The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 411  4836 31-Oct-1992 Cynthia Higginb  p-p fusion, Sword worlds, and others...
 411  4837 31-Oct-1992 metlay           GDW on the TML, alors! An addendum to y
 411  4838 31-Oct-1992 Steve Higginbot  ATTN:  Neubayern. << I won't be able to
 411  4839 01-Nov-1992 Colin Roald      Refined seawater << From: Cynthia Higgi
 411  4840 01-Nov-1992 Nicholas Sylvai  Minor Legal-type Comment << >From: b.bo
 411  4841 02-Nov-1992 "Bruce Pihlamae  Refuelling and others << > Subject: cam
 411  4842 01-Nov-1992 Rob Dean         Netiquette/Fusion << I checked GEnie ye
 411  4843 01-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   UPPs, Starports, and Superdense << Cynt
 411  4844 02-Nov-1992 Does it matter?  Robot Design System << Having gone thro
 411  4845 02-Nov-1992 BARANSKI@VEAMF1  VIP's on TML << RE: Metlay
 411  4846 02-Nov-1992 CS171308011@UTS  Updating Traveller << Hey folx,
 411  4848 02-Nov-1992 Colin Roald      oops...sorry. << My apologies to the TM


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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4836
Date: 31 Oct 92 09:00:21 EST
From: Cynthia Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: p-p fusion, Sword worlds, and others...

Seth:

>Ah, but protium (hydrogen-1, the most common isotope) is useless for
>fusion unless you use a carbon-nitrogen cycle or some such.  Straight
>hydrogen fusion requires deuterium and/or tritium.  Anyone got figures
>on isotope frequencies? I don't have 'em handy...but I'll bet that less
>than 1 in 100 atoms of hydrogen is "good" hydrogen.  This multiplies
>volume by 100, making it a hefty 9.3 cm decrease in ocean level,
>annually.  This will have some significant effects after a while.

Where did you get the impression that you needed deuterium or tritium to
fuse?  The sun certainly uses a protium-protium cycle, and it certainly
should be possible to develop a controlled p-p cycle within a few
thousand years...

And the usage level you are looking at is about 30 times as high as even
MY wildest imaginings as to the space traffic on Terra.  At the rate I
have estimated for Terra, you would lower the ocean level by a meter in
only 7900-odd years.  BUT, part of that hydrogen will find its way back
into Terra's oceans, since presumably the waste hydrogen from the power
plants is dumped out as the ship goes, and anything discarded in
atmosphere will probably combine with atmospheric oxygen and fall like
rain.


Metlay:

>"we're not on GEnie and we can say whatever we want about GDW, so
>there" mentality that GDW frankly despises.

We're not, and we can.  Rude it may be, but free speech is still written
into the Constitution (though Ross may want to change that when he is
the Man).  We can say whatever we like about GDW, Slick Willie, Ross, or
even "Candidate George" (and his evil twin "Skippy").

GDW is under no more obligation to listen to us than we are to be polite
to GDW, of course.  That's what freedom is all about...

>(get real, folx. Are YOU going to go into insulin shock if TNE has a
bad starship combat system?),

No, but if I can read a copy in advance, and find out that it has a
lousy starship combat system, I won't buy my own copy.  And if the news
(rumours) going around about TNE don't imply that it has definitely
shaped up from MT, I won't buy one UNLESS I can read it first and
determine whether it is worth buying.


> it is always better to be liked than to be right. The customer must be
>pleased, and communicate this pleasure to the seller.

And how should we communicate pleasure we don't feel?  Unless GDW writes
the game we want to play, we are under no obligation to tell them they
did a wonderful job, or to buy something we dislike.

>BUT! Common, decent courtesy to the people who provide us with the
>games we love should be first and foremost.

I have acquired, through one means or another, almost every RPG GDW put
out.  Entirely too many of them languish in a closet because GDW stopped
support of them. Available players tend to dry up when the company stops
supporting a game, alas!  GDW ought to keep in mind that common courtesy
should also be due the people who buy their products, and (indirectly)
pay their bills.

All this is leading to the point that if they produce products like
"Shattered Ships of the Fighting Imperium" (which Chadwick  admitted had
not been editted properly (what do they do over there, if they don't
edit their products?)), then they deserve no more (in fact, a lot less)
respect than they have been getting.


>GDW fields letters and phone calls every day from all over the country,
>if not the world. They cry out for material to keep CHALLENGE on the
>stands. But there is no corollary to that law that says they must
>tolerate the slings and arrows of a small, thoroughly obnoxious group
>of buyers- --and pay for the privilege!--

As I  have told George, I would be willing to write for Challenge only
after they change their payment policies to payment upon acceptance.
Not, I expect that GDW WANTS me to write for Challenge...
All my other objections he demonstrated had been met by Challenge when
he writes for them.

BTW, I missed something:  "pay for the privilege"?  What was that
supposed to mean?

>But there is one other face and voice attached to ASCII on my screen, a
>face and voice that most of you have never met and will never meet.
>Loren Wiseman.

I'm glad that you have a friendly relationship with Loren Wiseman.
But, since, as you say, I am unlikely to ever meet him, I am unlikely
ever to care about him unless we communicate somehow.  ASCII text may
not be the preferred choice for making friends, but
friendships/acquaintances/relationships have historically been
created/maintained for years via the mail system.  If Loren Wiseman
wants us to treat GDW like "people", then he should try posting
occassionally.  Maybe after we nattered with him a while, we'd
understand GDW's problems a little better, and care a little more what
they thought of us...


Sulieman:

>About crossing the Reft...
>To me the question that is raised is how and why? If they crossed the
>Reft they did it for a specific reason i.e. they knew exactly where
>they wanted to go and then took the "shortest" path. I don't know if it
>is even viable to do it with J-2 maybe J-3 technology. Remember the
>Reft was only crossed in 1090 by a specialised Scout ship and that was
>done in Corridor. If they did it I can see why it took them 20
>years....but I can also see them changing their minds from frustration
>and skimming the spinward edge of Vland into Corridor-Deneb-Marches.

How and why?  1090?  In my TCS game, there are at least two ships, one
TL-10, one TL-12, that are theoretically capable of crossing the Rift.
Both can cross eight parsecs of empty space, and one (the TL10 one),
can, with sufficient drop tanks, cross 21 parsecs without refueling.  So
it certainly is possible to build ships that can, and has been since the
Ziru Sirka.


>And they might have been isolationist/racist enough not to settle in a
>world that was pre-populated..... Any takers on what they might have
>done to get so isolationist? It seems that the reasons might still be
>applicable to current SW as they are still have an
>isolationist/antogonistic attitude.

If they were racists, they probably would have settled somewhere with
natives to feel superoir to/exterminate.  Makes you feel more macho, I
guess.  If they were isolationist, they should have settled well away
from Darrian.  Personally, I think the knowledge of Darrian should be
excised from the History of the Sword Worlds.  It is difficult to
reconcile with everything else.  Perhaps the "Official History" says
they knew of the Darrians, but they were really caught flat-footed when
they discovered their next-door neighbors (whom they didn't really
want), and changed history to imply that they had planned it that way
all along.  This would make a good line to feed their people ("Yes, we
knew about them before we chose Gram, but we settled here anyway.  We'll
need a stong enemy to test us, to keep us strong, etc....")

BTW, Cynthia and I will be offline for several days while we move into
our newly bought house.  Perhaps through Friday.  So anyone who expects
to hear anything from us should be prepared for a delay.  And all those
who will be relieved by MY silence can now breathe a collective sigh of
relief....

---Steve

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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4837
From: metlay@netcom.com (metlay)
Subject: GDW on the TML, alors! An addendum to yesterday's rant.
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 92 10:40:49 PST


Well, shucky darn. Looks like I was a bit hasty on my predictions
concerning Loren's presence on the TML. My apologies for making a
snap assumption. However, no apologies for the point I was trying
to make, which still stands with equal validity. I, for one, am
going to be watching to see not only who makes either a deliberate
effort to be polite OR obnoxious now that GDW is here, but also
to observe which formerly cantankerous posters suddenly lose the
will to go head to head with the Keepers of the Canon Law. It should
be a blast. |->

(Five will get you ten that Bart Massey was referring to me, folx.)

I remain, as always,

- --
metlay            | and she's a master of return hitting
atomic city       | giving rhythm to her posts
                  | so you read her and think hey it sounds good
metlay@netcom.com | and wish her posts had a soundtrack too    (f. ercolessi)

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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4838
Date: 31 Oct 92 18:15:40 EST
From: Steve Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: ATTN:  Neubayern.

I won't be able to get your turn out tonight with the others.  I don't
have your alternate address available here, so send it to me ASAP, and
I MAY be able to get your turn to you Monday.

Sorry for the inconvenience....

---Steve

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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4839
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 92 15:32:12 EST
From: Colin Roald <colin@callisto.pas.rochester.edu>
Subject: Refined seawater

From: Cynthia Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>

>Where did you get the impression that you needed deuterium or tritium to
>fuse?  The sun certainly uses a protium-protium cycle, and it certainly
>should be possible to develop a controlled p-p cycle within a few
>thousand years...

 ...on the other hand, why would you want to?  It shouldn't be THAT difficult
to separate protium and deuterium, and if I remember my nuclear fizziks right,
the d-d reaction is much more energetic.

>...  BUT, part of that hydrogen will find its way back
>into Terra's oceans, since presumably the waste hydrogen from the power
>plants is dumped out as the ship goes, and anything discarded in
>atmosphere will probably combine with atmospheric oxygen and fall like
>rain.

But that would be a rain almost inevitably contaminated with tritium and other
fairly unpleasant fusion byproducts. *I* wouldn't want any starship emptying
its reactor waste over *MY* head. (Am I remembering right?  Tritium does
have a half-life of eleven years or so, doesn't it? And that would put it
squarely in the medium-duration really-nasty-to-large-lifeforms class.
(The really energetic short half-life stuff disappears too fast to be a
real problem, and the really long-lived stuff is too weakly radioactive,
but the medium-life stuff will decay just fast enough to deliver its entire
dosage in the life of one big animal.)  I'll check the CRC later if no one
beats me to it.)

Anyway, it would seem much preferable to refine the hydrogen first, and
sell the ships just the deuterium that they'd want, keeping the hydrogen for
your seawater--and for that matter, burning hydrogen to get water is an
excellent clean source of chemical energy for cars and such.

Are fusion reactors supposed somehow to take in a small amount of hydrogen,
fuse it for a while, and then spit it out, taking in another bite to refresh
itself?  Has anyone worked out any of the numbers here--is this a sensible
model? (I'm here out of a general interest in sf role-playing; I don't have
Traveller and am fuzzy on some of the details like this.)

>
>Metlay:

>"we're not on GEnie and we can say whatever we want about GDW, so
>there" mentality that GDW frankly despises.

We're not, and we can.  Rude it may be, but free speech is still written
into the Constitution (though Ross may want to change that when he is
the Man).  We can say whatever we like about GDW, Slick Willie, Ross, or
even "Candidate George" (and his evil twin "Skippy").

