From owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM  Thu Dec 12 13:46:52 1996
Return-Path: owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
Received: from phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (Phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.5]) by emin04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA14299; Thu, 12 Dec 1996 13:46:25 -0500
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA15759; Thu, 12 Dec 1996 13:38:45 -0500
Received: by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (bulk_mailer v1.5); Thu, 12 Dec 1996 13:36:24 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) id NAA15523 for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 12 Dec 1996 13:36:23 -0500
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 13:36:23 -0500
Message-Id: <199612121836.NAA15523@phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM>
From: owner-traveller-digest@mpgn.com (Traveller-digest)
To: traveller-digest@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
Subject: Traveller-digest V1996 #745
Reply-To: traveller@mpgn.com
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@mpgn.com


Traveller-digest     Thursday, December 12 1996     Volume 1996 : Number 745



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: SSDS and Drives
Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.
SSDS Question
Re: Traveller on IRC - Very Long!
Re: T-Plates and HEPlaR - The Need For Speed
Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.
Re: T-Plates and HEPlaR - The Need For Speed
Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.
Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.
Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.
Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.
Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.
Re: Constructive Criticism for Starships
Re: Mechs in Traveller
Re: T-Plates and HEPlaR - The Need For Speed
P.S. - A Traveller Fan
Low Berth Transport
Re: Starships Review and Rant
Re: Bitter Starships Review

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 03:34:31 -0500
From: TPeterAZ@aol.com
Subject: Re: SSDS and Drives

In a message dated 96-12-11 18:48:50 EST, David J. Golden wrote:

> It was intended to be a step function based on
>  (mumble-mumble-tetrion-mhmrfm-mumble quantum-mumble-hrmph-mumble
>  gravitic-mumble-quantum) effects.

Huh, seems to be some kind of noise on the line, Dave.  Too bad we don't have
Heisenberg Compensators to help filter it out. ;-)

<Waving my hands, as I head for the door...>

Tim Peter
<TPeterAZ@aol.com>
"There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, Ignorance."--- Socrates

Werner Heisenberg (1901-1976)---"Discovered uncertainty principle, though we
can't say for sure."  Tony Rothman

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 04:13:07 -0500
From: TPeterAZ@aol.com
Subject: Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.

In a message dated 96-12-12 02:01:50 EST, Glenn Hoppe wrote:

> Since thruster plates and Hep' drives operate by accelerating in opposite 
>  directions, Heplar and T-plate drives *can't* be used in series. No 
>  addition of G's. (assuming, of course, that they're mounted on the same 
>  side of the ship. I can't see how it would be efficient in terms of 
>  streamlining and engineering placement to do it any differently, and 
>  besides, what would happen if the gravity field intersected the ship? 
>  Don't open that can of worms or we'll get into the Horiz/Vert debate 
>  ag'in -- but I digress) 

You want Horiz/Vert, I'll give you Horiz/Vert...;-)  Just kidding.  Actually,
I'm a trifle confused by this part of your post.  Namely, how are the two
drives accelerating in opposite directions?  One is pulling, one is pushing,
much like a front wheel drive car stuck in the mud, with a couple of drunken
fraternity lads at the back pushing, whilst their more sober compadre floors
the gas pedal.  (OK, it's late.  It's just the image I got).  Or am I missing
something here?  (Besides sleep, that is).  Anyone?


Tim Peter
<TPeterAZ@aol.com>
"There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, Ignorance."--- Socrates

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 02:52:00 -0800 (PST)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: SSDS Question

I love the SSDS, but I have one question about a possible flaw.  The life
support tables simply don't make sense. Standard Life Support only take up
1.6 m^3 for a 200 ton hull?  That's several weeks food (minimum) + Air and
water purfication.  The value for FF&S would be 22.4 m^3 which sounds a
lot more reasonable.  Why the drastic reduction? 


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 05:16:54 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Traveller on IRC - Very Long!

