Nice, read it all. It reminds me of a game I ran long ago in a galaxy far away in CT w/o high guard. Biggest. Ship? 5k. The Kiniur really was a cruiser.

I liked that a lot. Destroyers, corvettes and frigates were sub 1k, and dreadnoughts were rare and 4-5k.

I did start to bring in bay weapons, because a ship of the line could have a few of those and then need some escorts for anti-missile and anti-fighter work.

But PCs normally saw the frontier cruisers and others that could operate unattached.

Fighters worked well for massed missile attacks, and a CV could carry 20 or 30 light fighters fairly easily.

However, looking at current tonnage, I don't see this being the case if traveller were "real". 100kton ships would be common IMHO, due to economies of scale. And, just like in the real world there would be an escalation of size unless there was a pressing technical reason not to.

One of the reasons I have thought of, was that jump fields couldn't encapsulate anything larger than 5K tons. However, this brought up the question of monitors. If the attacking force is limited to 5K tons, and the monitors are not that's going to be brief and bloody…

So I just never really addressed it in the game. :-)

I've never come up with a good technological reason to limit ship size other than jump fields or gravatics, but both of those have unintended consequence of the defenders have an advantage.

Sent from my bat phone

> On Sep 13, 2014, at 7:17 AM, "J. Michael Looney" <xxxxxx@megawatts.com> wrote:
>
> I've posted part 1 of a series on why I think smaller craft can work
> in MgT space combat, this part being about the rules.  Next part will
> be actual ship designs.
>
> http://3rdimperium.org/?p=819
> -----
> The Traveller Mailing List
> Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
> Report problems to xxxxxx@travellercentral.com
> To unsubscribe from this list please goto
> http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=g8EYmpjfNu22Uwq2slNgbtlSYHMIUXYZ