From ???@??? Tue Jul 02 17:56:58 1996
X-State:  3
X-Total-length:     24541
Received: from NS.MPGN.COM (NS.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.254]) by mail-e2a-service.gnn.com (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA23339 for <bborich@gnn.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 1996 13:04:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by NS.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9) id LAA19098 for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 2 Jul 1996 11:21:07 -0400
X-UIDL: 836357142.158
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 11:21:07 -0400
Message-Id: <199607021521.LAA19098@NS.MPGN.COM>
From: owner-traveller-digest@MPGN.COM
To: traveller-digest@MPGN.COM
Subject:   Traveller-digest V1996 #200
Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Errors-To: owner-traveller-digest@MPGN.COM
Precedence: bulk


Traveller-digest            Tuesday, 2 July 1996        Volume 1996 : Number 200

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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

         1. Fleets
         2. Re: Joe's long post
         3. Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #197
         4. Re: Disposable PCs
         5. Re: Naval Ships in Milieu 0
         6. Re: Fission Reactors
         7. Re: [T96#187] Languages
         8. Re: [T96#187] Languages
         9. Re: Marines vs. Army
        10. Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #178
        11. Re: Fission reactors
        12. Re: Virus Flame War, et. al
        13. Re: Rationality
        14. Re: [T96#187] Languages
        15. Re: Virus via E-Mail
        16. Re: Sylean Exploration Corp.
        17. Re: Sylean Exploration Corp.
        18. Re: Disposable PCs
        19. Re: Disposable PCs

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

From: Liam_McCauley@qsp.co.uk (Liam McCauley)
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 14:14:39 +0200
Subject: Fleets

     I was looking through some old White Dwarfs last night, and I came 
     across some interesting Traveller articles (as well as some good 
     reminiscing - reviews of C&S, Call of Cthulhu, Bushido, Space Opera, 
     Traveller deluxe set, Starfleet Battles, rumours of Chaosium licensing 
     AH to produce RQ, rumours of TSR about to sue someone [some things 
     never change...]).
     
     One of the articles, by Andy Slack (who did a lot of Traveller stuff 
     for WD - I wonder what ever happened to him?), concerned fleet 
     composition.  He argued that for design simplicity, and so that the 
     ships didn't completely dwarf anything the PCs might have, it would be 
     a good idea to build up fleets purely using Book 2 designs (or rather 
     ships that could be designed using Book 2).  His suggestion for a 
     fleet composition went as follows:
     
     1    Carrier with about 100 fighters
     2-12 Escorts (type C or T - I think that's Close Escort & Patrol 
          Cruiser)
     1-6  Auxiliaries - supply ships, hospital ships, etc (type R / M 
          subsidised merchants)
     3-18 Scouts (type S)
     1-6  Couriers - for inter-fleet comms
     1-6  Tankers
     1-6  Assault Carriers
     
     The scouts would, er, scout, the carrier, tankers & auxiliaries would 
     huddle under the protection of the escorts and the fighters would go 
     in and do the fighting.
     
     
     I have to admit I rather liked the idea of this mix of smaller ships 
     in a fleet, rather than a BatRon made up of X 100,000 ton Battleships. 
      I guess that this fleet is too underpowered to take on an Imperial 
     squadron, but it could well be the task force for a pocket empire (in 
     fact the article was written around 1983...).
     
     
     Cheers,
     Liam

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

From: Joe Walsh <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 08:03:30 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Joe's long post

On Mon, 1 Jul 1996, Paul Walker wrote:

> >Anyway, we'll see what happens.  It's still a dream at this point.  In 
> >another couple of months, though....who knows?
> >
> 
> Dear God, I've created a monster!!!!
> 
> *sob, sob, weep*

See what happens when you aren't careful what you say? :)


- -Joe
______________________________________________________________________________
Joseph E. Walsh      |  Atari 8-Bit User and Programmer Since 1982
ransom@iconnect.net  |  Classic Traveller Referee Since 1983
Stuck in the '80s    |  Microsoft-Free and Loving It! :)



