TRAVELLER Digest 499

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Tech levels... by Alvin Plummer <alvin.plummer@sheridanc.on.ca>
  2) MVM weight saving. by StarWolf <myhre@oslonett.no>
  3) Re: TRAVELLER digest 498 by "R. W. Jamison" <rwj@engr.latech.edu>
  4) Eternal Guardian Bomber by lewis@chara.gsu.edu
  5) Psionics in the Coalition by mark james wilkin <aa4mwi@orac.sunderland.ac.uk>
  6) Re: TRAVELLER digest 497 by shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
  7) The Latest Update On GDW Staff Changes by "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@smtpgate.read.tasc.com>
  8) RE: 7 Ideas...plus a few more gripes by "Bruce Johnson" <JOHNSON@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu>
  9) tech levels by John Muir Macpherson <muirmac@uclink.berkeley.edu>
 10) Re: MVM weight saving. by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
 11) Re: TRAVELLER digest 498 by library@dss.gov.au (DSS Library)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 07:55:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Alvin Plummer <alvin.plummer@sheridanc.on.ca>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Tech levels...
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.951129074535.26756A@hubble.sheridanc.on.ca>

From: "Upton, Django" <DUpton@vtrnntov.telecom.com.au>
>
> ROWAN Iain <wm0iro@acresearch.sunderland.ac.uk> writes:
>
>  --------------------
> Seeing the recent postings about the Tech Level equivalent
> of 2300AD has made me think of TL progression within the
> Traveller universe as a whole.  I'd be interested to know if
> anyone has any canonical information on TL's at various
> points in the history of the Imperium - I've  never seen
> anything of that sort.
>  --------------------
>
> Really? I'm sure we've done this before....
>
> Ist Imperium: TL 10 during initial expansion.
> TL 11 during consolidation ( remaining unconsolidated areas remained at 10).

Actually, TL 9 at initial expansion - I think that they obtained a 60 pc
"Sphere of influence", pre-1st Imperium.

> Terran Confederation: TL 9 at first contact. TL 10 soon after.
> TL 11 at the start of the interstellar wars, TL 12 by the end.
>
> 2nd Imperium (Rule of man): Solomani TL12, Vilani TL11.
>
> Long night: down to TL 9-11.... if that!
>
> 3rd Imperium: Sylean expansion... TL 9-11 ?

The Syleans were at TL 12 during their initial expansion

> Solomani Rim War TL 14.
> Fifth Frontier War TL 15.

> Maybe someone out there with their books handy can give you full references
> but I recommend reading all the Alien modules ( CT &MT ) and having a look
> at what units are capable of in the various boardgames.

Consult the MegaT "Referee's Companion".  I think GDW still has copies of it.
If interest continues, I can bring my copy from home...

***---

From: "Glenn M. Goffin" <ggoffin@igc.apc.org>

<snip>

> So then the Terrans, whose culture(s) could never be
> accused of over-emphasizing stability at the cost of
> technical and scientific progress, conquered the Vilani.
> Soon thereafter, however, scientific progress slowed down
> for the Terrans.  Did the Terrans adopt too much of the
> Vilani life-style?  The canon says the opposite -- the
> majority Vilani tried to Terrarize themselves, even
> adopting Solomani surnames.

Either this, or the cost to change Tech Levels rises, the higher you go.
I doubt it: I think the Zho's spent c. 3000 years at TL 8, and who knows
how long certain Droyne worlds spent at, say, TL 5.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alvin Plummer

Bread in, toast out.  How does it DO that?
                            - stolen from Jonathen Gapen
                              (innuendo@yar.cs.wisc.edu)

Reply to: alvin.plummer@SHERIDANC.ON.CA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 16:00:52 +0100
From: StarWolf <myhre@oslonett.no>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM, hiwg-list@fwe.com
Subject: MVM weight saving.
Message-ID: <199511291500.QAA15639@hasle.oslonett.no>

There has been long time since I posted something, but now I'm back.

I have started to design starship with weight/thurst ratio rather than
size/thrust. In my work with this I try to save much as possible on the
weight of the ship as there can be considerably savings on this as more gee
hours, smaller crew, cheaper craft and so on.

And now I ask: Is it OK to leave a gap in the hull to the drive plunge? As
the rules stands there is no hole at all. Cutting a hole will save several
tons on the design. The drawback is that a hit in this hull location will go
straight to the drive without passing through armor.