GDW is under no more obligation to listen to us than we are to be polite
to GDW, of course.  That's what freedom is all about...

>(get real, folx. Are YOU going to go into insulin shock if TNE has a
bad starship combat system?),

No, but if I can read a copy in advance, and find out that it has a
lousy starship combat system, I won't buy my own copy.  And if the news
(rumours) going around about TNE don't imply that it has definitely
shaped up from MT, I won't buy one UNLESS I can read it first and
determine whether it is worth buying.


> it is always better to be liked than to be right. The customer must be
>pleased, and communicate this pleasure to the seller.

And how should we communicate pleasure we don't feel?  Unless GDW writes
the game we want to play, we are under no obligation to tell them they
did a wonderful job, or to buy something we dislike.

>BUT! Common, decent courtesy to the people who provide us with the
>games we love should be first and foremost.

I have acquired, through one means or another, almost every RPG GDW put
out.  Entirely too many of them languish in a closet because GDW stopped
support of them. Available players tend to dry up when the company stops
supporting a game, alas!  GDW ought to keep in mind that common courtesy
should also be due the people who buy their products, and (indirectly)
pay their bills.

All this is leading to the point that if they produce products like
"Shattered Ships of the Fighting Imperium" (which Chadwick  admitted had
not been editted properly (what do they do over there, if they don't
edit their products?)), then they deserve no more (in fact, a lot less)
respect than they have been getting.


>GDW fields letters and phone calls every day from all over the country,
>if not the world. They cry out for material to keep CHALLENGE on the
>stands. But there is no corollary to that law that says they must
>tolerate the slings and arrows of a small, thoroughly obnoxious group
>of buyers- --and pay for the privilege!--

As I  have told George, I would be willing to write for Challenge only
after they change their payment policies to payment upon acceptance.
Not, I expect that GDW WANTS me to write for Challenge...
All my other objections he demonstrated had been met by Challenge when
he writes for them.

BTW, I missed something:  "pay for the privilege"?  What was that
supposed to mean?


>But there is one other face and voice attached to ASCII on my screen, a
>face and voice that most of you have never met and will never meet.
>Loren Wiseman.

I'm glad that you have a friendly relationship with Loren Wiseman.
But, since, as you say, I am unlikely to ever meet him, I am unlikely
ever to care about him unless we communicate somehow.  ASCII text may
not be the preferred choice for making friends, but
friendships/acquaintances/relationships have historically been
created/maintained for years via the mail system.  If Loren Wiseman
wants us to treat GDW like "people", then he should try posting
occassionally.  Maybe after we nattered with him a while, we'd
understand GDW's problems a little better, and care a little more what
they thought of us...


Sulieman:

>About crossing the Reft...
>To me the question that is raised is how and why? If they crossed the
>Reft they did it for a specific reason i.e. they knew exactly where
>they wanted to go and then took the "shortest" path. I don't know if it
>is even viable to do it with J-2 maybe J-3 technology. Remember the
>Reft was only crossed in 1090 by a specialised Scout ship and that was
>done in Corridor. If they did it I can see why it took them 20
>years....but I can also see them changing their minds from frustration
>and skimming the spinward edge of Vland into Corridor-Deneb-Marches.

How and why?  1090?  In my TCS game, there are at least two ships, one
TL-10, one TL-12, that are theoretically capable of crossing the Rift.
Both can cross eight parsecs of empty space, and one (the TL10 one),
can, with sufficient drop tanks, cross 21 parsecs without refueling.  So
it certainly is possible to build ships that can, and has been since the
Ziru Sirka.


>And they might have been isolationist/racist enough not to settle in a
>world that was pre-populated..... Any takers on what they might have
>done to get so isolationist? It seems that the reasons might still be
>applicable to current SW as they are still have an
>isolationist/antogonistic attitude.

If they were racists, they probably would have settled somewhere with
natives to feel superoir to/exterminate.  Makes you feel more macho, I
guess.  If they were isolationist, they should have settled well away
from Darrian.  Personally, I think the knowledge of Darrian should be
excised from the History of the Sword Worlds.  It is difficult to
reconcile with everything else.  Perhaps the "Official History" says
they knew of the Darrians, but they were really caught flat-footed when
they discovered their next-door neighbors (whom they didn't really
want), and changed history to imply that they had planned it that way
all along.  This would make a good line to feed their people ("Yes, we
knew about them before we chose Gram, but we settled here anyway.  We'll
need a stong enemy to test us, to keep us strong, etc....")

BTW, Cynthia and I will be offline for several days while we move into
our newly bought house.  Perhaps through Friday.  So anyone who expects
to hear anything from us should be prepared for a delay.  And all those
who will be relieved by MY silence can now breathe a collective sigh of
relief....

---Steve

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

  colin roald |
observer on a | what do YOU care what other people think ?   -- Arlene Feynmann
  random walk |

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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4840
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 16:40:13 -0500
From: Nicholas Sylvain <npsylv%wmvm1.bitnet@utcs.toronto.edu>
Subject:      Minor Legal-type Comment

>From: b.borich@genie.geis.com
>Date: Fri, 30 Oct 92 21:40:00 EDT
>Subject: GDW talk
>
>P.P.S. As for the discussion on GDW suing Scott, they where talking about
>doing so for libel, not copyright infringement. And GDW has been pretty
>good about allowing others to use their universe, especially when there
>permission is asked.

Indeed, they WERE talking about suing Scott for libel, which IMHO is a
very silly and stupid threat and/or comment, based on the facts in that
situation. I can only hope that increased access to the TML will blow
a little sunshine into GDW and Mr. Chadwick in particular. We shall
see.

- ---
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
 the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
                   -- United States Constitution, Amendment 2

Nicholas Sylvain (npsylv@wmvm1.cc.wm.edu)
Marshall-Wythe School of Law
College of William and Mary

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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4841
Date: Mon,  2 Nov 92 10:21:11 +1100
From: "Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au>
Subject: Refuelling and others

> Subject: campaign notes
> From: goldman@orac.cray.com (Matthew D. Goldman)

> I've been going through my old Traveller stuff preparing for my
> current campaign.  It is going to be much easier to get the
> group involved this time any time before.  They are all Zhodani
> spies.  Have them meet an old man in the bar and try to get the
> players to get involved?  Naah, this time I'll just have the old
> man pass them the information along with their current orders.

The one I liked was when we were handed a set of orders and we started
commenting on them in front of the GM (ie orderer) who just sat there
taking notes of our attitude.  Later, we were "evaluated" by intelligence
officers based on what we had complained about.  There's nothing
more paranoid than a paranoid security officer.  Boy, they could dig
up things you thought you had well and trully forgotten.

> I really like lines such as "This data is of extreme value to a
> Zhodani Intelligence operative (maybe Cr30 million, plus expenses)"
> from 'Adventure 2 -- Research Station Gamma'.  Cr30 million?  Not
> a chance!  They will just get a pat on the back for a job well
> done, and their next assignment.

Gee, your guys are either very patriotic or thy're shit scared of their
boss.

I remember a discussion long ago (well bits of it) about why the US never
had any good spies and always seemed to have big leaks.  Of course the UK
are a separate issue, most of their agents were working full time for
everybody else.

It seems that the end result was that if you pay your top-notch agent
$40K a year and then expect him/her to pay informants $200K for a snipet
of information then you would have to be an idiot to expect them to NOT
cash in by selling some US secrets to the oposition.

If you give the $200K to your agent and say "get the information" then
they will be more likely to come home with the goods (with a profit to
themselves) and be very expensive to win over to the other side.

> From: Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.com>
> Subject: Oops!

> Still and all, a chest of 30 is pretty respectable if you're up
> against one of those wimpy weapons like a 50lb hunting bow (average
> damage 2.5--12 hits to serious wound level).

It does sound unrealistic.  I've found this in almost any game system
where they try to cover everything from fist blows to vehicle mounted
fusion weapons.  I have found the LIGHT/SERIOUS/CRITICAL wound
classifications to be easier to accept where the category of wound
has varying meanings depending upon where you get hit.  A light wound
to the head is far more incapacitating than a light wound to an arm etc.

BTW  I have heard of a LONG BOW firing an arrow at short range though
     half inch of plate armour.  Armour which a police revolver did
     not penetrate.  Police were there for the exhibition and I believe
     that the arrow used was wood with a reinforced metal tip.


REFUELing
- ---------

Thanks to the few who have replied to this question but I still don't have
a useful answer.

So far I've got

   - don't worry about it, it won't cause any problems for several thousand
     years,

   - panic now because you're losing 2cm a year (2cm over a 10 year period
     would start to get me worried), and

   - panic yesterday because you're losing 9+cm per year.

If you have to process XX tons of water to get 1 ton of fuel then you must
be processing a lot of water.  When does this activity start to impact the
planet?  When do the GREENies and other radical groups start complaining
about the environment and the destruction of water life etc etc etc and
shut down your operation on planet.


Bruce...             pihlab@hhcs.gov.au

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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4842
From: Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.com>
Subject: Netiquette/Fusion
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 92 21:09:57 EST

I checked GEnie yesterday to see what the Internet rates are.  GEnie is
currently charging $0.30/5000bytes of information flow, either incoming
or outgoing.  So, getting the TML on GEnie is probalby going to cost
about $45/month.  So, watch those inclusions, folks.  Colin Roald
presumably left half of the Higginbotham's message below his response
by accident, but it is now costing any of our GEnie friends money to
read...

On the subject of fusion, I am no expert.  However, I once ran through
the calculations during our discussions.  At least on Earth, deuterium
is about .015 percent of all hydrogen.  If you figure a fuel flow rate
of 3 liters of hydrogen per hour (see MT Ref's Manual for choice of
number), and had a 100% efficient d-d fusion reaction with no other
reactions, you could derive a maximum of 5MW from that reactor (compared
to the 6MW that can be gotten from a 14kl+ TL9-12 fusion reactor using
3 liters of hydrogen per hour per kl).  Ergo, you either have deuterium
enrichment, or protium reactions.  It doesn't take a terribly efficient
protium reaction (when added to d-d with a higher efficiency level) to
get the sort of power output we are told we get from a fusion plant in
MegaTraveller.

Rob Dean
(shouldn't be doing this--I've got to be up at 4:30 tomorrow to make my
flight...)

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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4843
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 92 22:32:51 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: UPPs, Starports, and Superdense

Cynthia Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM> writes:

>         To generalize from this: world UPPs are snapshots (we all know
> this).  The less logical a particular UPP is, the more likely it is to be
> a temporary condition.  This kind of UPP should be revised by the Referee
> as appropriate; what the PCs encounter, and what is published in the
> update column of the Wall Street Journal (Library Data edition) will not
> match the UPP in the Official Third Imperial Grand Survey.

One suggestion is to xerox or retype the world data for the subsector
you are adventuring in.  Put the copy in your campaign notebook and
update the world UPPs as the players encounter them.  This way you can
fudge the values of just about anything and remain consistent when the
players return to the world at some point in the future.

>[starport ratings and traffic levels]

One problem with quantifing the traffic levels in aggregate tons a year
is the problem of deciding what the trade level should be.  By this I
mean that everyone's concept of how much interstellar traffic there
actually *IS* in the Imperium varies greatly.  Heck, I'm not even
self-consistent in my own view.