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

From: Les Howie <lhowie@novalis.ca>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 10:12:36 -0300
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #197

On Mon, 1 Jul 1996, Peter  H. Brenton wrote:
> For ye Windows folks (3.1 or better) the program Visio allows one to not
> only draw lines and such on a nice grid, it's main feature is the ability
> to draw 'objects' and use them over and over.  I have made objects for all
> the standard features of a starship (iris valves on floor, ceiling, wall;
> chairs, bunks, turrets, desks, etc.  Some were already in the
> office/layout object set)

The version I have (3.0a) does have a pretty good selection in its save-as
file type box, although I have only experimented with .wmf

Wonderful package: would your sahe your ship design template? Perhaps one of
the Traveller website operators would provide a location where it could be
accessed.

Les Howie
Senior Software Developer
NovaLIS Technologies
Halifax NS
lhowie@novalis.ca


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

From: Tom Ellis <tellis@telerama.lm.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 09:51:58 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Disposable PCs

On Mon, 1 Jul 1996, Stuart L. Dollar wrote:

> On  1 Jul 96 at 21:38, Tom Ellis spewed:
> 
> > What??  WHAT???!!  I have been refing for 18 years and NOW you tell me
> > that when a character dies I am NOT supposed to kill the PLAYER TOO???
> 
> As a player of Tom's e-mail game, you all are my witnesses that Tom 
> threatened me with physical violence if my character dies... :-)
> 
> Stu

Play by E-Mail is harder for me as a ref...trying to figure out how to
MIME encode my katana you know is quite difficult, I may have to find
another way to dispatch the poor souls.

I know! I will drop relativistic rocks on them!  Virus infected
relativistic rocks!  With lots of fighter coverage of course so the
VI-ROCK will be invincible.  If I can't find my players I will just drop
it on some feudal technocracy somewhere...

Tom



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

From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 96 02:24:00 PST
Subject: Re: Naval Ships in Milieu 0

"Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net> writes:

> A quick idea to throw out.. What is the proper "header" for an Imperial Navy
> ship?  USS is used for the US Navy, etc..

> I'm leaning towards HMS (His Majesty's Ship), but then I've been reading a
> lot of David Weber this week..

Given past usages, it'd be HIMS (His Imperial Majesty's Ship). But I
believe it's already established as INS (Imperial Navy Ship) or INV
(Imperial Navy Vessel).

There's also ISS (Imperial Scout Ship).

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

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

From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 96 02:15:12 PST
Subject: Re: Fission Reactors

normf@wegener.com writes:

> IMO there should be an armor *requirement* for fission reactors on
> combat vessels. The requirement could be a rule expressly stating such,
> or a bad effect from combat that the designers want to avoid. The armor
> requirement should be broken down into safety systems and actual
> protection. This is a case where the FFS subsystem armor actually is
> needed.

Actually, on a combat vessel, you are likely going to design the ship
with the reactor at one "end" so you can cut mass by using shadow
shielding. So then you just armor the reactor enough to keep it from
getting knocked out too easily, and just incorporate some extra armor
in the shield between the reactor and the crewed sections of the ship.

That makes it very difficult to have reactor damage present a risk to
the crew, other than the usual "Oh shit, there goes the power!".

Of course there will be some promotions and posthumous decorations in
the engineering department if they have to repair the reactor to get
home. 


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

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

From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 96 02:33:44 PST
Subject: Re: [T96#187] Languages

jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (JEFF ZEITLIN) writes:

>  On the other side of the coin, there is the issue of translation
>  and transcription.  When you are doing either for people that do
>  not speak the source language, you are doing it into an alphabet
>  that they recognize - usually, their own.  You do the best that
>  you can, given that there may be sounds that are not normally or
>  cannot be represented in the target language - for example, the
>  tones in many of the oriental languages, or the gutturals in many
>  middle eastern and eastern European languages.  Sometimes, you
>  succeed reasonably well, as when you write "da svedanya" as a
>  transcription of the Russian phrase of leave-taking.  Other times,
>  you fail miserably, as when the early church missionaries to
>  Ireland and Wales tried to transcribe what they heard, and came up
>  with spellings that look impossible even centuries later, or when
>  you try to transcribe Arabic or Hebrew (how do you transcribe a
>  glottal stop, or the guttural sound that Germans write as Ch, but
>  which sounds nothing like the initial or final sound of
>  "church"?).