In mail, suzd@goodnet.com writes:

> <SteveP> Joe: Or Worse...run an RCES game where the 
> players have to access some incompatable computer 
> database...and hand them an 8" floppy disk!
<snip>
> <shadowcat> hand them a stack of punch cards
<snip>
> <SteveP> Shadow> AND get them to translate them?
<snip>
> <JoeW> Steve: Yah, make them do conversion to octal, then 
> to EBCDIC or something like that - by hand. ;)

So what's the problem? I can read punch cards. I had to do it often
enough back in the 70's. I can also read both ASCII and BAUDOT
paper-tape (and have samples of both).

As for the 8 inch floppies, I still have gear that uses them! And I'm
planning on hooking a spare 8" drive up to an old PC. An 8" MS-DOS boot
disk should be weird enough to freak even my friends.


- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 09:18:02 -0500
From: rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca (Roderick Darroch Elliott)
Subject: Re: T-Plates and HEPlaR - The Need For Speed

Bill Hopper wrote:

[massive chainsaw noises]

>
>So if you design a ship with  6G T-plates and a 3G HEPlaR drive, can
>it accelerate at 9G, with the crew being subjected to an
>uncompensated 3G?  This makes a lot of sense to me, but has
>wide-ranging implications for space combat.
>
>What do _you_ think?
>
>WKH

        This is a no-brainer: I say they add.

        Say I'm getting 0.3 g acceleration in my VW Beetle, and am clearly
being outdragged by that jerk in his Dodge Viper.  Hah!  say I, and I
trigger the 4 mil-surplus JATO units I have strapped to the roof, thereby
adding another 420 G's of acceleration to my Bug, literally blowing the
Vipers doors off.

        I leave the large fireball that would be the inevitable result to
the reader's imagination; I don't think that any Volkswagen every built
could handle 423.3G accelerations without crumpling like a beer can, much
less the driver.

        Sure: if your hull is built to take 9Gs, and your power plant can
handle the demand, and the crew's UPP's all read like B9A777, by all means
run 6G T-plates concurrently with your 3G HEPLaR backup drive. Given that
TL12 Inertial Compensators only provide 3Gs of compensation, and G-Tanks
could deal with another 2, you'd have your crew taking 4Gs at best if you
have Gtanks installed and everybody had time to get in them before the
pilot put the pedal to the metal.  Military crews could probably handle
this for a while, and a really demented Noble out to prove just what a stud
he was to the Sylean Imperial Yacht Club might try to pull it off too.
Your average civilian ship, OTOH, would not...

*-------------------------------------------------------------*
| Roderick D. Elliott... rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca              |
|                        elliot_r@lsa.lan.mcgill.ca           |
*-------------------------------------------------------------*
| "...an imperfect plan implemented immediately and violently |
| will always succeed better than a perfect plan."            |
|                        -Gen. George S. Patton.              |
*-------------------------------------------------------------*

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 09:18:07 -0500
From: rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca (Roderick Darroch Elliott)
Subject: Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.

Glenn Hoppe wrote:

[snippage]
><heresy alert!>
>
>Thruster plates indeed use gravitic technology to create a warping of
>space-time (a gravity field "dimple" in space time) projected in the
>direction of accelleration. IIRC, somewhere in canon it states (was it
>DGP's Starship Ops?) that there is a certain angle within which thruster
>plates provide their thrust:
>
>       | |  /
>       | | /
>       | |/   no thrust possible here
>       | |\
>       | | \
>       | |  \
>
>I want to throw canon out the window and say that thruster plates point
>in the direction of acceleration "projecting" a gravity field behind them
>(away from the ship). In short, a ship with *aft* thruster plates can
>only accelerate *backwards*. (Would that part of the ship still be called
>"aft" then? hmmmm...)