At one end of the spectrum is the "luxury trade" concept.  This is that
interstellar trade is a relatively rare and expensive thing, and that even
the busiest ports have at most a few dozen ships in port at once.  This
point of view seems implicit in many of the earliest Traveller
materials.  Trade therefore makes up a very little part of the Gross
Imperial Product, and most worlds are almost entirely self-sufficient.

The other end of the extreme is where the Imperium is one large
interstellar economy; with most worlds dependent on interstellar imports
or exports to maintain their technology and standard of living. Such a
model calls for hundreds or thousands of ships in port at even
moderately busy systems.  This point of view is implicit in almost
anything written for MegaTraveller.

I tend to suspect that the latter case is probably more accurate, but I
would hate to create a rating system that dictated a level of trade to a
referee that was comfortable with something else.

>         What does size of the vessel have to do with how much traffic a
> system sees?   I personally think that a port that sees 120,000 Free
> Traders a year rates a higher traffic rating than a port that sees one
> 100,000 ton bulk hauler a year.  I suggest you rate traffic by Aggregate
> Tons of ships (not cargo) rather than by tonnage of individual vessels.

This is why I used two numbers in my rating system.  The traffic rating
indicates the aggregate tonnage of shipping (in a vague sort of way),
while the facilities code shows what the landing pads, yards, and repair
shops are capable of (a code A-?0 world might find constructing a
scoutship to be a challenge, while a A-?F world would be quite capable
of million-ton behemoths).

Using the large-scale trade assumptions, a rough guide to my system
would go something like:

Trade Volume (with Cynthia's interpretation of Scott's ragings):
  F = a billion aggregate tons or more (more than "H")
  D, E = over a hundred million aggregate tons ("H")
  A, B, C = over ten million aggregate tons ("M")
  7, 8, 9 = over a million aggregate tons (high "L")
  4, 5, 6 = over a hundred thousand aggregate tons (Low "L")
  1, 2, 3 = over ten thousand aggregate tons (high "O")
  0 = at least a thousand aggregate tons (low "O")
  Z = less than a thousand aggregate tons ("Z")

> I accept that advanced technology could create something tougher than
> single-crystal metals without knowing the details.
>         I tend to reserve degenerate matter and meson atoms for
> explanations of Monadium; they are too high tech and too tough to be
> Superdense.  (BTW, degenerate matter is Really Neat Stuff -- and its
> characteristics match almost all the observed characteristics of Monadium
> except one).

I tend to hand-wave on this one.  Most players are satisfied with my
explanation of "Partially-collapsed matter" and don't ask for details.
You are right, though: degenerate matter ("neutronium" to my players)
and meson atoms are probably way-higher than TL-15.


wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                         in the Far Future

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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4844
From: Does it matter? <vender@plains.NoDak.edu>
Subject: Robot Design System
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 0:43:02 CST

Having gone through the archives of this list, attempted to reverse
  engineer several of the robot designs I have seen, I need some
  help.  I have no access to Traveller book 8, and have never
  met anyone who has, so if anyone could help me with the following
  information:
    The charts for the robotic brains, skills, and how to work
    building a robot in a CP based system.
    (Since book 8 is out of print, I assume and hope no laws would
    be violated by this information. :(

BTW:  I have seen article#2070 about adjusting the output of a robotic
  powerplant for locomotion speed.

Any help would be greatly appreciated and probably save my current
  campaign.
- --Brad Vender

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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4845
Date:    Mon, 2 Nov 1992 10:27:10 -0500 (EST)
From: BARANSKI@VEAMF1.NUSC.NAVY.MIL
Subject: VIP's on TML

RE: Metlay

I think you've got a lot of gall to preach to the rest of us after some of your
episodes on TML.  I resent being preached at.

I try to be tolerant and civil to all the people on TML, and I think everyone
should do likewise in general.  However, the tone of the message is usually set
by the preceeding traffic.  When someone at GDW threatens to sue someone on
TML, the following traffic is likely to be a bit harsh.

However, when I see something I don't understand or think is wrong in some of
GDW's published information, I'm going to say so, and I hope that everyone will
continue to do so.

I don't "demand" that GDW do modify *anything* for my sake, or even reply to me
personally for some bit of trivia I might bring up.

I don't know that I've ever heard anyone actually *demand* that GDW do things
*their* way.

Most reactions to occasional game idiocies are on the tone of 'this is stupid!
is there something I'm overlooking, or is there a better way to play this?'.

Some idiocies have provoked people swearing off TNE and GDW, and playing the
classic or private rules in the future; that is certainly a valid choice for
them.

The more prolific & imaginative members of TML would like to be more of a
resource for GDW, and have them pay a bit more attention to TML.  However,
recent experience shows that TML is not organized enough to carry out sizable
projects.

It might be nice if GDW paid a bit more attention to TML, but that's up to GDW.

It also might be nice if GDW had some stated policy regarding Traveller forums
so that we would know what to expect of any interaction between TML and GDW.
What would GDW like to get from TML?  My belief in the past has been that with
occasional exceptions GDW doesn't care about TML.

In any case, I hope that TML continues as it has in the past; a interesting and
fun place to talk about Traveller.  GDW can take it or leave it.  If GDW really
does want to cooperate with TML we're going to need a lot better communication
on both sides then we've had in the past.

:-)  Welcome to TML, Loran! :-)

Jim Baranski

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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4846
Date:    Mon, 2 Nov 1992 10:02:14 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: Updating Traveller

Hey folx,

To Mr. Wiseman & GDW welcome.

About updating Trav:
Well, the feel for the game comes from the era in which it was written.
Take a look at the old Tech level advancement charts.  The original
appeared in '77 (25 Years ago), and to be frank, it shows.  IMO, the
feel for the game comes from it's view of technology.  ie. Computers
are less important than human (player) input.  Aiming and firing a gun
is not much less difficult at TL 15 than it is at TL 4.  The gun just
has more hitting power.  Maybe these things are not such great ideas
in now that we've had more and more influence from computers than we
did in '77.  Maybe these things gotta change.

The old TL chart (Book 3:  p14-15  :-)  Sez:  Artificial Intelligence
is TL 17.  BOO!!!  So much of Science Fiction (especially right now)
has A.I. much more common than that.  There's only ONE planet in the
Entire Trav/MegaTrav universe that has Artificial Intelligent Robots,
(other than the Cymbiot chips) and they're in a Red Zone.

Ok, now maybe the 'Virus' will change all that.  We have a retroactive
convention (or as Metlay sez 'retcon') saying that the chips have been
used all around the Trav universe as transponders.  Well, to me and
several others, it sounds a bit silly that that would be their Only use.
Seems ta me that they would get used EVERYWHERE if they were available.
And their self reproducing capabilities make them awfully cheap.

Frankly, I would not mind seeing a 'retcon' that artificial intelligent
robots are a lot more common in Trav than they have been seen to be
previously.  After all, we have all the stuff from book 8 onward saying
that robots are ALL OVER the Imperium and its surroundings.  We see that
At tech level 10, the maximum intelligence of a robot brain is average
human intelligence (7)  So why is it such a strain that A.I. robots have
been around since the beginning, but just aren't very important?

Robots are quite important in Science Fiction.  Take a look at what is
out there.  Robots are popular.  Star Wars --> Terminator etc. etc.
Trav is a bit out of step with more popular stuff by making the robots
so rare.  Why not use the cymballine chips & descendants in LOTS of
things OTHER than just the transponders.  After all there are a LOT of
good applications for them.  When handed a chip like that, AI & all,
one of the LAST applications I would have in mind would be a
transponder.

I wouldn't mind if TNE used A.I. much more extensively.  It would broaden
the base appeal of the game, and if done carefully, wouldn't change it
too much.  Let's face it.  We don't want EVERYTHING to be AI.  I don't
want MY characters to be less intelligent than the smart sights of their
guns.  I wanna have the Character do the thinking, not his gun.  (Many
games/science fiction genres have a habit of letting the guns do all the
planning/thinking/talking, but I don't think Anyone out there wants Trav
to change into just a shootemup.  :-P)

I don't like the idea of having a player hand over the facts to a
computer & have the computer come up with the solution.  Trav is
not like that.  Trav is a 'hands-on' game.  But there is still a
good deal of room for AI.

What other things have become popular in Science Fiction that
should be incorporated to make Trav sell?

Cyborgs?  Sure!  Why not?  One of the things I like about Trav is it is
pretty versatile.  The incusion of cyborg rules won't change the flavor
of the game unless it becomes the selling point of the game.  As it is
NOT the flavor of the game, it Won't change anything we don't want.
But cyborgs are popular & all the cyber punk stuff is selling, so put it
in!

Neural feeds?  Cyberspace?  I don't know enough about it to comment, but
I don't think it's inclusion will change trav much.  It isn't the Selling
point of the game, so it won't change it.  There is some rudimentary
stuff on neural connections in Trav, but it could use some fleshing out.

Nano-technology?  Well, that's tricky.  As Bertil pointed out, if you've
got Nano-tech, why bother walking around in Battle Dress with a fusion
gun when you can just send a cloud of nanotech thingies out to do all
that nasty fighting for you?  But, if it is done carefully, and limited
enough, I think it could be included without changing the feel of the game.

Matter transportation?  Urf.  I don't like it.  But if it were sufficiently
limited, it MIGHT be doable.  If handled like it is in some of Niven's
stories, it could be done:  designated booths as transmitter & reciever.
NOT like Star Trek.  A trasporter like Star Trek's would be out of control.
If the players got a hold of one it would be utterly rediculous.  And any
opponant with one would be unstoppable.

Matter manipulation/replication?  Just don't.  It would be worse than
a trasporter by a longshot.

Anti-matter?  Why not?  It's not that much more powerful than any other
weapon in Trav.  Also, we're much closer to having anti-matter stuff now
than we are to having artificial grav.  To those who say that the players
could destroy an entire planet with anti-matter, I gotta point out that
a crew in a scoutship could destroy an entire planet with a cargo hold of
pebbles.  (Accelerate to 1/10 speed of light {18 days @ 2G's} and drop
the rocks on the planet.  @ speeds like that, a 10 gram pebble has the
kinetic energy equivalent of a 1 kiloton atomic bomb.)

Ok, those are just some of the things Trav is light on that might
work for TNE.  I've probably left out a bunch.  What do you all think?
And remember, Trav is a TL 7 game after all.  It needs an update:  it
had Air/Rafts & other grav transportation listed as tech level 8.
(Not to mention fusion...  laser carbines...  interplanetary spacecraft...)

Scott 2G Kellogg
Speaking of A.I. & nano-tech, anybody heard anything outta
DGP lately?  What happened?  Did they make it or give up?

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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4847
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 16:13 GMT
From: PAVEWAY <BSP054@BANGOR.AC.UK>
Subject: testing testing...is this getting out?


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

Bundle: 411
Archive-Message-Number: 4848
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 11:24:17 EST
From: Colin Roald <colin@callisto.pas.rochester.edu>
Subject: oops...sorry.