You've also overlooked tonal languages like Chinese where the same word
has many different meaning depending on which tone or tones are used in
speaking it. 

And of course there are things like some african languages with such
phonetic elements as "inhaled clicks". The current record holder for
the worst tongue twister is in one of those languages (check a copy of
Guiness). It has three or four inhaled clicks and sounds like the
speaker is swallowing her tonsils sideways! (I used to know a lady who
could say it...)

>  I would be inclined to believe that whenever two literate cultures
>  come into contact, each will maintain its own system of writing,
>  and its own sound values for the glyphs, even if the spoken
>  language itself is ultimately discarded. 

Again, note Chinese. Many of the dialects are completely unintelligible
to each other, yet they all use the same ideograms. So they can
communicate in writing, but not speak to each other. Heck, the Japanese
can still read a good deal of Chinese!

>  Go look at some old maps of the Far East, spanning several
>  decades.  You'll find that there's a city marked as the capital of
>  China whose name is variously spelled "Peiping", "Peking", and
>  "Beijing".  Which one is correct?

None of them. But I'm not equipped to enter the ideogram, even if I
knew it. :-)


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

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

From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 96 03:52:57 PST
Subject: Re: [T96#187] Languages

Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com> writes:

> We should go look at the British occupation of Egypt and the other Arabic
> countries.  Despite the presence of far more Arabic speakers, English was
> the language of governance, and the Latin alphabet rather than the Arabic
> the one for governmental decrees.  Had that situation persisted centuries
> further, I suspect that English would have come to dominate more and more: 
> a direct analog of the Anglic-Vilani situation.  At least, IMHO. 

Well, there *is* a limit on the spread of English in that situation.
Islam. While they tolerate translation of the Koran, to be a true
Muslim, you have to read it in the original Arabic. That sets a *hard*
limit on penetration of any other language, at least as long as the
religion endures.


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

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

From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@smtpgate.read.tasc.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 1996 10:38:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Marines vs. Army

Larry Hadley writes:

>One of the reasons the Marines have the "everybody carries a rifle"
>rule is because they have *no* logistical tail, this is covered by other
>services. (eg, Navy provides transport and medical, while army
>provides things like massed artillery and long-duration garrison support)

   That's because they spend their time fighting relatively close to shore,
or at least that's the theory anyway (Khe Sanh didn't have much beach
front from what I understand....).  They do have logistics units, but as
you suggest there are fewer of them proportionately than their Army
counterparts.

>This doesn't mean Marines are more "elite", just that they have a
>different mission and train/organise appropriately.

   Don't tell a Marine that (especially one from the U.S.).  As far as they
are concerned, they are by definition ``an elite fighting force``, the equal
in the U.S. of an Army Ranger (my standing in the Army Reserve
disqualifies me from commenting on this remark--other than to cough
politely....and sarcastically).

   In point of fact, services around the world do consider the U.S.
Marine infantry to be a cut above your standard Army infantry, on a par
with the elite 82nd or 101st Airborne divisions of the U.S. Army.  Their
armor units are lacking however (most of them still have M-60A3 tanks,
and what M-A1s they have were stolen/requisitioned from the Army),
and their artillery support relies heavily on supplementation from the Navy
in the form of off-shore bombardment, and their own aircraft (the Harrier,
F/A-18, SuperCobra, etc.).

   In TRAVELLER terms (because I know sombody is going to complain
if I don't), Marines could have a variety of roles, depending upon the
basic philosophy of the armed forces using them.  