If the drive is on there may be some protection.

I would like your thoughts and comments on this.


--------------+-------------------+-----------------------------------
Roger Myhre   | myhre@oslonett.no | http://www.oslonett.no/home/myhre/
HIWGmember 142| Some people have one of those days, I got one of
              | those lifes.
--------------+-------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 09:05:01 -0600
From: "R. W. Jamison" <rwj@engr.latech.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 498
Message-ID: <199511291505.JAA12895@aurora.engr.latech.edu>

At 01:36 29/11/1995 -0500, you wrote:

>Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 10:32:17 +0200
>From: Jyrki.Paajanen/OU=im/OU=ccbi@smc.carel.fi
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>Subject: RE: Drop Tanks
>Message-ID: <H000058703a62452@MHS>
>
>David wrote:
>"In other words, I am *NOT* convinced that drop tanks have any place on
>a military vessel (Eurisko's results aside). Merchant shipping on
>standard runs;yes, this is very feasible. Can anyone explain the
>benefits to military ships?"
>

Wouldn't it be for reasons similar to why drop tanks are used
on military aircraft today- to extend their range and time over target?

I would expect that the military can expect much less consistency in
the length of jump required for their vessels than merchant traffic
(who knows where the front will be tomorrow - and who will be nearest).
Military organizations today try to stay flexible (at least in reaction
capability), why would this change in the future?

Bill


--
RW Jamison
rwj@engr.latech.edu

There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please.
And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences.
                                                  -- P.J. O'Rourke
--- BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK ---
Geek Code 3.1
GCS d- s a- C++++ UI+++$ P+>+++ L+++ E(--) W++ N++ K w O M++ V- PS+ PE Y+
    PGP-(+) t+ 5 X- R+++>$ tv b++++ DI++++ D++ G++ e++>+++ h---- r+++ y+++
--- END GEEK CODE BLOCK ---



------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 10:31:49 -0500
From: lewis@chara.gsu.edu
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Eternal Guardian Bomber
Message-ID: <9511291531.AA18663@chara.gsu.edu>

A week ago, someone mentioned that I forgot Maintenance Points for the
Eternal Guardian Bomber.  So I went back and looked at them.  I stuck
in another computer to cut down on the number of mps, this decreased
cargo space, and increased costs. So the new lines are :

Price: MCr 49.84 (Price does not include ammunition, but does include fuel)
Maintenance Points: 31
Cargo: 6.2 tonnes

31 is alot of MP for a plane that is supposed to be kept running for
several weeks.  But I figure they can do the work in shifts. THe plane
has 50 propellers, one can be turned off, and worked on.

If anyone wants a new updated copy, just email me, and I'll send you one.
Lewis Roberts

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 16:21:47 +0000 (GMT)
From: mark james wilkin <aa4mwi@orac.sunderland.ac.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Psionics in the Coalition
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9511291600.A4637-0100000@orac>

Does anyone have any thoughts on the legality and genral organisation of
psionics in the coalition. There are a few refernces to its use, in the
hiver book they mention it as a possible defense against manipulation and
in The Path of Tears they talk about how a certain planet is dangerous
for no psions.But thats it, I think that its definately legal, the ban on
psionics being seen as more bad Imperial ideas but beyond that I'm not
sure.What do people think?

 "I was one of seventeen children.We were all named Wilkinson-I suppose it
  was roughest on the girls,but we all got used to it in the end....Mustn't
  grumble.Our parents were the salt of the earth.Lovely people.It was just
  when they found a name they liked,they stuck with it."
MArk James WilkinSandman, A Game of You.


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 04:37:55 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 497
Message-ID: <wLVBFD1w165w@krypton.rain.com>

t01bpa@abdn.ac.uk writes:

> How accurate are jump gates.  (Alternative technologies).
> Do you need two gates, on to receive the package?
> If not, could a succesfull plantetary bombardment be inplimented from
> sectors away with a jump gate, by sending armaments through the
> gate?

As Niven pointed out *long* ago in "Theory and Practice of
Teleportation", any sort of receiverless or transmitterless
teleportation isn't a transport system, it's a recipe for a short, ugly
war.

So I'd say that you need jump gates at each end. Otherwise things
degenerate rather badly.

Oh yeah, in case the terminology confused anybody, a "transmitterless"
teleport is something that can reach out and grab things with no
hardware needed at the "sending" end. This allows all sorts of "snatch
& grab tricks and other nastiness. (How well do you fight if I just
grabbed all your missiles? Or all your *fuel*?)