        Why not then simply flip the plates over so the business end is
pointing forwards and say that those big flat glowing thingies on the back
of the ship are merely the radiators/Cerenkov Radiation Exhausts?  No more
forever travelling in reverse, being the laughingstock of those guys
zipping about in their HEPLaR-driven ships..:)

[snippage]
>
>And before anybody pulls out the Laws of Newton and wacks me on the 'ead
>wit' 'em -- Action-Reaction Satisfaction... Riddle me this: How do
>inertial compensators and artificial gravity circumvent them? How come
>the artificial gravity field that accelerated (oops... M0...) er.. *will*
>accelerate Olaf hault-Plankwell towards the floor of his dreadnaught
>isn't counteracted by an equal and opposite force. Or am I stepping in it
>here? Howzzat "normal" force work again? Those mechanics classes are a
>foggy memory now...

        I read ya...  Personally, I can accept the 1000d limit if all of
Imperial military history depends upon it, and the details of Imperial
history yet to occur are important to my campaign.  OTOH, limiting an SF
RPG's reactionless drive to some arbitrary limit because the game's
original developers didn't quite think everything through completely, and
the background that developed reflected some of their bad assumptions,
doesn't strike me as being a good thing.

        Whatever.  This is an RPG.  We're supposed to use it to stimulate
our imaginations, trigger that "sense of wonder" that the cosmos raises in
the minds of anyone with half a brain, and to have a good time.  If canon,
or heretical reinterpretations of T-plate functioning, interfere with this
for you, by all means go with whatever you prefer...  I know I will.  Now
I'd better get back to the books.

*-------------------------------------------------------------*
| Roderick D. Elliott... rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca              |
|                        elliot_r@lsa.lan.mcgill.ca           |
*-------------------------------------------------------------*
| "...an imperfect plan implemented immediately and violently |
| will always succeed better than a perfect plan."            |
|                        -Gen. George S. Patton.              |
*-------------------------------------------------------------*

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 08:54:21 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: T-Plates and HEPlaR - The Need For Speed

On 11 Dec 96 at 23:17, Bill Hopper wrote:

> The T4 description of Thruster plates has some interesting 
> ramifications about the design , capabilities, and operations of military and 
> custom-designed ships.

Maybe what we are seeing here is the difference in technology.  This 
is just a suggestion, and I have not thought it out completely.  But, 
here goes anyway.

Is there a possibility that the T-plates were in their infancy in the 
year 0?  They need gravitational force from large mass to push off 
from?  Then, a thousand years later, in the 1100's (what we are all 
used to seeing), the technology has been refined to where particles 
actually push off from themselves (as described in the Starship Op 
Man.) allowing use in deep space.

The way the T-plates are described in T4 is how they describe grave 
plates in the 1100's.  I remember a description, somewhere, that if 
you altered the altitude govenor on an air raft (provided the 
g-plates were powerful enough), you could take the raft out into 
space, but you would eventually get so far away from the planet that 
you had nothing to push off on.  The air/raft would then remain 
helpless.

It seems the T-plates in T4 are just longer range versions of this 
principle.  I could see, a thousand years in the future, the 
technology growing to be what we all know T-plates to be in the 
1100's.

What do you guys think?

Kenneth.

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 10:51:37 -0500
From: jpb@miamisci.org (Joe Block)
Subject: Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.

In article <v01510101aed579db6181@[198.168.189.27]>,
rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca (Roderick Darroch Elliott) wrote:
> Glenn Hoppe wrote:
> [snippage]
> ><heresy alert!>
> >I want to throw canon out the window and say that thruster plates point
> >in the direction of acceleration "projecting" a gravity field behind them
> >(away from the ship). In short, a ship with *aft* thruster plates can
> >only accelerate *backwards*. (Would that part of the ship still be called
> >"aft" then? hmmmm...)
> 
>         Why not then simply flip the plates over so the business end is
> pointing forwards and say that those big flat glowing thingies on the back
> of the ship are merely the radiators/Cerenkov Radiation Exhausts?  No more
> forever travelling in reverse, being the laughingstock of those guys
> zipping about in their HEPLaR-driven ships..:)

One side effect of projecting the gravity well ahead of the path of the
ship will come up in combat - if there are incoming missiles, what's to
stop the pilot from manuevering his g-well into their path - that last
minute 6g yank may be just enough to generate a miss.

