T5 Rules question Jeffrey Schwartz (24 Feb 2015 16:15 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question tmr0195@xxxxxx (24 Feb 2015 17:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Richard Aiken (24 Feb 2015 20:13 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Jeffrey Schwartz (24 Feb 2015 20:51 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Richard Aiken (24 Feb 2015 21:23 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Phil Pugliese (24 Feb 2015 21:23 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Bruce Johnson (24 Feb 2015 21:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Phil Pugliese (24 Feb 2015 21:55 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Bruce Johnson (24 Feb 2015 21:27 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Phil Pugliese (24 Feb 2015 21:51 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Richard Aiken (24 Feb 2015 22:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Bruce Johnson (24 Feb 2015 22:11 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Bruce Johnson (24 Feb 2015 22:21 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Richard Aiken (24 Feb 2015 22:48 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Bruce Johnson (25 Feb 2015 00:41 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Edward Swatschek (25 Feb 2015 09:12 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Jeffrey Schwartz (25 Feb 2015 14:47 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question tmr0195@xxxxxx (25 Feb 2015 21:27 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Jeffrey Schwartz (27 Feb 2015 14:29 UTC)
RE: [TML] T5 Rules question Anthony Jackson (25 Feb 2015 01:27 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Richard Aiken (25 Feb 2015 01:48 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Kelly St. Clair (25 Feb 2015 06:12 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Phil Pugliese (25 Feb 2015 07:39 UTC)
RE: [TML] T5 Rules question Phil Pugliese (25 Feb 2015 04:18 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Dan Corrin (24 Feb 2015 21:34 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Bruce Johnson (24 Feb 2015 21:54 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Grimmund (24 Feb 2015 22:15 UTC)
Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Kurt Feltenberger (25 Feb 2015 02:54 UTC)

Re: [TML] T5 Rules question Jeffrey Schwartz 25 Feb 2015 14:46 UTC

I think I got it figured out... and part of me is applauding Mr.
Miller's cleverness, and part of me is scratching my head and
wondering if it's a good thing.

This is all IMHO and YMMV and MDA (Many Disclaimers Apply)

It looks like the progression is:
TL 6-8: Sundry early fusion reactors that meet  Power Plant A specs
for use in ships... barely.
TL9 - Standard fusion reactor for power plant A
TL10-13 : progressively better power plant A variations
TL14+: Plateau for fusion Power Plant A. We've pushed it to the limit,
and can't make it any better. However, the fuel consumption is
dropping, and you can now fit a Power-B + fuel into the space a
Power-A + fuel used to be.
TL 16: Earliest Antimatter power plant A
TL 17/18: Antimatter improves
TL 19: Standard Antimatter Power Plant A

Similar things apply for the other drives as well.
Building a TL-15 Jump-5 Scout looks possible...
A TL-19 Type-S looks... wow.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:12 AM, Edward Swatschek <xxxxxx@bitslayer.net> wrote:
> On 2015-02-24 14:21, Bruce Johnson wrote:
>>
>> If someone puts up a skyscraper in the nice mountain views, you cannot
>> just move around them.
>>
>
> This is Traveller.  You hire a group of  ne'er-do-wells, inexplicably stuck
> on planet until they raise some cash, to demo the skyscraper while
> implicating a third party.
>
>
> --
> Edward Swatschek - xxxxxx@bitslayer.net
>
>
> -----
> 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=vSy3NFQJMSbZKrzPfC3XucFBsUCMtKrI