Date: Sat, 4 Jan 97 22:15:24 -0500 From: Derek Wildstar Subject: [Traveller Answer] Starship Controls (again) Though the distinction between "military" and "civilian" systems is made in QSDS, the terms are probably confusing to a number of people (Sam included). In addition to responding to his questions directly, I'd like to re-iterate what QSDS says about "military" versus "civilian". The terms "military" and "civilian" are used as convenient and easily recognized descriptions of a type of system. "Military" systems could be defined as "sophisticated systems of the type commonly employed in military and para-military applications", while "civilian" is "relatively inexpensive systems of the type suitable for general use". In particular, there is NO REQUIREMENT that only "military" systems be used in ships designed for the various spacefaring armed services. If "civilian" systems will meet the mission requirements, they may be used. Similarly, and if permitted by local law, "military" systems can be installed on ANY commercial and privately-owned vessels, and are not restricted to the armed services. It is the TYPE of the system that determines that system's capabilities, and not the ship it is installed on. A "civilian" weapon system has the same capabilities no matter who built or who owns the ship it is mounted on. sam thomas wrote: > I said: > >The sensors must be from the SAME TL as the controls. > Why is this so? > A 1977 Ford car has the same analog controls(gauges) as 1933 Ford. As I pointed out in the original message, the term "Controls" is a misnomer. QSDS "controls" represent the starship's flight avionics and central computer installation, and not the "gauges". > Hmmmmm.. Define a military weapon and civilian ones. Military weapons and civilian weapons are defined in the QSDS rules: see the Military Laser Batteries table and the Civilian Laser Batteries table. To summarize the rules for you, "military" weapons are sophisticated systems generally used by military and para-military ships. "Military" weapons include sophisticated targetting systems, and are larger and more expensive than "civilian" weapons. Civilian weapons are inexpensive systems designed primarily to arm non-warships. > Is what you are saying > is that a laser turret mounted on a trader has FC rating of 0 and a laser > turret mounted on patrol cruiser a greater than zero FC rating? Definitely NOT. The TYPE of the weapon system determines the fire-control rating, NOT the type of ship it is installed on. The QSDS rules state that "military" and "civilian" weapons can be mounted on any ship (subject to local law, of course). A ship with "civilian" weapons has a fire-control rating of 0. A ship with "military" weapons installed has a fire-control rating based on it's tech level. > If I am > arming a trader why are the costs the same for arming the patrol cruiser? If you compare the Military Weapons Table and the Civilian Weapons Table in QSDS, you will see that the costs for military and civilian are quite different. Military weapons are larger, much more expensive, and more effective. If you were to choose the same weapons system for both applications, you would recieve the same capability at the same cost. However, a "military" weapon system is far too expensive for the average trader to justify, and a "civilian" weapon system is too ineffective for a patrol cruiser. Guy "wildstar" Garnett Traveller Answer Team wildstar@qrc.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Science-Fiction Adventure In the Far Future