BTW, can someone let me know if this is getting to the list ok?  I recently
started gatewaying the mailing list to news on my linux box and would like
a confirmation that I haven't screwed it up.

Joe Block <jpb@miamisci.org>

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 10:51:37 -0500
From: jpb@miamisci.org (Joe Block)
Subject: Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.

In article <v01510101aed579db6181@[198.168.189.27]>,
rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca (Roderick Darroch Elliott) wrote:
> Glenn Hoppe wrote:
> [snippage]
> ><heresy alert!>
> >I want to throw canon out the window and say that thruster plates point
> >in the direction of acceleration "projecting" a gravity field behind them
> >(away from the ship). In short, a ship with *aft* thruster plates can
> >only accelerate *backwards*. (Would that part of the ship still be called
> >"aft" then? hmmmm...)
> 
>         Why not then simply flip the plates over so the business end is
> pointing forwards and say that those big flat glowing thingies on the back
> of the ship are merely the radiators/Cerenkov Radiation Exhausts?  No more
> forever travelling in reverse, being the laughingstock of those guys
> zipping about in their HEPLaR-driven ships..:)

One side effect of projecting the gravity well ahead of the path of the
ship will come up in combat - if there are incoming missiles, what's to
stop the pilot from manuevering his g-well into their path - that last
minute 6g yank may be just enough to generate a miss.

BTW, can someone let me know if this is getting to the list ok?  I recently
started gatewaying the mailing list to news on my linux box and would like
a confirmation that I haven't screwed it up.

Joe Block <jpb@miamisci.org>

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 09:34:24 -0800
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@eagle.wbm.ca>
Subject: Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.

TPeterAZ@aol.com wrote:
> You want Horiz/Vert, I'll give you Horiz/Vert...;-)  Just kidding.  Actually,
> I'm a trifle confused by this part of your post.  Namely, how are the two
> drives accelerating in opposite directions?  One is pulling, one is pushing,
> much like a front wheel drive car stuck in the mud, with a couple of drunken
> fraternity lads at the back pushing, whilst their more sober compadre floors
> the gas pedal.  (OK, it's late.  It's just the image I got).  Or am I missing
> something here?  (Besides sleep, that is).  Anyone?

Ya, you're missing my entire point. ;-)

Since the drives are mounted on the same side of the ship, the frat boys
(representing the T-plates) are hanging onto the rear bumper *pulling*
the car while their buddy (representing the HEPlaR) is flooring it. I'll
leave what happens to the drunken frats to your imagination.

The rear mounted T-Plate pulls towards the rear, the rear mounted HEPlaR
pushes away from the rear.

Hope I've cleared up my idea, crazy as it may be.
- -- 
===== Glenn Hoppe =====\ /--- MailTo:jumpspace@geocities.com ----
\ . . Enter Jumpspace --X-> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8275 \
 ----------------------/ \========== Eschew Obfuscation ==========
     Examine what is said, not him who speaks. - Arab Proverb

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 09:59:34 -0800
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@eagle.wbm.ca>
Subject: Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.

Roderick Darroch Elliott wrote:
>         Why not then simply flip the plates over so the business end is
> pointing forwards and say that those big flat glowing thingies on the back
> of the ship are merely the radiators/Cerenkov Radiation Exhausts?  No more
> forever travelling in reverse, being the laughingstock of those guys
> zipping about in their HEPLaR-driven ships..:)

I guess I wasn't clear. I alluded elsewhere in my post that flipping the
thing isn't possible because there'd be the possibility of projecting
the gravity field *within the ship*. You can insist (ie. handwave) that
the projected t-plate gravity field has to be projected a certain
distance away from the t-plate. Or perhaps the field distance is
variable, depending on local gravity potentials, the acceleration
desired... or what if the thing just plain got hit and wonked out its
projection distance?

