Help support TMP

"Full Thrust or Other? - Traveller Adventure class Ships" Topic

16 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Spaceship Gaming Message Board

Back to the SFRPG Message Board

926 hits since 7 May 2017
©1994-2018 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Mako11 Inactive Member07 May 2017 6:01 p.m. PST

I asked this before, a while back, but most of the responses were for the larger scale vessels in Traveller.

I'm curious if any people are using Full Thrust, or other, more simplified/streamlined rules, than the official Traveller ones for encounters, and space combat between the smaller, Adventure class vessels, and perhaps other patrol or system defense vessels they might encounter.

I'm not sure I really want to spend time calculating minutes/hours from missile launch to impact, etc., etc..

Just looking for something a bit easier to use, that still provides for a range of tactical outcomes, to either bolt onto adventure campaigns, or for use in standalone games.

Hidden movement, detection, decoys, etc., would be nice too, as well as some simplified options for anti-missile fire, since I imagine such small vessels won't do very well, if/when they are hit.


boy wundyr x Inactive Member07 May 2017 6:46 p.m. PST

Silent Death with Warhounds and the Kashmere Commonwealth would let you do it. I think 10KT ships are the official top end, but I always view the tonnage as relative. Divide everything by 10 and you get 5t to 1000t ships.

Sandcasters might be your toughest match, unless you count PD as part of that. But sandcasters will be hard for every rule system that isn't Traveller.

Coyotepunc and Hatshepsuut07 May 2017 7:26 p.m. PST

IIRC ship to ship combat was pretty one-sided in Traveller unless it was intended by the GM to be a fair fight (in which case BOTH sides usually came off worse for wear.) My groups rarely engaged in space battles, instead trying diplomacy, subterfuge, or negotiation to resolve conflicts.

Mako11 Inactive Member07 May 2017 8:01 p.m. PST

Thanks for the tip on SD, BWX. That is a good idea.

I'm sure I can come up with some house rules for sandcasters.

Yes, that is an excellent point, Coyote, and is pretty much the impression that I've been left with as well, after reading over the occasional battle account, and/or looking at the stats. I appreciate your input too.

I'm not averse to changing that significantly though, for a good yarn like Han and Chewie escaping a pair of Star Destroyers pursuing them, just for grins, though that should probably be more rare, and discretion and stealth, or craftiness might be better tactics.

Still, with ALL those missiles on even a Beowulf class Free Trader, there must be some reason for them. Does seem like overkill though, if in a minor skirmish, they get immediately destroyed in the first salvo.

I guess, like submarines, the trick is to try to remain undetected, or to present as little threat, and/or concern as possible, so as not to be fired on. Then, if that occurs, you hope you have an excellent computer, and countermeasures suite.

Personal logo David Manley Supporting Member of TMP07 May 2017 9:35 p.m. PST

Have you tried the "Power Projection" series of FT/Traveller rules that were published by BITS?

Mako11 Inactive Member08 May 2017 1:52 a.m. PST

I bought a copy secondhand, and have looked at it, but not played it yet.

Most of the vessels in that though, are larger than the ones I'm considering for games, e.g. launches, boats, shuttles, free and far traders, and small patrol craft to interdict and pursue them.

TheBeast Supporting Member of TMP08 May 2017 5:11 a.m. PST

But sandcasters will be hard for every rule system that isn't Traveller.

Loathe tho' I am to admit it, but the directional shields in SFB is actually a fair start in that 'direction.' If you go with SD, fiddle with things like 'ammo' and 'duration' and you're good to go.

Have you tried the "Power Projection" series…

If you get the first book, Power Projection: Escort's smaller, though not so much small, craft. I'm assuming you have PP:Fleet.


TGerritsen08 May 2017 8:43 a.m. PST

Have you looked at Mayday from GW, which was essentially a board game of the space ship conflicts in Traveller? I believe it is still available on Wargaming Vault.

TheBeast Supporting Member of TMP08 May 2017 10:06 a.m. PST

If you go with SD, fiddle with things…

…which uses hexes…

Mayday is hexes as well, just in case you tend to avoid if possible.


Mako11 Inactive Member08 May 2017 2:06 p.m. PST

No, I don't have Mayday, so will need to check that out.

I can deal with/without hexes.

boy wundyr x Inactive Member09 May 2017 9:00 a.m. PST

Ganesha's new Star Eagles rules may work too, though again those damn sandcasters…

Will have to wait for the rules to be released to know for sure.

TheBeast Supporting Member of TMP09 May 2017 9:17 a.m. PST

Mayday, Triplanetary, other GDW's [I THINK], SPI's Delta Vee, and some I've vauge memories of, all use a three marker [per ship] system on hexes.

Last turn, this turn, next turn; you take the vector between last and this turn to place next turn, then 'adjust' per various things like thrust, collisions, etc.

Move from last to this, this to next, and you're ready for next turn.

FT is a bit similar, if you think about it.


infojunky09 May 2017 3:42 p.m. PST

Honestly I more have considered replacing Traveller ship combat with Fullthrust. Remapping FT such that fighters become the small end of the mass scale and 10,000 dTons as the top end.

I would use the Cinematic movement system

Mako11 Inactive Member09 May 2017 9:31 p.m. PST

Yea, every time I look at, and/or consider using the Traveller rules, I come away shaken with ALL the mods, confusion, and complexity of the system.

Perhaps its better, once you get a few plays in, under your belt, but the rules seem to me to be so spread out, and contradictory (given the various releases), that it seems rather tedious just to even try to get one's brain wrapped around the basics.

Full Thrust, and/or other options seem a lot more straight-forward to me, and you can probably run a game in an hour or two, instead of taking all day to look stuff up, and run calculations.

Perhaps I'm wrong, and someone will steer me straight to a simple, one or two-page, QRS for Traveller Spaceship Combat, but I've yet to come across that, so am pondering making my own rules up for the small ships in FT.

David Johansen10 May 2017 9:22 p.m. PST

Well, Mayday cuts it down a bit. One change T5 made that I'm very fond of is that damage reduces the drive letter, not the performance. This means big ships can finally soak up more damage than fighters.

Really, it depends what you want. I quite liked T4's version which gave small damage point totals to ships and cut back on the computer programing nonsense from CT Book 2.

emckinney11 May 2017 9:56 a.m. PST

The computer rules are badly misunderstood: they distinguish between civilian and military vessels! In a ship design system with no armor, number of weapons fixed by ship size, and weapons consuming little tonnage and no power, it seems as though thrust is the only differentiation, and thrust makes little difference in a shootout. The ridiculous mass and cost of computers, the very high cost of software, and the decisive effects of superior software are the advantages of a warship that doesn't need to worry about cargo tonnage.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.