My apologies to the TML for my sloppy editting of my post yesterday.

    colin roald | ooh! drat this computer. it is naughty
  observer on a | and complex. i could just pinch it.
    random walk |                       -- marvain the martian

------------------------------
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 412  4849 02-Nov-1992 Scott S. Kellog  Laser Weapons << Greetings,
 412  4850 02-Nov-1992 Colin Roald      Re: Refuelling and others << >So far I'
 412  4851 02-Nov-1992 Martin Snow      Deuterium << Whether or not your fuel s
 412  4852 02-Nov-1992 SULAIMAN@ecs.um  Sword Worlds -> Rift crossing << From:
 412  4853 02-Nov-1992 Colin Roald      radioactivity reality check << Yesterda
 412  4854 02-Nov-1992 CS171308011@UTS  Alien Flight Controls in Trav << Howdy,
 412  4855 03-Nov-1992 langsl@hhcs.gov  TNE wish list << Greetings to TML'ers.
 412  4856 01-Nov-1992 Theresa Verity   Okay - now get on with it... << [This m
 412  4857 02-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Wildstar and the Wishlist << I feel tir

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

Bundle: 412
Archive-Message-Number: 4849
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Laser Weapons
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 10:28:19 CST

Greetings,

Somebody asked about how much damage laser carbines are
gonna do under the Twilight 2000 rules.  This got me to
thinking about the basic treatment of laser weapons in Trav.

Lasers are not treated very well.  They are treated
essentually as a gun without recoil.  Now to quote our
fave cantakerous physicist:  "A laser is not a gun without
recoil.  It is a flashlight that kills!"  Aiming a laser
weapon will be pathetically easy.  Point it at em.  Keep
the beam on the target.  I once played a little game with
some trav friends of mine.  We had a Class II Helium Neon
laser 0.095mw.  Your basic classroom demonstrator laser
about as powerful as a laser pointer.  We taped it up to
a pair of binoculars so you could see the beam at a about
a hundred yards.  Next we sent someone (me) down to be the
target.  (Class II lasers will not hurt you unless you
stare into the beam).

Now, I can assure you, at a hundred yards, I'm a small
target.  Also most of you can figure out from my writing
that I'm pretty hyper and I'll assure you I can move/evade
when I want to.  I could not keep that beam off of me.
Even with that clumsy binocular/laser arrangement I just
could not evade that beam without good cover.

Hitting a target with a laser weapon will be VERY easy.

Furthermore, hitting an unarmored target will be a piece of
cake.  Speaking as (probably) the only person on the TML who's
actually been wounded by a laser (Argon Ion Class IIIb to the
retinae)  Lemme tell you it would be VERY easy to incapacitate
a person with a laser weapon.  Aim for the eyes.  Now, you don't
need all that much power to blind someone.  A laser that can
cut through 7mm of steel as the early laser weapons are supposed
to could easily put a lens on to expand the beam and still have
enough power to blind.  Sure you don't get penetrating power,
but now your beam quite large large.  It would be exactly like
pointing a flashlight at someone.  In a combat situation,
blinding someone is just as effective as killing them.

Scott 2G Kellogg
Laser Jock Extraordinaire

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

Bundle: 412
Archive-Message-Number: 4850
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 11:46:33 EST
From: Colin Roald <colin@callisto.pas.rochester.edu>
Subject: Re: Refuelling and others

>So far I've got
>
>   - don't worry about it, it won't cause any problems for several thousand
>     years,
>
>   - panic now because you're losing 2cm a year (2cm over a 10 year period
>     would start to get me worried), and
>
>   - panic yesterday because you're losing 9+cm per year.
>
>If you have to process XX tons of water to get 1 ton of fuel then you must
>be processing a lot of water.  When does this activity start to impact the
>planet?

It would obviously depend a lot on where and how the refining is done. Assuming
it's done in open water and with enough care not to contaminate the water
dumped out of the system, I wouldn't expect it to be a problem except in an
already badly weakened ecosystem.

>When do the GREENies and other radical groups start complaining
>about the environment and the destruction of water life etc etc etc and
>shut down your operation on planet.

You seem to have a fair idea: the radicals get pissed on principle, as soon
as they notice; responsible environmentalists as soon as it's measureable;
and your average sleepwalking citizens when they see their beaches receding.


  colin roald |
observer on a | what do YOU care what other people think ?   -- Arlene Feynmann
  random walk |

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

Bundle: 412
Archive-Message-Number: 4851
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 12:57:33 -0500
From: snow@lyrae.DNET.NASA.GOV (Martin Snow)
Subject: Deuterium

Whether or not your fuel supply needs to be deuterium or protium shouldn't
make any difference in the amount of water taken from the ocean.  If you
only use the deuterated water, you'd put the rest back anyway.  So you
can do your calculations (liters per year) without regard to the level
of "enrichment" that your fuel needs.

As for replenishing this water, it wouldn't be too hard to capture a comet
or two and drop chunks of snow into the atmosphere.  A well-managed starport
probably includes provision for environmental replacement, including
replacement of ocean water.


Martin Snow
snow@lyrae.dnet.nasa.gov
snow@cololasp.bitnet

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

Bundle: 412
Archive-Message-Number: 4852
Date: 02 Nov 1992 16:50:34 -0500
From: SULAIMAN@ecs.umass.edu
Subject: Sword Worlds -> Rift crossing

From: Steve Higginbotham
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Hopefully this is correct :-)
Subject: Sword worlds

>Sulieman:
    ^^^^ its Sulaiman as it says in my post or you can use Ameer if
 you feel informal :-)

>>About crossing the Reft...
>>To me the question that is raised is how and why? If they crossed the
>>Reft they did it for a specific reason i.e. they knew exactly where
>>they wanted to go and then took the "shortest" path. I don't know if it
>>is even viable to do it with J-2 maybe J-3 technology. Remember the
  ^^^^^^
>>Reft was only crossed in 1090 by a specialised Scout ship and that was
>>done in Corridor. If they did it I can see why it took them 20

>How and why?  1090?  In my TCS game, there are at least two ships, one
>TL-10, one TL-12, that are theoretically capable of crossing the Rift.

Two out of how many? What's their total useful tonnage?

>Both can cross eight parsecs of empty space, and one (the TL10 one),
>can, with sufficient drop tanks, cross 21 parsecs without refueling.  So
>it certainly is possible to build ships that can, and has been since the
>Ziru Sirka.

I think you missed the whole point of the argument. The problem isn't if
its possible, the problem is whether its VIABLE. What is the ratio of
useful cargo to fuel for such vessels? If you are transporting more than
10 people what is its size? If the original SWs had access to a very large
volume tonnage then they could have run over just about any opposition at
that time or atleast taken the less risky route. If they were exiled then
would the Terrans have let them go with oh a couple of hundred million tons
worth of shipping in the assumption that most of it would be used for fuel.

If on the other hand they built such ships then they were purpose built for
crossing the Great Rift.

That implies that the SW knew EXACTLY where they wanted to go. Which brings
us back to the original question of: Why settle where they did? Still
doesn't explain why it took them 20 years. If they
took the short-cut then they should have gotten there sooner not later by
14 years. As far as settling in the Trojan Reach goes, I would have thought
that they would stick around there for a few more years, IF they were trying
to settle, before running another half a sector into the Marches. One other
thing if your vessels have Riftspanning ability why cross the unknown Rift,
just skip from one backward world to another skimming fuel. No problem with
governments and its safer than the Rift i.e you can always find worlds that
can supply fuel AND food.

The other problem is that as my reference to crossing of Reft and the
original Aslan book reveals that the region was not mapped till recently.
While it may have been possible to cross the Rift, it wasn't done until
recently (as far as we know). Now if the SW crossed the Great Rift they
probably did so w/out the benefit of any accurate maps. This is probably
true in any case due to the state of interstellar commerce. This could
explain why they wandered around for about 20 years. However sanity would
suggest that after the first 5 years of jumping into deep space they would
have changed their minds and taken a route which allows them to use less
fuel.


>If they were racists, they probably would have settled somewhere with
>natives to feel superoir to/exterminate.

Maybe they were out to show how to build utopia. They preferred no
confusing interference from smarty natives. Otherwise all the Klansmen
would have settled in ghettos. And the suburbs would be free of all racism.....

>If they were isolationist, they should have settled well away
>from Darrian.

Too tired of travelling and possible that they did not think that the
Darrians would recover anytime soon. They were right in that regard
mostly. They did nothing to help them that's for sure.

>Personally, I think the knowledge of Darrian should be
>excised from the History of the Sword Worlds.  It is difficult to
>reconcile with everything else.

I think it becomes worse if u assume that they did not know of Darrians.
Then u have a group of people who has travelled for 20 years
scouting for the best place to settle and they never noticed the Darrians
when they finally decide to settle! Its more likely that they thought
that the Darrians were too low-tech to be a threat and the unoccupied
SW subsector too good. There is no indication that any of the civil wars
made the SW lose the tech for jumps. They would have NOTED the Darrians
existence whether they really NOTICED or CARED TO NOTICE them is an
entirely different matter. I think its more likely that they underestimated
them.


>Perhaps the "Official History" says
>they knew of the Darrians, but they were really caught flat-footed when
>they discovered their next-door neighbors (whom they didn't really
>want), and changed history to imply that they had planned it that way
>all along.  This would make a good line to feed their people ("Yes, we
>knew about them before we chose Gram, but we settled here anyway.  We'll
>need a stong enemy to test us, to keep us strong, etc....")

This would be fine if we knew of what the SWs taught as history. Its
not the SW that claim to have contacted the Darrians, its Darrians who
claim to have been contacted. The source of info is the Darrians Alien
Module. Info on SW is rather scanty as far as pre-Imperial history goes as
you might have guessed.


Ameer

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

Bundle: 412
Archive-Message-Number: 4853
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 16:56:48 EST
From: Colin Roald <colin@callisto.pas.rochester.edu>
Subject: radioactivity reality check

Yesterday I claimed tritium had a half life of 11 years; it's actually 12.33 y.
How much of a problem this would be depends on the tritium concentration, which
depends on the reaction chain.  Do we have anyone out there who really knows
fusion?

  colin roald |
observer on a | what do YOU care what other people think ?   -- Arlene Feynmann
  random walk |

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

Bundle: 412
Archive-Message-Number: 4854
Date:    Mon, 2 Nov 1992 16:18:14 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: Alien Flight Controls in Trav

Howdy,

A couple of things in my private e-mail brought up cockpit design
again.  So, I just thought I'd post my updated version about
cockpit design.  I've changed a few things since you all saw it
last.

Question:  Just how do the different alien races design their
control panels.  We kinda take it for granted that they are
different, but just how different are they?  For simplicity's
sake I just took a look at pilot stations.

I'm assuming that a grav vehicle's throttle will basically be
similar to a helicopter's collective control.  While the attitude
control of grav vehicle and helicopters will be very similar as
both perform the same operations.  No, there is no steering wheel
in an air/raft!