   The Imperium used its Marines as ship's troops and as kind of a SWAT
team/peace keeping force, called out when the locals started getting a
little too violent with each other.   Imperial Marines are elite--in the same
manner that U.S. Marines are.  They strike with overwhelming force,
secure the objectives, and then move on when so ordered.  Their tactics
emphasize mobility and shock over battles of attrition.  While Marine
garrisons are set up on a long term basis (like the one on Terra), such
garrisons serve merely as bases of operations or are for show--in
general Marine units do not spend too much time in one place, long
term occupation duties usually going to the Army.

   For my own campaigns, Marines are used as offensive troops--the
people who get to invade planets--the Army is used to defend planets
from invasion.  While a Marine force may find itself having to defend
against a counterattack, in general they are relieved by Army forces as
soon as is practical.  As with the Imperial Marines, the Marines in my
campaigns emphasize mobility, though they are better able to handle
prolonged campaigns if necessary.

Regards,

Harold




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

From: Quibell E D <quibez@essex.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 96 15:39:31 BST
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #178

G'day sorry to bother the list, but the mailer here works
somwhat strangly.

Please could I be removed from the list.

Thanks

Ewan

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

From: Paul Walker <tiger@datasync.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 10:05:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Fission reactors

>From: ROWAN Iain <wm0iro@acresearch.sunderland.ac.uk>
>Subject: RE: Fission reactors
>
>Cynthia wrote:
>>>Ship-reactors do face one disaster that current reactors do not: they
>>>fly, and can crash.
>
>>Submarines swim, and can sink & be crushed. Real World(tm)
>
>True as far as it goes.  But how many Real World nuclear powered
>submarines are owned and operated by a disreputable bunch of
>traders, wheelers and dealers?  How many Real World nuclear
>powered subs could be owned and run by someone who stole
>it or is skipping out on their ship financing payments?

Isn't this why they call those guys up in Washington politicians?  I thought
that was so that they could legally do what no one else could do, SKIP THE
PAYMENTS!!  Its just when they get confused and do this in their personal
life that they get in trouble.  ;)

Oh, you mean Private owners, sorry!  ;)

Paul  {tiger}


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

From: Paul Walker <tiger@datasync.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 10:05:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Virus Flame War, et. al

>From: Larry Hadley <lhadley@knet.knet.flemingc.on.ca>
>Subject: Virus Flame War, et. al
>
>On Tue, 2 Jul 1996, Wes Payne wrote:
>> It may be stupid, but it's canon, unless you want to find and burn every 
>> extant copy of "Survival Margin."  Keep in mind that, despite other 
>
>   (Pointing flamethrower)  "Hold up your copy, please" :)

I'm gonna seal my copy in asbestos!!  There are some evil people out there!


>   YOU bear in mind that all this business about the trasnponders STILL
>doesn't explain how the TL6 agro-world's D spaceport traffic control
>computer (without transponder, b/c it's not a starship) is infected by
>Virus through the radar dish.

See my post of Quotes from Survival Margin!  Virus can only inflitrate
through sensors with GREAT (read great, big, huge, stupendous) difficulties,
and it was NEVER done!  Also, I'm at work now, so I don't have SM with me
(its in my concrete safe surrounded by asbestos in the bomb shelter under my
house!), but IIRC all starports and many other places installed
transponders.  I know if I ran a big investment company, I'd want a
transponder to tell me exactly when my J-6 courrier arrived in system with
info on the Imperial Stock Market!


Paul {tiger}

I know I said I'd take this off list, sorry, I'll try better next time.


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

From: Paul Walker <tiger@datasync.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 10:05:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Rationality

>Oh, crud!  We're starting to agree on things!  Can it be that some 
>rationality is finally starting to creep into the discussion, or could it 

I've been trying!


>So, how 'bout them rocks?

Rocks, I thought we were talking about Feudal Technocracy?


Paul  {tiger}


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

From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 09:56:02 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: [T96#187] Languages

Quoth Leonard Erickson, re: British occupation of Egypt:
> Well, there *is* a limit on the spread of English in that situation.
> Islam. While they tolerate translation of the Koran, to be a true
> Muslim, you have to read it in the original Arabic. That sets a *hard*
> limit on penetration of any other language, at least as long as the
> religion endures.