A "receiverless" one is one that can dump stuff someplace without
needing a receiver. This lets you do things like drop a fusion bomb in
the other guys engine room. Or in the case of a jump gate drop some
truly *huge* nasties into his system.

The Star Trek transporter is a medium range device that can do either.
And if it wasn't for "shields" stopping it, it'd make most episodes
real short... :-)

Leonard Erickson           leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
(aka Shadow)    shadow@krypton.rain.com (preferred)
FIDO:   1:105/51  Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:19:37 -0500
From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@smtpgate.read.tasc.com>
To: hiwg-list@fwe.com, traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: The Latest Update On GDW Staff Changes
Message-ID: <s0bc5dad.087@smtpgate.read.tasc.com>

Greetings all,

Here's the latest update:

   Dave Nilsen is now working as a security analyst for Fort Knox
(yes, the one in Kentucky).  He will continue as an associate writer for
GDW, completing work on ``Armor 21`` and developing some more
materials for the Regency.

   Loren Wiseman has scaled back his role at GDW, working there on
a part time basis.  I have no further information on what his title is
or what his duties are at this time.

   James Cambias, a frequent contributor to Challenge, is being brought
on board to write the final two parts of the Virus Redux Epics.  I have
no further information on Mr. Cambias, though it would appear that he
will be picking up some of the slack created by Dave's and Loren's
change of status.

   More news as I am made aware of it....

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:54:55 MST7
From: "Bruce Johnson" <JOHNSON@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: RE: 7 Ideas...plus a few more gripes
Message-ID: <540512C018A@tonic.pharm.Arizona.EDU>

James Kiley's comments:

>III Drop the Sector/Subsector...

Yes...I think very much that the RC should be presented as a single
map, but also, realistically, many of the 'old' designations will be
hard to shake, particularly at the subsector level.  Remember, one of
the stated reasons for the breakup of the Imperium is increasing
'nationalism' at the sector and subsector levels, so many people will
still identify themselves as from the 'XYZ subsector'.  Also, the
only remaining navigational aids, maps and library data are all
organized into the old imperial system, and I doubt that the
pragmatists of the RC are going to spend the time, effort, and money
to change all their libraries to match what is, essentially, a
ideological point.  Of course, 50-60 years from now will be a
different story indeed. Still, the imperial geography is still going
to be the common ground for all the people the RC will contact in the
forseeable future.

>III.  Change the AO strategy.  Sure, right now the Area of Operations
>strategy is to expand to core-spinward, and Oriflamme has managed to
>con them into limiting it to just seven parsecs, but I think that
>going just seven parsecs core-spinward is foolish in the extreme.  My
>reasoning is simple:  The Reformation Coalition has NO IDEA what
>is going on rimward of them, or trailing, either.

True, but GDW may have something up it's sleeve here, I think. Look
carefully at the NE map in the TNE manual.  There's a big gray
'Frontiers' blob right where the RC is, and just spinward are two
more, smaller ones. Earlier Hiver experiments? Hiver insurance
policies against the RC turning hostile? Nothing GDW has said that
I've seen indicates what these may be. I treat the Hivers as somewhat
akin to Larry Niven's Puppeteer's, and the manuals say that the
Hivers are masters of psychohistorical manipulation.  Anyone who
could get a K'Kree culture to eat meat would have to be. So I think
that the AO strategy could well be due to Hiver manipulation.  Also,
this is toward the 'Black Sphere' which could well be the source of
significant danger to everyone, so it does make sense to move that
way.  After all the Aslan have to come through a lot of former
Solomani space (and former Solomani...who would not really welcome
very many ihatei in 'their' territory) to get to the RC, and one would presume 
that they are
more interested in the Regency.

This also accounts for no great 'Push to Sol' movement.  These were,
after all Imperial territories, though briefly in the Confederation
during the Rebellion.  I get the idea that it didn't really make much
difference at the time. Sol/Terra wasn't a very inviting target after
the Confederation and the Imperium were done fighting over it.

Remember, no one very much outside the AO knows anything about the
RC's existence, so there's probably no great push to their area.
Every other group is pretty much in the same position as the RC, just
poking around in their own little neighborhoods.


>VII.  Expansion Timetable Changes.