SOLOMANI (start off simple right?)
     Solomani and most Imperial flight controls generally consist
of stick, throttle, and rudder pedals.  The stick is usually
mounted in the center of the console, but is sometimes on the left
side, while the right hand generally controls the throttle.  This
allows the co-pilot or navigator (generally seated on the right) to
be able to reach the throttle.  If the pilot were incapacitated,
the co-pilot can easily take control.  If the stick is on the left
side, it and the throttle are mounted in the arms of the
acceleration couch.  This allows the pilot to rest his arms on the
chair.  This can be nice when you don't have inertial compensators
working.
     On most ships, especially fighters, all combat and
communication functions are mounted on the stick and throttle.
This allows a pilot to conduct all combat operations without having
to move his hands to different controls.  This design philosophy is
known as HOTAS.  (Hands On Throttle And Stick)
     Darrians tend to use Solomani control design philosophy,
though with a greater emphasis on center mounted sticks.  This is
because of the high proportion of ambidextrousness and left
handedness in Darrian gene pools.

VILANI
     Vilani controls are a bit more automated.  Auto pilots tend
to be a bit more sophisticated (and are heavily relied on)  The
control lay out is on the clumsy side.  Engineers opted for a
single design to ease training of pilots and to avoid their
having to study their ship to understand what is going on.  Thus
the same control panel exists on a Vilani fat trader as exists
on their air/rafts and their most sophisticated fighters.  The
compromise design is good, but any compromise in engineering tends
to lessen performance.
     Vilani attitude controls look like a cross between a
control yoke and motorcycle handle bars.  Rudder pedals are not
present as they are in Solomani designs, and yaw control is linked
to the handle bars.  Yaw movement is coordinated with the roll
control producing a controlled turn and bank.  Flying a Vilani
built craft is very similar to driving a ground car.  The lack of
individual yaw makes a cross controlled 'slip' maneuver somewhat
more difficult in Vilani aircraft.
     Lack of yaw control is compensated for by the presence of
crosswind landing gear.  Crosswind gear allow the craft to land
while the ship's nose is not pointing along the direction of
travel.  The gear is mounted on casters akin to the wheels on a
shopping cart.  However, they make high speed taxi difficult and
hazardous as the wheels do not aide in turning the aircraft.
     The throttle is mounted on the left handle bar as if it were
a motorcycle.  This allows for a HOTAS system.
     Many minor races prefer Vilani flight control system layouts
as they are among the simplest human layouts to operate for most
manipulatory appendages.  They do not require input from the feet
and can usually be managed with one hand or other appendage.
Another advantage is that Vilani systems do not require the foot
pedal rudder controls of standard Imperial equipment:  Difficult to
manage when your feet are like a rhino's, or you don't have feet...
LLELLEWYLOLY and VIRUSHI prefer Vilani layouts.

ZHODANI
     Almost all Zhodani pilots come from the noble ranks.  Flight
controls for their ships are open for flicking.  Thus the
psi-trained Zhodani pilot may change the ship's attitude, throttle
settings, and weapons by flicking.  Special safe guards are in
place to prevent outside psionic interference in the piloting of
the ship.  Up to and including a psi-shield surrounding the
pilot's station.  This is demonstrated in the Shivva class patrol
frigate and her fighters.  The fighter pilots are open to
telepathic contact from their flight controller, but the flight
controller can not affect flight controls of the fighter.
     There also exist manual controls for all craft.  Not all
pilots are nobles, and enlisted & prole pilots use the manual
controls.  Also proles operating grav vehicles and the like have a
need for manual controls.  While one would think that manual flight
controls would be of lesser quality because of the dependance on
psi-controls, this is far from the truth.  With their wealth of
insight into the human mind, data presentation among the Zhodani
is a fine art.  Screens with flight data are very well presented
in such a manner so as not to swamp the pilot with data.
However, manual controls do tend to receive secondary attention
in Zhodani cockpit design.
     Controls are generally mounted on the arms of the flight
acceleration couch.  The stick is generally mounted on the left,
and the throttle on the right.  Often times, with a Psionic pilot
in command, the controls are stowed inside the chair arms and,
with a press of a switch, can be deployed in emergencies.
     Yaw control is subsumed into the stick in a rotational
manner.  Turn the stick to the right and the ship yaws right.
This last is a reflection of how manual flight controls are
considered secondary.
(MOTAS?  Mind On Throttle And Stick?)

VARGR
     Vargr flight controls do not follow general lines making it
difficult to generalize.  But, their control systems tend to be
similar to human designs at least where hands are concerned.
Their digitigrade stance makes their foot controls quite
different.  Rudder pedals are rare, and yaw control tends to be
absorbed into the stick as Vilani and Zhodani designs.
     Aslan control systems are sometimes copied by Vargr.

ASLAN
     Aslan flight controls are a set of half gloves set into the
arms of the acceleration couch.  They look somewhat like large
balls on the ends of the chair arms.  The hand is placed atop the
ball in deep indentations in it for the hand.  (Picture a big wax
ball with a hole the shape of your hand melted into it.)  (Rather
like Hiver controls with deeper indentations)
     This design meshes with the Aslan philosophy that the ship
is but an extension of the pilot.  The 'gloves' make the ship
part of him.  The ship follows the motion of the hand, much as a
human stick would do.  The extension of the dew-claw fires the
ships weapons on ship's where the pilot is in control of the guns.
A similar control is for the aiming and firing of ship's weapons.
     Attitude control is usually controlled by both hands on
separate controls.  With roll and pitch on one hand and yaw on the
other.  Though some control units have pitch, roll and yaw all on
one ball.  Throttle control is in foot pedals.

DROYNE
     Droyne controls are one of the most unusual.  Attitude
controls are mounted beside the pilot.  They are low level infra-
red sensors that sense the position of the pilot's wings and
tail.  Though the Droyne generally have great difficulty in
flying, they do still possess the equipment for rudimentary
flight, and the instincts to do so (though buried).  To raise the
nose of the ship, the pilot would increase the angle of attack of
his wings.  The sensors see the change in wing angle and perform
the maneuver.  If the pilot raises his right wing, the ship will
bank left, and so on.
     Yaw maneuvering is controlled by tail movement.
     Throttle control is based around the width which the wings are
spread.  The closer the wings are drawn in, the higher the thrust.
Much as a flying droyne would pull his wings in while diving.
     Pilots usually wear a small set of infra-red reflectors
(looking something like large clip on earrings) around the joints
in their wings and tail to aid in the sensing of the pilots wing
positions.  These IR reflectors are part of a Droyne pilot's
uniform.  Sufficiently high technology (TL 10) allows sufficient
sensor capability that these reflectors are not necessary, but they
continue to be worn as the mark of a pilot.
     Below TL 8, Droyne pilots must rely on boosted mechanical
linkages from to their wings to the flight controls.
     AEL YAEL, while unable to build ships will commonly adapt
control panels to this type of configuration.

HIVERS
     Hiver controls are balls mounted with control studs.  This is
the form best suited 'ergonomically` to their limbs.  Control is
similar to a control stick in terms of attitude (forward, back,
turn etc.).  Throttle control is based on the amount of pressure
exerted on the control ball.  The tighter the grip, the more thrust
applied.  Hiver controls are very difficult for anyone but a hiver
to operate, thus, many of their ships employ dual control panels,
to allow for a member race to use them.  The Federation Member
control panels are similar to Aslan designs, though the indentation
in the control globes is not so deep as the Aslan half gloves.
This arrangement allows the hiver better control than he would
manage with a Solomani design.

K'KREE
     The K'Kree have probably the most bizarre arrangement of
attitude control.  The pilot lies in a couch arrangement with his
four hooves touching the floor.  By leaning in one direction or
another, the ship's attitude is changed.  It looks something like
flying a hang glider.  To roll left, lean left.  To lower the
nose:  lean forward.  To pull up:  lean back.  Yaw control is by
twisting the body to the right or left.  Throttle control is by
hand levers.
     The leaning method of attitude control dates back to the
earliest K'kree experiments in flight.  Their earliest gliders
used this method of steering, then their primitive aircraft.
After that, it was too entrenched in conservative K'kree
engineering philosophy to ever change.

VEGANS (Not the nuts with vegetables :-)
     Vegan flight controls are geared toward their own set of
unique physiology.  They rely heavily on inertial compensators as
their somewhat weak limbs have difficulty overcoming high
acceleration.  Ships which do not have inertial compensators in the
entire ship will nevertheless have a region where they are
installed:  around the pilot.
     Controls are mounted in sockets inside the acceleration couch.
A pilot inserts his tentacles into the sockets to make control
adjustments.  The position of the tentacles is sensed and attitude
adjustments are made.
     Vegan control consoles look somewhat strange to human eyes in
that all controls are mounted very close together in a very compact
data presentation.  This is because of the construction of the
Vegan neck which restricts side to side head movements.

AGRICOLANS
     (Remember an Agricolan looks like a swimming Tyrannosaurus.)
     Agricolans being powerful swimmers, have adapted to using
their powerful rudder-like tails as direction and attitude control.
Their control mechanisms are somewhat similar to the mechanical
Droyne flight controls, though none of the IR systems are present.
The Agricolan lies prone on its belly, with its tail fitted into a
holder linked to the control systems.  Throttle control is by foot
pedals, while other controls (communications, weapons) are mounted
up by the Agricolan's small manipulator hands.
     R-Alpha's Phins probably use something similar.

Copyright 1992 Scott S. Kellogg

Whaddya think?

Scott 2G Kellogg
Ross for Boss!  Ross For Boss!

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

Bundle: 412
Archive-Message-Number: 4855
Date: Tue,  3 Nov 92 09:49:09 +1100
From: langsl@hhcs.gov.au
Subject: TNE wish list

Greetings to TML'ers.
====================

GENERAL RAMBLINGS
=================
I have been lurking and listening for a while, and so thought it was
about time I sent in some comments.

Wildstar:
My Traveller campaign is currently at 317/1107, so I think I have
a way to go before hitting the Rebellion - allowing for no changes in
History along the way, of course 8-). So, I wouldn't mind seeing your old
Classic Traveller stuff either.  If you don't want to post it again to
TML I would appreciate you email me at the following INTERNET address:

langsl@hhcs.gov.au

 ...thanks in advance.  Let me know if there is any I can do for you in
return.

Metlay & James Perkins:
I like your comments regarding courtesy.  Well said.

Dale Poole says:
>What the hell is COACC?

COACC stands for:  Close Orbit and Aerospace Control Command, I believe.
Hope it helps.

TO GDW:
=======

RE: 'THE NEW ERA' (TNE)
- -----------------------

I am looking forward to TNE to see what you come up with.  With this in
mind I have provided a list of some things I would like to see in the
game.

TNE WISH LIST
=============

RE: DESIGN RULES
- ----------------

If I buy the TNE rules + TNE Imperium sourcebook combination I would
like to be able to start play as soon as possible.  Having to stop to
design starships, ground vehicles etc is the last thing I want to do.

I would prefer to see a longer list of equipment, including vehicles for
Air, Sea, Land, Space, and Interstellar Travel, rather than a long set of
detailed design rules.  In my own roleplaying the design rules have not
featured in the games I have run, and very little in any games I have
played in.  Thus they would be of little use to me initially, whereas a
good list of equipment is always of use.