"Keptin! The T-plate's bin hit!"
"Oh shiiiii----- *splat*"

Here's the best idea yet: The field projected is a gradient. If you
project the thing from the back over the x metres to in front of the
ship, then people standing on the bridge and the front half of the ship
accelerate at a different rate than those in engineering. Bad stresses
on the structure of the ship (and it's occupants), I'd say.

OTOH, if you meant mount the plates on the *front* of the ship instead
of the back, sure it's possible. Just as possible as mounting HEPlaR
drives on the front. But that just changes the definition of fore and
aft, now doesn't it? It makes no difference. My whole theory is this:
HEPlaR, like all rockets, pushes. T-Plates pull.

- -- 
===== Glenn Hoppe =====\ /--- MailTo:jumpspace@geocities.com ----
\ . . Enter Jumpspace --X-> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8275 \
 ----------------------/ \========== Eschew Obfuscation ==========
     Examine what is said, not him who speaks. - Arab Proverb

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 10:11:21 -0800
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@eagle.wbm.ca>
Subject: Re: That annoying 1000d T-plate limit.

Joe Block wrote: 
> One side effect of projecting the gravity well ahead of the path of the
> ship will come up in combat - if there are incoming missiles, what's to
> stop the pilot from manuevering his g-well into their path - that last
> minute 6g yank may be just enough to generate a miss.

Funny thing is, what you describe above doesn't break canon. What do you
think those maneuver/evade programs are for? Any shmuck can give his
ship some random accel vectors, but it takes a real studly program to
compute exactly where and when a gravity well should be placed to avoid
being hit.

> BTW, can someone let me know if this is getting to the list ok?  I recently
> started gatewaying the mailing list to news on my linux box and would like
> a confirmation that I haven't screwed it up.

Got it twice, Joe. You tell me if you've screwed it up or not ;-)

- -- 
===== Glenn Hoppe =====\ /--- MailTo:jumpspace@geocities.com ----
\ . . Enter Jumpspace --X-> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8275 \
 ----------------------/ \========== Eschew Obfuscation ==========
     Examine what is said, not him who speaks. - Arab Proverb

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 10:33:17 -0600
From: John Kovalic <muskrat@msn.fullfeed.com>
Subject: Re: Constructive Criticism for Starships

"Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@brokersys.com> wrote:
>
>(Lots of GREAT observations snipped)
>I sure didn't want this to happen.  Massive dissappointment set in.
>The posts are correct.
>(Lots MORE great observations snipped)


Good LORD, I can't believe how strongly I agree with your entire post!

The deckplans alone were my main warning signal. Non-artists in my group
could do better! The similarities to Judges Guild is dead on. It's very
unfortunate.

I think one of the problems is that Imperium Games seems to lack a decent
graphic artist. Someone in charge of the overall look and feel of the line.
Someone with enough know-how to say "Hold on - this is going to get laughed
off the shelves" when it comes to layout and design. Someone who knows
enough to seek out Blair Reynolds for freelance illustrations. (GDW
suffered the same fate later on in the final releases of T:TNE: some of the
products, cover and interior art was just UGLY to look at).

While I still Believe in Traveller, I think Imperium would do well to slow
down with their release schedule until they get some of the basics
straightened out (yes, I know delays have slowed it down plenty as is - but
I'd rather see them concentrate on one GOOD release every two or three
months than running around trying to rush out one mediocre/poor release
everyone or two months). In fact, I would have LOVED to have seen T4
released *next* summer instead of last, so that it could have been properly
playtested, edited, and smoothed out. Why the rush (and it WAS a rush) as
soon as GDW folded?

People here know my views on the Foss art. It's good. It's recycled. It's
not Traveller. (Those are for the Starships. The vehicles and equipment
illos in T4 are just ill-conceived). "Starships" IS thin - did no-one look
at DGP's "Starship..." to see just WHAT a Traveller supplement should look
like?

