Topic: SM: P VM Design Example and more POSSIBLE Erratum

[snrdg051306]

Step 19 Point Defense Design appears to be missing per the formula for

Total Point Def. Power Cost: (Rating) x (Attacks)

under the Point Defense Cost Chart in the Example on p.114.

Recommended change the  text from

Example: Every TMAC needs point defense. Gary purchases a single pulse laser (1 attack) with a rating of 5. This masses 20 metric tons and takes up 20 kiloliters of space. It costs ¢3,000,000 even. Military tech isn't cheap!

to

Example: Every TMAC needs point defense. Gary purchases a single pulse laser (1 attack) with a rating of 5. This masses 20 metric tons and takes up 20 kiloliters of space. The PDS draws 5 power. It costs ¢3,000,000 even. Military tech isn't cheap!

Step 20 Select Maneuverability cost formula is

Total Cost of Maneuverability: (# of Drive Units) x 20K

In the example on p. 115 the cost is

¢100,000 ( 10,000 x 10),

Is the base cost 20K per the formula p. 114 or 10k per the example on p. 115?

[snrdg051306]

Looks like I may not be clear on what I posted.

Should I break this down into two separate posts or just stop posting altogether?

[David Johansen]

You know, maybe what is needed is a Guild Companion article with a compilation of your discoveries and suggested solutions.  I've done a few vehicles and robots but nothing out of the range of the core setting.  The support situation and ICE's attitude took the wind out of my sails and I'm sure I'm not alone in that.

[snrdg051306]

Sounds like a good idea David the only problem is that I seem to be very bad at keeping my documents clear and concise.

[David Johansen]

Yeah, me too, but the GC's editor is pretty understanding and helpful.  I suspect they'd love to use a compilation of your notes and suggestions.

[snrdg051306]

My notes are basically compiled right here on the forum.

Can you give some assistance on the Total Cost of Maneuverability since the formula states the base as 20k and the example shows 10k. Given my druthers I'd used 10k since that keeps the cost down.

[David Johansen]

You know, I'm not sure on that one.  Generally I give the actual text the weight of official as examples are frequently wrong due to being written before playtest modifications.  But I'm tempted to read it as maneuverability being bought at the best TL available and since it's always the TL of introduction it's always x 10.

Perhaps if you buy the system at a lower TL it should be x2 and if you buy a state of the art system it should be x20.  I must confess that when I've worked on vehicles I've thought some of the prices were a bit off.  Weapons seem to make up too much of the ticket price IRRC.

[snrdg051306]

I like the suggestions you've made David, however right now I'm just trying to get through the rules as written.

Maneuverability appears to have two ways to modify the mass, volume, and power. The first is by vehicle tons and then TL. Cost is modified by the number of units by vehicle tons after the base cost is factored in.

Unfortunately, the base cost is the problem and I rather use 10k than 20k. I'm kind of cheap.

Weapon systems are usually more costly than most of the equipment installed. After weapons the cost is a toss-up between power plant/transmission/propulsion and electronics. At least that is what I've seen both in the real world and most gaming universes.

[Marc R]

So this is the official answer?

I would go with the non-example version.

Thank Defendi,

Total Cost of Maneuverability is equal to (# of Units) x 20k per the equation on SM: P VM p. 114.

The use of 20k adds another ¢100,000 to the price.

[Defendi]

If there's a mistake in the example you should probably go with the main text.  Yes.  That's my official answer.  Either the editor or myself might have changed it and not updated the example.

[snrdg051306]

Hello Marc R and Defendi,

To be 100% certain that I have this correct the Total Cost for SM: P VM Step 20 Select Maneuverability p. 114 is ¢20k per the text

Total Cost of Maneuverability: (# of Drive Units) x 20K

And not the example cost shown on SM: P VM p. 115.

[Marc R]

I added it to the errata that way.

[snrdg051306]

Just making sure, you do know I am a retired submarine sailor

[Marc R]

measure twice and cut it once is good enough on land. . . .

[snrdg051306]

Very true

Thanks again Marc R