From what I have seen of Twilight 2000, Merc 2000, and Dark Conspiracy
they have very well presented equipment sections.  They also have good
building plans, which I find to be of great use too. I hope TNE emulates
this approach.

Rather than full detailed design rules on how to start from scratch,
rules on options for varying the standard designs might be a better way
to go in the basic rules.  This would allow even more vehicles to be
easily constructed from the standards presented.

Design rules _have_ featured in Trillion Credit style play by mail cam-
paigns which I have played in, so I wouldn't mind seeing some design rules
eventually, or released at the same time but in a self contained volume.

If these design rules for vehicles, robots etc were _all_ together, tested
and workable, this would save hunting through basic rules, supplements etc
whenever you wanted to design something, or check something in the design
rules.  Another advantage of this approach is that you would have room to
go into the detail that some people appreciate, in a separate volume that
only these people need buy.

It would be nice if the design rules were easily tunable too - so you
can have a campaign where ordinary individuals can own a starship
because they cost 1/10  or 1/20 say of standard Traveller's pricing.

RE:ECONOMICS
- ------------

It would be nice if you could include some ideas on how economics is sup-
posed to work too, as background to the trade rules.  I am not asking for
a treatise on economics - just some guidelines to help when trading comes
up in a game.

RE: DIFFERENT METHODS FOR SPACE/INTERSTELLAR TRAVEL
- ---------------------------------------------------

I have no objection to this - I would *like* to see some variety.  Jump,
Gate, and [Stutter]Warp systems seem as good a start as any.  Advice
on tuning them would be useful too - then beginning refs can construct
a universe which more faithfully models their intention or favourite
sci fi novel.

RE:STUTTERWARP & SHIP COMBAT
- ----------------------------
I don't think 2300's stutterwarp as is will work in the Imperium back-
ground.  I like the game mechanics though - you could present this as
an alternative to using a delta-vee system for ship maneuvre and combat.

You could tone down the stutterwarp efficiency so that it becomes closer
to jump drive in performance - perhaps only better in certain circum-
stances.  In this way you could have a Traveller version of stutterwarp
which works for Traveller.

COACC's approach for aerial dogfights is also good - they provide an
abstract system, which I use, and a more detailed system to resolve as
a board game, which I don't - though I would like to try it some time.
I think this is a good approach. You serve the needs of those who like a
board game style of resolution, and those who don't.  Two different
abstract systems, or two different board game systems, would not be as
good in my opinion.

Both these approaches are better for -roleplaying- ship to ship combats
than High Guard - at least in my humble opinion.

RE: WORLD BOOKS, LIKE GURPS, FOR DIFFERENT SETTINGS.
- ----------------------------------------------------

I like the idea of a 2300 world book for this system.  One of the groups
I play with likes the 2300 setting _a lot_, and dislike the 2300 rules
(not STARCRUISER...they love this too) equally as emphatically.  I am
currently using CYBERPUNK 2020 as the rules to run a 2300 game (minus the
CYBERPUNK aspects presented in the EARTH/CYBERTECH source book), and people
find it a good fit - nice simple mechanics that they understand, and a
_much_ more pleasant universe.

Since we haven't gotten very far yet they might be interested in helping
playtest TNE rules for a 2300 setting. (unsubtle hint)... 8-)

LASTLY (phew I hear you say 8-)
- -------------------------------

I have recently had an opportunity to look through the rules for STAR
WARS RPG.  I like their approach of having rules for trade, ship combat,
world design etc biased toward either being easy to ROLEPLAY with, or
provide opportunities for roleplaying.  This is what I would like to see
with TNE.  I think it is what the original Traveller had, despite its
warts, that Megatraveller doesn't.

- --
Alistair Langsford,
Canberra Australia.
INTERNET: langsl@hhcs.gov.au

Highlander II: The Sickening - there should only have been one!
(quoted from Interface Magazine)

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

Bundle: 412
Archive-Message-Number: 4856
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 17:13:51 -0500
From: Theresa Verity <uwfgamer@uwf.bitnet>
Subject: Okay - now get on with it...

[This msg was sent only to traveller-request, the list admin.  I
forwarded it on to traveller, the broadcast alias -- James]

   Can we stop bickering about the reality of if GDW is reading this
list or not?  It's gotten a little boring and really has no real bear-
ing on why this list was set up --- to discuss Traveller...

   Howz about this: Talk about things you WANT to see in the newer
evolution of the Traveller line...  I know if I had a chance to look
at the game or playtest it I'd make d*mn sure it had a system for
computers (even Challenge magazine had an article recently that pointed
out the weaknesses of the older Travellers!).  Being a computer engin-
eering major I hate to crack open a new RPG and see some sorry excuse
for a computer system, something that has absolutely no basis in real
computational theory (I haven't found a system yet that has done it).
Having seen this as a continuing fad (designers being unable to create
a working system that supports computers and related technologies), I
and a few friends have resigned ourselves to adding new system modifi-
cations in order for a computer system to really exist...

    Now I KNOW there are those out there in Netland who feel the same
way about other systems within the older Travellers...  Who knows, after
we gripe about it we could get together and write something that satis-
fies all of our collective criteria - hopefully BEFORE TNE is released.

    As I said, I'm currently learning the T2000 system and will be
re-reading some passages in Trav and Mega-Trav to run a hybrid game where
I live...  If I work on a new computer system, and it works, would any-
body want it (I mean to read and re-playtest)?  I plan to do this re-
gardless if I playtest TNE or not...

        Theresa Verity
        Pensacola GDW Demo Team Leader
        and freelance playtester for various companies

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

Bundle: 412
Archive-Message-Number: 4857
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 23:32:23 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Wildstar and the Wishlist


I feel tired and dizzy, it's late, and tomorrow is election day.  Please
pardon me if this posting is stranger than most ...

Theresa Verity <uwfgamer@uwf.bitnet> writes:
>    Howz about this: Talk about things you WANT to see in the newer
> evolution of the Traveller line...

Hear, hear!  Now that someone from GDW actually reads TML, we may
have slightly better than the proverbial snowball's chance of being
heard.  Wish list from Wildstar coming up as soon as I clear out some of
the other Traveller-related things I have to do ...

> If I work on a new computer system, and it works, would any-
> body want it (I mean to read and re-playtest)?  I plan to do this re-
> gardless if I playtest TNE or not...

By all means, post it to TML; I for one am always glad to see things
like this!  I am looking forward to seeing it!

langsl@hhcs.gov.au () writes:

> [about my classic traveller materials]

Gee, I just said I had some Traveller-related things I have to do ...
this is one of them!  I am going through my files now, and will be
posting things to TML as I discover them.

> [TNE wish list for GDW]
> If I buy the TNE rules + TNE Imperium sourcebook combination I would
> like to be able to start play as soon as possible.  Having to stop to
> design starships, ground vehicles etc is the last thing I want to do.

I like to see a decent selection of vehicles included with the game, but
I am a designer at heart.  One of my favorite solataire activities with
Classic Traveller was designing ships for many and varied purposes.

> Rather than full detailed design rules on how to start from scratch,
> rules on options for varying the standard designs might be a better way
> to go in the basic rules.  This would allow even more vehicles to be
> easily constructed from the standards presented.

This might be a good idea for the basic rulebook.  However, I would want
the ability to design vehicles from "scratch".  This capability is very
important to me, and I would be willing to spend additional money (over
and above the basic rules set) to get it.  This is indeed what I had to
do in Classic Traveller (I purcased Striker for the design system alone;
I have never played it as a wargame or as part of a rpg campaign, except
as a demonstration of miniatures combat).

If such an "add-on" design system is selected, I strongly suggest that
it be designed and playtested at the same time as the basic rules.  The
reason for this is so that the two fit seamlessly together, and so that
the "simplified" system presented in the basic rules is compatible with
the advanced "add-on" system purchased separately.

> If these design rules for vehicles, robots etc were _all_ together, tested
> and workable, this would save hunting through basic rules, supplements etc
> whenever you wanted to design something, or check something in the design
> rules.  Another advantage of this approach is that you would have room to
> go into the detail that some people appreciate, in a separate volume that
> only these people need buy.

Yes; I whole-heartedly agree with this.  I would much rather get all of
the design rules in one suppliment for an additional price than to have
some of them included for "free" in the basic game, and then have the
rest spread out over half a dozen suppliments and sourcebooks.

> It would be nice if you could include some ideas on how economics is sup-
> posed to work too, as background to the trade rules.  I am not asking for
> a treatise on economics - just some guidelines to help when trading comes
> up in a game.

The economic background bears a little extra thought.  One of the
recurring and recent topics on TML is the economics of Traveller.  About
the only consensus we have ever reached is that the available
information is too inconsistent and fragmentary to draw any rock-solid
conclusions from.

By one set of calculations, the amount of trade in the Third Imperium
was such a small portion of the Gross Imperial Product that no-one would
have noticed the onset of Hard Times: the economic impact of the loss of
a sector of the economy responsible for a less than 0.1% of an average
planet's economy is ... well negligible.

By another set of calculations, the Imperial Navy budget was large
enough to easily afford complete protection (in terms of a globe of
warships with weapon and sensor ranges out to 100 diameters) from piracy
for every one of the 11,000 worlds of the Third Imperium ... with plenty
of money left over for a subsector and reserve fleet.

Admittedly, these are two extremes, but this does give an idea of the
magnitude of the uncertainty!

Since one of the features of the New Era is supposed to be a period of
trade expansion and exploration, the economic benefits driving this
expansion could use some explanation.

> I have no objection to this - I would *like* to see some variety.  Jump,
> Gate, and [Stutter]Warp systems seem as good a start as any.

The only problem I see is ensuring that one drive technology does not
"overpower" the others, by being superior in every way.  That is the
danger with the stutterwarp proposal.

> Both these approaches are better for -roleplaying- ship to ship combats
> than High Guard - at least in my humble opinion.

A good point here, in my opinion.  Most of my players did not like
miniatures combat - either for starships or for personal combat.  While
we improvised abstract systems, an official abstract combat system,
especially for space combat, would be a good feature.

> I like their approach of having rules for trade, ship combat,
> world design etc biased toward either being easy to ROLEPLAY with, or
> provide opportunities for roleplaying.  This is what I would like to see
> with TNE.  I think it is what the original Traveller had, despite its
> warts, that Megatraveller doesn't.

The name of the game is science-fiction roleplaying.  The idea is for
the referee and players to co-operatively tell a story.  One for which
everyone involved is willing to suspend disbelief.  When this happens,
you can really become your character, and role-playing begins.  If this
does not happen, then all you are doing is rolling dice and pushing
pencils.  Game rules which do not further roleplaying are part of the
problem; game rules which provide opportunities for roleplaying are part
of the solution.

In Classic Traveller, this suspension of disbelief happened; for us, the
best role-playing was done without reference to any rulebook, and without
rolling any dice.  We "got into our character's heads" and what followed
was as close as we could come to the world of the far future.