Production levels for T4 are FAR below industry standards. I've done a fair
bit of work for Steve Jackson Games, and we may all laugh at some of their
delays, but for the most part, when a SJG product is released anymore, it
looks, reads and feels DARN good.

I love Traveller, and so I hope this is not taken as an indictment of Marc
or his vision. But between the stupid typos in T4 and the out-and-out
ugliness of Starships, I'm starting to worry. We who all love the game may
pick them up, but what about the newbie, who is going to compare them to
GURPS and GURPS SPACE?

John "But hey, I can still buy a dog tag for $10. :-)"  Kovalic




********************************************************
           "This must be Thursday. I never COULD get the hang of Thursdays"
                                                     - Arthur Dent
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*                                 "Wild Life": a Web comic --
*
*              MUSKRAT CENTRAL: http://www.msn.fullfeed.com/muskrat/
*
********************************************************

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 08:45:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Douglas <douglas@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: Mechs in Traveller

On Wed, 11 Dec 1996, Mused wrote:

> Big targets are big targets, now and forever. The surface area of a box is less than that of a
> human, and you do not need massive gears and joint protection. Sure some of the barriers
> will be solved, but which way would you go: bionic horses, or helicopters?

EXACTLY the way MBTs (main battle tanks) were described when the shoulder
fired LAWs and again when the hunter/killer helicopters, like the AH-64,
were first being deployed.

Firepower, armor, mobility, and sensors will offset a lot of the size
disadvantage.

- --------------------------------------------
Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy and go well with Brie!

Douglas@Teleport.Com
http:\\www.teleport.com\~douglas\

MSPS: Windows95, Windows NT 3.51 Server, Windows NT 3.51 Workstation,
Networking
- --------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 11:46:53 -0500
From: TPeterAZ@aol.com
Subject: Re: T-Plates and HEPlaR - The Need For Speed

In a message dated 96-12-12 09:18:55 EST, Roderick Darroch Elliott wrote:

> if your hull is built to take 9Gs, and your power plant can
>  handle the demand, and the crew's UPP's all read like B9A777, by all means
>  run 6G T-plates concurrently with your 3G HEPLaR backup drive. Given that
>  TL12 Inertial Compensators only provide 3Gs of compensation, and G-Tanks
>  could deal with another 2, you'd have your crew taking 4Gs at best if you
>  have Gtanks installed and everybody had time to get in them before the
>  pilot put the pedal to the metal.  Military crews could probably handle
>  this for a while, and a really demented Noble out to prove just what a
stud
>  he was to the Sylean Imperial Yacht Club might try to pull it off too.
>  Your average civilian ship, OTOH, would not...

So why not gang inertial compensators?  Really.  Compensator one is engaged
at all times, lowering acceleration effects by 3 Gs.  The second is designed
to kick in when it detects acceleration over 1 G, AND while the first is
engaged.  Boom.  Instant compensation.  Of course, if you can manipulate
gravity to the point where you can use it to push a ship around, why can't
you use it to push missiles around, so they don't hit you (gravitic shields,
which I use extensively in a GURPS campaign).  You think comet refuelling
would throw canon for a loop, try that one on for size.  Y'know, one of the
problems with "magic" technology, (and I'm not disputing the *possibility*
that it could exist some day) is that it creates these sort of problems with
your players.  They say, "Well, if it can do this, why can't it do that?"
 (Also not necessarily a bad thing; keeps the earnest ref on his toes).  And
eventually you turn into your parents and say, "Because it can't.  I'm the
referee, and I say so."  (A time-honored tradition amongst referees
everywhere).  That's why I tend to use HEPlaR, myself.  Less messy, from a
late-20th century physics standpoint.  (But I do use inertial compensators,
CG, and, for that matter, JUMP DRIVES!  I simply explain CG and ICs as
related technology which can counteract gravity effects, but provide no
thrust).  Though when I'm waxing nostalgic (like today, since it's my
birthday; and yes, I am fishing for birthday wishes) I break out my Black
Books and pretend I'm a teenager again, and just play without regard for "how
the Universe works," (a la Star Wars) which is a hell of a lot of fun.  And
isn't that why we all started playing this game in the first place?