Part of my biggest problem with TNE is exactly this...everything's
happening waaaay too fast.  If you read some of the blurbs sprinkled
throughout the TNE manual, by 1250 or so the 'Star Vikings' were just
memories that the revisionists were busy carving up into racists,
violent stereotypes.  You're right, Jim, none of this could possibly
have taken place so fast.  Exploration is a slow process, building an
infrastructure to have all the resources that the RC has (separate
Navy, fleets, etc) takes a lot longer than the 12 or so years that
have been given.


Finally, since Jim started this...I have a couple of ideas of my own
to throw out.

One of the worst contradictions in the books is trying to justify
the number of starships.  The whole thing starts out going on about
how the post-Virus era only had a precious few rickety, 70 year old
starships, then in the next paragraph talks about the dangers of
pirates. C'mon...which is it?  If there are so damn few ships, piracy
is not an option...no on would risk getting their ship shot up for
the little trade goods that might be passing through. Where are the
pirates getting <their> ships, fer Chrissakes?

If the pirates are raiding defenseless coastal villages and selling
their stuff in more sophisticated markets a la the original Vikings,
it makes little more sense, because the economics don't hold
up...who do they sell stuff to?  what do they take in return?
Remember all the high tech manufacturing was wiped out.  Without
some sort of manufacturing base the pirates are limioted to trading
this high tech relic for that high tech relic, and become more of
the Fred Sanford of the spaceways rather than Blackbeard.

Remember, in the era of piracy here on Terra, most of it occurs
where there were large amounts of valulable resources going back and
forth (the Spanish Main, spice ships in the Indian ocean, etc.)

Most of my problems with TNE, like the piracy issue, stem from their
statements like 'Virus wiped everything out', and 'the Wilds were a
blasted wasteland'  No, it didn't, and they aren't.  Virus
only really kicked the Imperium when it was down. The thing that
wiped the Imperiium out was the general galaxy wide depression that
ensued from the horrendous resource consumption of the rebellion, and
the generalized destruction that emanated from it.  If you got your
starport bombed out, and couldn't pay for the ever more costly stuff
to fix it, because your main market for your superwidgets can pay for
them because their mnarket dried up, and you can't get them there
anyway, because of the pirates...well, your planetary economy dries
up and blows away.

I see the Imperium in it's latter days, with these vaccuum worlds
with 3 billion inhabitants, as more of a collection of 'company
towns' than individual self-supporting planets.  When the company
goes, so does the town, in quick order, no Virus needed. The
remaining inhabitants turn to subsistence living, and scratch their
way through somehow.

What this does is make the Wilds less dangerous, and less lucrative
than before, and forces the strategy of the players to go out and
find those places that still do support some trade, which means wide
ranging exploration, and a lot less smash and grab.




Bruce Johnson
Information Technology/College of Pharmacy
The University of Arizona
johnson@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu


As if this place HAD any opinions...

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:30:59 -0800 (PST)
From: John Muir Macpherson <muirmac@uclink.berkeley.edu>
To: Traveller Mailing List <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: tech levels
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9511291130.B6555-0100000@uclink.berkeley.edu>

Glenn M. Goffin <ggoffin@igc.apc.org> said:
>> From: ROWAN Iain <wm0iro@acresearch.sunderland.ac.uk>

>> Could there be a good reason for the rate of
>> technological progress to slow way way down?

>Isn't there a Calvin & Hobbes book called Scientific
>Progress Goes Boink!?  Maybe that's what happens.
>
>Remember, the Vilani developed jump drive in -9235, but
>only developed J-2 in -5430!  And they were still at J-2 by
>the time they met the Terrans in -2422.  So that's TL9 to
>TL10 in 4,000 years, with _no_ advances for another 3,000
>years.  That's counter-intuitive, to say the least.  The
>explanation seems to be that the Vilani culture, with its
>emphasis on stability at the cost of everything else,
>slowed down research.
>
>So then the Terrans, whose culture(s) could never be
>accused of over-emphasizing stability at the cost of
>technical and scientific progress, conquered the Vilani.
>Soon thereafter, however, scientific progress slowed down
>for the Terrans.  Did the Terrans adopt too much of the
>Vilani life-style?  The canon says the opposite -- the
>majority Vilani tried to Terrarize themselves, even
>adopting Solomani surnames.