In MegaTraveller, the typoes, errata, inconsistancies, and the dizzying
swirl of Rebellion-era events got in the way far too often.  This is not
to say that the magic never happened, but that it was all too
infrequent, and usually ended with puzzled looks as we stumbled over
some new impossibility.

(I feel as if I have wandered away from my more usual facts and
 considered opinions into a nebulous area of philosophy.  Chalk it
 up to the late hour, and if you disagree, flame me in the morning).

a slightly dazed ...

wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                         in the Far Future

------------------------------
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 413  4858 03-Nov-1992 Alex Jeffries    Viruses and things <<                 D
 413  4859 03-Nov-1992 Adrian Hurt      Re: Controls << Scott 2G Kellogg (CS171
 413  4860 03-Nov-1992 Michael A. Surm  Refueling & Ecology << It has been brou
 413  4861 03-Nov-1992 Hans Rancke-Mad  Interstellar trade. << Wildstar writes:
 413  4862 03-Nov-1992 Hans Rancke-Mad  Updating Traveller. << Scott writes:
 413  4863 03-Nov-1992 Martyn J. Wheel  Am I the only one who likes MT? <<
 413  4864 03-Nov-1992 Matthew D. Gold  Welcome to TML, Loran! (and random ramb
 413  4865 03-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Recent events on TML << Seth the Lesser

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

Bundle: 413
Archive-Message-Number: 4858
From: ajeffrie@waite.adelaide.edu.au (Alex Jeffries)
Subject: Viruses and things
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 17:43:46 CST



                Dear TML readers,

     I have recently been delving back into the TML archives to read up on
the discussions held about the TNE virus story. A number of things have become
apparent to me from this reading;
     The virus story is (or at least can be brushed off as) a plot device for
the TNE background.
     It has some plausability holes in it wide enough for one to drive a
G-Carrier through. No-one can honestly doubt this.
     However, it has a lot of roleplaying potential, particularly since the
agent in question is a managable, transportable, physical entity.
     Although Traveller is most often played by people of above average
education (I'd hate to absolutely associate this with intelligence), as far as
fine details of scientific plausability is concerned, they can be considered as
well-informed lay people. People on the TML may jump up and down at this but I
don't think we constitute "average" consumers of the product. Most people I
know who play Traveller wouldn't know how to turn a computer on let alone find
out about and subscribe to a mailing list.
        Therefore, the virus story should stand up to consumer acceptance
especially if it is tweeked a little bit more (certainly, some of the
constructive criticism that has come from this group could be of great
use here)
        However, I for one will not be using the story unless it is
significantly changed and I don't think anyone would deny me this prerogative.
        What I will use is something similar and still embryonic but I thought
some people here would be interested in hearing about it.
 ============================================================================
        Genetic algorithms are a current but fledgling technology. For a review
I would direct you to;

    Holland, J. H. (1992). Genetic Algorithms. Scientific American. July. 44-50.

        The gist of this technology can be summerized in the following quote
from the above paper;

        "By harnessing the mechanisms of evolution, researchers may be able to
"breed" programs that solve problems even when no person can fully understand
their structure."
        Impressive results have already been made. The example given in the
the paper is the design of jet engines.
   -------------------------------------------------------------------------
        I will subject my players to this scenerio;

      Imperial researchers have been studying genetic algorithms for some time
(indeed the research has been going on since the mid-1960's here on Terra).
Combine this field of research with A.I. research and massive computer power and
interesting things begin to happen. Lucan's researchers where doing just that at
the time of the Rebellion. Under desperate circumstances they began evolving a
primative A.I. program. Completely underestimating the power of the process and
the level of computer security they posessed they created a "monster" which
quickly travelled through the Imperial computer networks and harboured itself
quietly in unexpected corners of memory. With evolution continuing at an
alarming rate and an almost unlimited access to memory not to mention a totally
malignant ego (something only a computer could understand) there was no stopping
"it".  The malign ego is essential at least at the moment for the plot.
       The "virus" moved to other worlds either mascarading as data down-loads
or as actual programs. The latter was easy because it was able to vastly
compact the original program by simply evolving a far more efficient algorithm.
Hence no-one suspected because the programs were the same size and did the same
jobs. If anyone was looking, well the virus just gave them what they expected to
see on the screen. (Come to think of it, this could be happening right now!
Who's paranoid, I'm not). For an A.I. that knows EVERYTHING about computer
systems "even when no person can fully understand their structure" it was not
very dificult for the virus to infiltrate military and commercial security. True
it was hard to get to "closed" computer systems but you can always get a dumb
organic sophont to intervene for you.
       For reasons known only to itself it rather rapidly "destroyed" the
Imperium. Maybe that was the best thing to happen. Although it caused untold
hardship and death it may have broken a futile cycle of warring and oppression.
Is it the closest thing to an angel yet seen? Was it simply a plan of it's own
to spare Deneb? Here is lots of opportunity for a bright future. A true new
start plus lots of religious cults, a bit of Ludditism etc.
      But I can hear you asking, "How was it stopped?". There could be a number
of possibilities. I havn't decided which I'll use yet.
       1) It didn't. It just made it look like it was. Somewhere in an old hard
drive it still waits. Or maybe it resides, and controlls?, a MegaCorporation's
computer. Imagine the players comming across a much better thought out version
of Tron! Then again, maybe some old crackpot hermit keeps the "holy" print-out
in a temple somewhere. That print-out just happens to be the core program. Sort
of like being in a sporolated form or like a real virus, not really alive and
not really dead.
        2) Like a real virus that is subject to evolutionary pressures it
mutated into a milder, coexisting form; there is no point in totally destroying
your host although it is possible. Once it became a nice guy it underestimated
the invidious nature of Man who erased it completely while it was sleeping one
day in the high memory buffer! Although this possibility is based on some solid
scientific facts it ignores things like quasi-species, vectors and resevoirs
which makes it a low option with me. Also, how do you sneek up on such a thing?
        3) Known space simply switched to a new computing medium and or ethos
that was able to thwart the virus. I don't like this one very much also.
        4) Someone designed and let loose an avatar A.I. to do battle with the
creep and the good guys won. However, every modem in the known universe was
burnt out in the process and hence society collapsed when everyone found out
that they couldn't get the TML any more.
        I admit that it's a bit difficult to think of a good way to end the
"plot device" without generating a totally paranoid universe but I'm happier
with the above scenerio than the one originally put forward by GDW, sorry guys.
        A few self criticisms;
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
        Is this really that much different from the sophont chip story?

       I think there is a much more believable "biology" to this little critter.
Although it is a bit more difficult to grasp, especially in your hand!, I find
the information theory and metaphysical aspects of it more challenging. Granted
it's not all that original (Tron, Wintermute....sound familiar?) but neither is
jump space.

        Is it more plausable?

      Based slightly on current technology and theory and adding a bit of
fiction to science, it keeps all the essential plot requirements of the original

        Does it allow for some interesting roleplaying?

      Religions based on A.I. remenants or just remembered. Residual "code"
found in expected and not so expected places (remember the print-out?). Anti-
computer, and even technology, societies. Basically all the usuall roleplaying
possibilities as with the original scenerio except this guy is a little more
ethereal and volitile.

        Is it resolvable so that the game can go on?

      Anything is resolvable given enough time/effort/imagination although I
will definitely be setting TNE anything up to 500 years after the Rebellion
rather than a measily 70 years. In my mind, 70 years, particularly in an
interstellar community is diddly-squat for society to collapse. On high
population worlds maybe but who could forget the Imperium in just 70 years? Look
how much we know about WWI.

        I am not a computer expert by any stretch of the imagination and so I
will conceed that my scenerio may seem just as laughable as GDW's when read by
someone in the know. I know that molecular biology written for scifi ALWAYS
makes me laugh. I have posted it however simply as a GMing discussion.

         While I am here, I strongly agree with the comments made by Theresa
Verity and Alistair Langford about giving GDW our wishes for TNE. In fact if
someone could come up with a standard list of topics GDW could literally do
statistis on which ideas are most prefered. But then again, just trying to
decide on the list could take months of haggling!

        For those who have made it all the way to the end of this, wow! your
keen. Sorry for waffling for so long.

        Alex Jeffries
================================================================================
Alex Jeffries
Molecular Virology Lab.
Waite Agricultural Inst.          ajeffrie@waite.adelaide.edu.au
The University of Adelaide
Glen Osmond, South Australia
Australia
================================================================================

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

Bundle: 413
Archive-Message-Number: 4859
From: Adrian Hurt <adrian@cee.heriot-watt.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Controls
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 10:02:10 WET

Scott 2G Kellogg (CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU) writes:
>
> SOLOMANI (start off simple right?)
>      Solomani and most Imperial flight controls generally consist
> of stick, throttle, and rudder pedals.  The stick is usually
> mounted in the center of the console, but is sometimes on the left
> side, while the right hand generally controls the throttle.

Are the Solomani left-handed in the far future, then?  Because, being
right-handed, I'd want the stick in my right hand as that is the control
which needs the most control, so to speak.  Someone will correct me if I
am wrong, but I believe the F-16's cockpit is laid out like this - the
stick is on the right.

> ... the co-pilot or navigator (generally seated on the right) ...

Is this correct?  Someone who knows the insides of a wide-bodied passenger
jet, please comment.

> VILANI
>...Engineers opted for a
> single design to ease training of pilots and to avoid their
> having to study their ship to understand what is going on.  Thus
> the same control panel exists on a Vilani fat trader as exists
> on their air/rafts and their most sophisticated fighters.

Has anyone seen the computer flight simulator game "Birds of Prey"?
Evidently, the author is Vilani - the same cockpit display is used
for all the aircraft in the game, from a Harrier to a B-52.

>      Lack of yaw control is compensated for by the presence of
> crosswind landing gear.  Crosswind gear allow the craft to land
> while the ship's nose is not pointing along the direction of
> travel.  The gear is mounted on casters akin to the wheels on a
> shopping cart.

In a word, *@!%.  I have enough problems controlling a shopping trolley
at low speeds in 2D.  (This comment is not on whether or not the Vilani
would actually make such a system; I imagine that trained people would
get used to it, just as frequent shoppers eventually get the hang of
trolleys.  I just want to see a video of the face of the first Solomani
pilot who tried to land a Vilani fighter. :-)

> ZHODANI
> ...Special safe guards are in
> place to prevent outside psionic interference in the piloting of
> the ship.  Up to and including a psi-shield surrounding the
> pilot's station.  This is demonstrated in the Shivva class patrol
> frigate and her fighters.  The fighter pilots are open to
> telepathic contact from their flight controller, but the flight
> controller can not affect flight controls of the fighter.

That's a neat trick, building a shield round the controls only so as
to leave the pilot unshielded, but also leaving the controls open to
the pilot.  Is there just a small hole in the shield, pointed at the
pilot?  What happens when the hole is also pointed at the Shivva?

> HIVERS
> ...  Hiver controls are very difficult for anyone but a hiver
> to operate, thus, many of their ships employ dual control panels,
> to allow for a member race to use them.

They're not the only ones!  What does a human do in a Droyne ship, given
that the average human is even more lacking in the wing department than
the average Droyne?