So you might get a situation akin to Sanskrit in India, used only for 
religious purposes and scholarly efforts, or to Latin in the pre-Vatican-
II Catholic church.  One language for secular purposes, one for religious.
(Actually, a medieval-style church based on Vilani scripture amidst an
otherwise mid-tech world might be an interesting adventure locale....)

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

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

From: Derek Stanley <dstanley@direct.ca>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 1996 07:04:04 -0700
Subject: Re: Virus via E-Mail

David C.. Broussard wrote:
> 
>Actually Microsoft's Internet Explorer 3.0 (and almost any Java enabled
>app) will download files from the Internet, and execute them (sometimes
>without the user even knowing it took place.
> 
>As for Virus executing programs on another computer, most server these
>days allow for remote execution of software.  For Example NT has a 
>command that will let you run a program on another system at a specified 
>time and date.

I wonder if perhaps it might be better understood if we explained the 
entities known as virus as a wondering CPU/SYSTEM ENGINEER/USER all 
rolled into one.  A CPU because it is capable of executing computer code, 
a SYSTEM'S ENGINEER because it is capable of re-designing the circutry 
pathways to best suit it's own needs and a USER because it is capable of 
independently executing any commands that it see's fit.

Derek Stanley



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

From: Derek Stanley <dstanley@direct.ca>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 1996 06:56:21 -0700
Subject: Re: Sylean Exploration Corp.

Leonard Erickson wrote:

> I have a toy racoon, and a large pink rabbit (looks like he's related
> to the Energizer Bunny, if you get those commercials down there)
> sitting in corners watching me. And my messages aren't strange. (yeah,
> right...)

Down There?  Don't you mean up here?  I'm assuming that you're writing 
from the States and Canada is generally considered up from the US of A.  
Where did you think I was writing from?

Derek Stanley

PS Over 1/2 of the TV stations we watch up here originate in Seattle or 
beyond.



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

From: Derek Stanley <dstanley@direct.ca>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 1996 07:06:52 -0700
Subject: Re: Sylean Exploration Corp.

Leonard Erickson wrote:

> We have (or had) a TV series here in the US based on a guy who was a
> weirdness magnet. I think it was called "Strange Luck". They actually
> handled the concept fairly well.
> D.B. Sweeny, it was filmed here in Vancouver.  I know about five people 
who were on the set at one time or another.  Unfortunately FOX decided to 
axe the show.  Did you see the one with the potato that looked like 
Elvis?

Derek Stanley



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

From: Derek Stanley <dstanley@direct.ca>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 1996 07:09:47 -0700
Subject: Re: Disposable PCs

Steve Charlton/Avalon Software Inc wrote:
> 
> Dave Golden said:
> >Since I lost my group before they ever got
> >anywhere near needing a decent explanation...
> 
> No, no, no, no... you are allowed to kill off the
> characters, but it is frowned upon to kill off the players.
> 
> Bad Dave.  Baaad...  No biscuit.
> "This falls neatly into the "bad thing" catagory doesn't it Cutter?"

"Yes Squat, I'd say being steamrolled by a giant flaming asteroid fits 
quite nicely into the "bad thing" catagory!"

Derek Stanley



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

From: Derek Stanley <dstanley@direct.ca>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 1996 08:11:08 -0700
Subject: Re: Disposable PCs

Tom Ellis wrote:
> 
> On 1 Jul 1996, Steve Charlton/Avalon Software Inc wrote:
> 
> > Dave Golden said:
> > >Since I lost my group before they ever got
> > >anywhere near needing a decent explanation...
> >
> > No, no, no, no... you are allowed to kill off the
> > characters, but it is frowned upon to kill off the players.
> 
> What??  WHAT???!!  I have been refing for 18 years and NOW you tell me
> that when a character dies I am NOT supposed to kill the PLAYER TOO???
> 
> Jeeze...

 Perhaps this is why you had so much trouble convincing new players to 
join.  8)

Derek Stanley



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

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #200
**********************************

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".