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 11:17:05 -0500
From: whitman@pensys.com (Ken whitman)
Subject: P.S. - A Traveller Fan

Hello everyone,

I just wanted you guys to know that I am a Traveller fan, as much as anyone
else on this list.  When I had the opportunity to work with Marc Miller and
Traveller, I jumped at the chance to put my 2=A2 worth in.  I spent 1 year o=
f
my life helping produce T4, and just because I left to do other things does
not mean I am not the same old Traveller fan I use to be.

I have always been a mover-and-shaker (some call that a Loose Cannon) in
the RPG industry.  I am excited about the new companies and products I am
working on and do not regret moving on.

=46rom time to time I will make a post as a Traveller fan! I am not black
balled from Traveller, I simply sold my shared of the company.  If there
are any questions you guys would like me to answer, feel free to ask.

As for the dogtags, I wanted to give Traveller Fans, MechWarror fans, etc.
a chance to get what other fans have.  Cool dogtags with character stats.
the Dog Tag machine is mine, so what the heck.  Notice I have only offered
to sale dogtags that could be used for...Traveller, MechWarrior, Your name
and address, or whatever.

Anyway, I head threw the grapevine that CSC and Aliens are being shipped
from the printer today!

Happy Holidays
- -Ken Whitman

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 20:00:09 GMT
From: Carlos Alos-Ferrer <alos@merlin.fae.ua.es>
Subject: Low Berth Transport

This is a QSDS design which I have developed as background. It is a 5,000
ton TL11 Aslan colonial transport which shows my POV: Aslan ihatei would not
necessarily travel in massive ships. I am using a fleet of this for an Aslan
long-term migration from Dark Nebula to Theta Borealis around the 600s, but
that's another story that maybe I will explain later.

Khaoleakh class Aslan Low Berth Transport

It is a mid-sized ship that can transport 700 colonists and 800 tons of
equipment. It is a TL 11 design that was popular in the Aslan hierate in the
500s. Many small companies operated them within the hierate for low berth
transport. When they became obsolete, many minor clans and backwater worlds
used them for their ihatei.

Special Notes:

1) The fuel allows for one Jump-2 and 80h of operation of the HEPlaR drive,
or, alternatively, for one Jump-2 and one Jump-1 immediately after, allowing
the ship to cover 3-parsec barriers in exceptional circumstances.
2) A special, separated fuel deposit of 64.2 ton allows the two twin power
plants to function for a whole year.
3) The ship has a 360 ton hangar for subcraft. It is usually fitted with 3
or 4 90-ton shuttles for refueling and landing (not accounted for in the cost)
4) It is fitted with medium military sensors very useful for exploration.

Khaoleakh class Aslan Low Berth Transport
Disp= 5,000     Vol=70,000 m3   Cost= 1,207.2 MCr
Crew= 70 (Eng=8, Electr=4, Astr=1, Pilot=1, Gun=10, Command=5, Subcraft=5,
Steward=1, Medical=35)
Low Berth= 700  Small Staterooms=68     Large Staterooms= 2     Sickbays=4
Cargo= 800.4 ton        Controls= Fib/Bridge, TL=11
Size=9                  Jump=2
FCR=3                   Maneuver= 1G / HEPlaR
10 Std Military Laser Batteries, 5 0 0 0 0
Power Rating= 2.4
Fuel= 1578.6 Ton /R
Sensor Rating= A16 P5 J16
Armor=20
Structure=28
Hull= Wedge/U
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos Alos-Ferrer                          E-mail: Alos@merlin.fae.ua.es
Dpt. Fundamentos del Analisis Economico     Phn: (34) 6 5903400, Ext. 3226
Universidad de Alicante                          (34) 6 5903614
03071-Alicante (Spain)                      Fax: (34) 6 5903685
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 13:13:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Flammang <FLAMMANG@vms.cis.pitt.edu>
Subject: Re: Starships Review and Rant

Hi.