>Well, that's not much of an explanation, I'm afraid.  I'll
>try to do better later.
>
>--Glenn

Actually, I think this is a very good explanation.  There are
plenty of Real World examples of empires which had (from our perspective)
unusually low rates of technical innovation.  The most blatant is
probably the Chinese.  They had ocean-going vessels, the printing-press,
and gun powder long before the Europeans, and yet it was the Europeans
who showed up on Chinese shores with guns and printed books.  I am not a
China scholar, but a friend of mine who has lived there claims that
Chinese ships began their own age of exploration, IIRC, about 200 years
before the European one, but that the emperor called it off, because
China was considered the center of the world, and he thought nothing
useful could be learned outside it.  The other explanation was that the
empire was already so big and the bureaucracy necessary to run it so
cumbersome, that further expansion threatened central control.  Similar
arguments have been made about the discouragement of technical progress.
>From what little I know about Trav history, the 1st Empire and the Vilani
can be considered Chinese for these purposes
Another ancient empire, the Romans, has a reputation for being
very technically accomplished.  But they also failed to make some very
basic technical advances which probably hobbled their ultimate success.
Remember that the saddle had to be introduced from China.  Also, the
Romans used yokes on their draft horses which work great on oxen, but
press uncomfortably on the throat of horses and holds them to walking
speed.  This has been offered as one reason why Roman roads werent more
used for internal commerce.  There was a Scientific American article a
few years back saying that in what is now southern France, the Romans had
begun to build primitive factories, but that the limitations of Roman
ground transport made trade outside of the immediate area very difficult
and the idea never took off.
 The Solomani Empires could be considered
rather Roman, in that they aggressively applied the knowledge they had,
but didn't  seem particularly interested in seeking new knowledge.
Please don't make too much of these comparisons.  IIm just trying
to point out that there are historical precedents for big empires being
poor at advancing technical and scientific frontiers.  One could argue
that the Solomani had their hands full assimilating all those inhabited
worlds and that the returns to this activity exceeded the returns to
rapid technical progress.

--Muir

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:28:22 -0700 (MST)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: MVM weight saving.
Message-ID: <9511292128.AA21179@Rt66.com>

> I have started to design starship with weight/thurst ratio rather than
> size/thrust. In my work with this I try to save much as possible on the
> weight of the ship as there can be considerably savings on this as more gee
> hours, smaller crew, cheaper craft and so on.

We decided to do the same on the beta list... it makes PAWs more useful
since armor is rather dense, so there's a performance trade off with
large armor values.

> And now I ask: Is it OK to leave a gap in the hull to the drive plunge? As
> the rules stands there is no hole at all. Cutting a hole will save several
> tons on the design. The drawback is that a hit in this hull location will go
> straight to the drive without passing through armor.

I just posted about his on the beta list, actaully.  Drives should have
a surface hit location like an airlock.  I'd just assume it's part of
the drive.  The "extra" armor is used supporting the drives, etc..

-Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:00:17 -0600
From: library@dss.gov.au (DSS Library)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 498
Message-ID: <199511302357.NAA00019@babylon5.dss.gov.au>

Dear Folks -

1.      DROP TANKS

Jyrki repied to my query:
>Can anyone explain the benefits to military ships?"
>>When military ships use drop tanks to jump to hostile system, they
>>arrive to their destination with their fuel tanks FULL. So here are some
>>benefits:

I assume you mean that they have not used the fuel in their drop tanks for
the jump?

eg. the Gazelle: it operates at j-4 if the fuel in the tanks is used AND the
tanks are retained. To retain the tanks and NOT use the fuel in them, it would
have to jump in at about j-2.

Sound correct?

2.      LEWIS

>    Most members of the Regency Senate have been reluctant to overturn
>the interdiction of Lewis, since it was an Imperial decree, and if the Senate
>were to overturn it, this would signify that the Senate could overrule
>the Emperor.  While currently there is no emperor, many members cling
>to the hope that there will someday be one.

I thought Norris' speech in 1125 (or whenever - after Arrival Vengance, anyway)
stated clearly, "I must myself admit, there is no Emperor". I don't know if the
reason above gels with the new attitude of the Regency.

Perhaps a better explanation could be found as to why the planet is still
interdicted:
- machinations by Tukera (I never liked them anyway, they are the "bad boys" in
my campaign, wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw one of their liners);
- the place has simply been overlooked due to other, more pressing problems
(although this probably won't wash, considering the Governor's efforts);
- can people suggest some other reasons?

- Hyphen
 (David Jaques-Watson)


------------------------------

End of TRAVELLER Digest 499
***************************