Has anyone figured out how to tell which, if any, of these ships are
streamlined? How many low passengers are carried in the areas marked
"LOW?" Which ships can land on a planet, and which ships cannot?

There is not much information given about many of these ships other than
their USP's.

- -Rob

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

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 10:34:13 -0800
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Bitter Starships Review

At 03:43 PM 12/11/96 -0800, you wrote:
>> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 09:52:39 -0800
>> From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
>> 
>> While most of the time I prefer the smaller vessels, I am currently planning
>> a game set aboard the I.N.S Coronation (BB-216), a 75,000 ton TL 12
>> battleship.  The players will control various characters from the senior
>> officers to the ship's Marines.  I'm stealing the idea from Ars Magica.
>
>To my way of thinking, the major problem with having characters in charge
>of big ships (or big troop units, or big *anything*) is that it gives
>them in (paradoxically) too little freedom of choice.  A 75 kton warship
>is going to be very, very, *very* closely watched by multiple agencies,
>commanders further up the chain, and so forth.  The Captain and senior
>officers will have broad discretion on how to achieve goals -- but the
>goals themselves will come from outside, and gods help them all if they
>aren't carried out!

That's the point in doing the multiple characters.  This adventure involves
the senior staff, next week we're doing something with the guys in the
Wardroom, etc...

>This to my mind captures the dilemma of being in too powerful a position.
>The crew of an aging Far Trader are (relatively) free to go pirate, become
>smugglers, involve themselves in secret plots, or whatever.  The crew --
>and *especially* the officers -- of a big warship are not.  And this
>constrains adventures severely.  Having every adventure consist of "You
>receive orders to jump to Obnox XII and pick up Ambassador Querf and her
>party" gets a little old...even if you come up with intriguing stuff about
>the Ambassador and her party.

Well, the Coronation is doing the Great White Fleet thing and traveling to
various worlds contacted by the Imperium to show the flag..  there are the
fair share of Ambassador Querf stories, but a few I've come up with to fill
in the gaps:

Players are a young Ensign and his Marine Shore Patrol.  Assignment: Keep
Keep the Coro's crew from running afoul of the law during Liberty.  Hook:
This place was settled by religious fanatics and the blue laws are amazing.
The crew is going to get pretty rowdy when the find a distinct lack of bars
and barmaids....

Players are the crew and passengers of one of the Coro's shuttles.
Situation:  While making an in-system run, the shuttle suffers a near
complete system failure, leaving the boat crippled.  Objective: Survive, and
find a way to signal your distress to the Coro.

Players are midlevel officers in Engineering  Assignment:  Someone is making
and selling drugs in your department.  Stop them quietly if possible, loudly
if necessary.  Hook:  Your immediate boss will try to cover up everything to
keep his image clean.

Those are just a few I've come up with so far..

>> For most Traveller campaigns, the big ships are just that: big.  They are
>> beyond the scale of a free trader or scout in much the same way as a Geo
>> Metro compares to a M1A2 MBT.  
>
>Brother o'mine, you've had a major failure of the analogizer. :)
>
>Displacement of your example vessel:  75,000 dtons
>Displacement of scout:                   100 dtons
>Size ratio:                           750:1
>
>Mass of M1A2:                          5,000 kg (IIRC)
>Reduced by factor of 750:                  7 kg
>
>So the correct ratio between your battleship and a scout is that between
>an M1A2 MBT and a medium-sized dog. :)

Ah, but a dog stands a chance of at least piddling on, or outrunning a M1A2.
I used to own a Geo, remember?

+----------------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net  |
|     Professional Driver - Traveller Guru     |
|        http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/        |
|**********************************************|
| "Life's a journey, not a destination."       |
|                                   -Aerosmith |
+----------------------------------------------+

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

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #745
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".