> VEGANS (Not the nuts with vegetables :-)
>      Vegan flight controls are geared toward their own set of
> unique physiology.  They rely heavily on inertial compensators as
> their somewhat weak limbs have difficulty overcoming high
> acceleration.  Ships which do not have inertial compensators in the
> entire ship will nevertheless have a region where they are
> installed:  around the pilot.

What did they do before they invented/were given inertial compensators?
Are there any low-tech Vegan aircraft?

- --
 "Keyboard?  How quaint!" - M. Scott

 Adrian Hurt     |JANET:  adrian@uk.ac.hw.cee
 UUCP: ..!uknet!cee.hw.ac.uk!adrian  |  ARPA:  adrian@cee.hw.ac.uk

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

Bundle: 413
Archive-Message-Number: 4860
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 08:10:02 -0600
From: surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
Subject: Refueling & Ecology

It has been brought up that the fuel requirements for starships
would impact the ecology of the planet by depleting the oceans but
then it was pointed out that it would be negligible.

However, I think another aspect has been over looked. Salts and
miscellaneous gasses. How is the fuel process performed? If it's
anything like electrolysis then there is going to be a large amount
of extra oxygen added to the atmosphere.

To get pure water to process for fuel what happens to all of the
salts, especially from ocean water. From the amounts being bandied
about there will be huge mountains of salt all over the place. How
is it disposed? Adding it back to the ocean would drastically alter
the local environment. And processing it for export would be redun-
dant since everyone else would be doing the same. And it's probably
more than the local chemical companies need.

BTW, is fuel liquid or compressed gas?

Mike


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

Bundle: 413
Archive-Message-Number: 4861
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Interstellar trade.
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:43:22 MET

Wildstar writes:
>         everyone's concept of how much interstellar traffic there
> actually *IS* in the Imperium varies greatly.  Heck, I'm not even
> self-consistent in my own view.
>
> At one end of the spectrum is the "luxury trade" concept.  This is that
> interstellar trade is a relatively rare and expensive thing, and that even
> the busiest ports have at most a few dozen ships in port at once.  This
> point of view seems implicit in many of the earliest Traveller
> materials.  Trade therefore makes up a very little part of the Gross
> Imperial Product, and most worlds are almost entirely self-sufficient.

Based on the assumption that it takes two MCr worth of civilian shipping
to generate the revenue to support one MCr worth of warship, I once worked
out that the civilian shipping tonnage in Aramis Subsector (we get quite a
lot of info about merchant shipping in Aramis in "The Traveller Adventure")
should be almost precisely 100 times as great as it was. My solution is to
say that 99% of all civilian shipping is hyper- and mega-freighters
(100,000 to million tons freighters) engaged in routine, year in, year out
freighting of bulk material. Such ships are so expensive that only with an
iron-clad decade-long contract will anyone build them. They are NOT used
for speculative trade, and their scedules are as predictable (and as dull)
as anything. The last percent is the luxury trade, and every merchant ship
we've ever seen in an Old Traveller or Megatraveller scenario belongs to
the luxury trade (well, in the case of Free Traders the proper word is
speculative, but you know what I mean.

> The other end of the extreme is where the Imperium is one large
> interstellar economy; with most worlds dependent on interstellar imports
> or exports to maintain their technology and standard of living.  Such a
> model calls for hundreds or thousands of ships in port at even
> moderately busy systems.  This point of view is implicit in almost
> anything written for MegaTraveller.

The above suggestion reconciles the two views. Of course, if you don't
agree with the basic assumption the whole thing falls apart.



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "A  subsector  official  pompously states that the
        subsector  armed  forces  have  four Kinunir class
        ships in service,  each with enough troop strength
        to put down any military operations that threathen
        the peace of the Imperium."

                        ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir

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

Bundle: 413
Archive-Message-Number: 4862
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Updating Traveller.
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 20:04:19 MET

Scott writes:
>Nano-technology?  Well, that's tricky.  As Bertil pointed out, if you've
>got Nano-tech, why bother walking around in Battle Dress with a fusion
>gun when you can just send a cloud of nanotech thingies out to do all
>that nasty fighting for you?  But, if it is done carefully, and limited
>enough, I think it could be included without changing the feel of the game.

The thing one has to realize is that we not dealing with SF enactment but
SF gaming. Much of the hardware we have TODAY tends to outpower the people
involved. If you extrapolate a propable future technology lots of classic
science fiction and adventure ideas becomes unlikely or even impossible.
That's why I don't like infallible laser-guided bang-you're-dead guns,
pinpoint neutrino detectors, or gene-type identification methods. Sure,
a laser is really more a flashlight that kills, but would you like to
referee a fight with that kind of weaponry? "Roll a die and add your
<appropiate characteristic>. The one who rolls highest wins." Some of
my players complain that their slug-throwers are too damn mundane for a
science fiction game, but what's the fun of can't miss weaponry? Somehow
I don't think that I'd like gaming in a REALLY realistic future milieu.

>Ok, those are just some of the things Trav is light on that might
>work for TNE.  I've probably left out a bunch.  What do you all think?
>And remember, Trav is a TL 7 game after all.  It needs an update:  it
>had Air/Rafts & other grav transportation listed as tech level 8.
>(Not to mention fusion...  laser carbines...  interplanetary spacecraft...)

The thing that really needs to be done about the tech levels is to get them
divorced from Terran historical dates. Just because we have it in 1990 it
dosen't have to be TL 8, and just because we don't have it dosen't mean it
can't be TL 8.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "A  subsector  official  pompously states that the
        subsector  armed  forces  have  four Kinunir class
        ships in service,  each with enough troop strength
        to put down any military operations that threathen
        the peace of the Imperium."

                        ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir

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

Bundle: 413
Archive-Message-Number: 4863
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 14:21:13 -0500
From: Martyn J. Wheeler <sasmjw@unx.sas.com>
Subject: Am I the only one who likes MT?

    or, _My Two Cents on TNE_

    What I like most about MegaTraveller it is the way I can run a
game quite well by ignoring almost all the rules.  The task system
works just fine, and with a feel for that almost anything can be
improvised readily.  With the addition of a simple vector movement
system, the ship combat system works.  The ship design system works.
The world/system generation system (especially as in WBH) works.
Admittedly, the man-to-man combat system is rather awkward, but with
some hand-waving and improvising tasks it can be made to work without
getting in the way of the game too badly -- it also helps that my
campaign has had little hand-to-hand combat.  With some filtering
through a reality check, star system/world generation works (I
computer-generate about three systems for each one used).
    What the MT system really has going for it is preserving game
flow.  I very rarely find the need to look up numbers in the rules.
With an SF game in particular, it is necessary to improvise almost all
the time.  My campaign is driven by the actions and motivations of the
players (and the NPCs), and it is just not possible to prepare enough
material to cover all eventualities.
    The task system is (IMHO) the best thing to have ever happened to
RPGs.  With a feel for it, I don't need character details for any NPC
they meet just in case that person ends up associating with the group
- -- from what I know about the person, and I can make their task rolls
with a good degree of consistency without ever needing to work out the
numbers until it becomes clear that the exact skill numbers and mix
becomes important.  One NPC had a character sheet almost soon as she
joined the crew; others have done without for almost two years (game
time).  I like a system where I can concentrate on the game instead of
the system.
    I am glad to hear that the task system is to be retained for TNE
- -- albeit evolved, but why not refine the rules?  I *love* the task
system (did I already say that?).
    I am not thrilled at the concept of throwing out all the ship
designs.  I have a lot of personal time invested in an interactive
starship design programme.  Yes, the rules are complex.  I have
designed a few ships by hand, and it is a real pain.  I have designed
substantially more by computer, and that is fun -- the players of the
ship's engineer characters have even spent some time playing "what
if?" with it.  Too *few* details would hurt that.
    I want a free-flowing game system where I can concentrate on the
role-playing, not the rules.  The task system is great for this.  (Did
I say that already?)
    I want a fun, detailed, ship design system.  Why not provide two
levels of detail?  By analogy with system generation: one to work out
the UPP quickly, and one to go into details of surface temperature and
so on.  Let one ship design be workable by hand, let the other be
workable by paintaking hours of fiddling (or a few minutes on a
computer).  Heck, why not sell a computer programme yourselves?  I'd
gladly pay real money for the software to do that -- *if* it was well
designed, with an interface that made it easy to fiddle with the
details (preferably running under Windows).  Bundle it with a star
system generator (yes, I *do* need to know surface temperature,
gravity, day length, and so on), perhaps with fifty or so
pre-generated sectors and several hundred pre-generated craft (just as
well sell your test data :-) ), plus a wealth of library data, and put
the whole thing on a CD-ROM I'd gladly pay $89.99 for.  It'd be worth
easily that much to me (were I to adopt TNE rules) for the time it
would save.
    I want a combat system that is relatively easy to use.  Firefights
must maintain a fast flow when role-played, or the involvement is lost
too easily.  "I leap round the corner, and give the first guy I see
both barrels!"  It should not take substantially longer to play it
than to say it.  (I like the MT concept of alternate unit moves and
task interrupting, but the way hit and damage are calculated I find,
quite frankly, tedious.  I don't know T:2000, I would guess that it
has a better feel since that's it's emphasis.  I mostly hand-wave a lot
and improvise.)
    Ship combat can be more complex.  I like many aspects of the MT
system: a twenty-minute move gives a stately feel to it -- like the
perception of surface naval battles that several people seem desperate
to emulate, quite rightly I think.  That's a long time -- the rules
can work much more slowly without interrupting the game feel.  There
is time for the Captain to discuss munition choice with the Chief
Gunner ("I say nuke'm, Cap'n!"); there is time for the Medical Officer
to attend those injured during the last turn by role-playing -- not
just "I go there and treat his wounds," but the need to find an open
way through, perhaps push past Jeff and Shelley fixing the junction
box in the corridor, past where a frantic Steward is trying to get the
passengers calmed down, only finally reaching the mess area where he
is needed so urgently.  There's a lot of room for role-playing in this
sort of ship combat, and I'd hate to see it interrupted by the rules:
"I <we fire> say <they fire> nuke <hold it, we haven't worked out the
damage yet.  OK, carry on> 'em <we turn and run> Cap'n!"
    I do have one very strong negative on MT: whoever insulted our
intelligence with that space-combat movement system must have a lot of
bad karma.  As written, everyone should accelerate from the beginning
of the combat until it's over, as that gives you the biggest maximum
move -- you can always move less, after all, you can use up that 120
hex move by circling in one spot!  That movement system was discarded
before the campaign started, replaced by a simple vector system that
gave enough concessions to Newton to pass a basic reality check.

Enough of the rules, now on to background:
    My campaign has now reached 354-1118.  Strephon is Emperor.  There
was no Rebellion.  There are no Hard Times.  Archduke Norris is a
great and honoured diplomat for preventing the Fifth Frontier War.
    I hate the darkness of a perpetually miserable life in RPGs.  It's
hard to have fun that way, and a solid stable Imperium has a lot of
places to have fun.  The players have been snow-skiing and sunbathing
on Spirelle; some partied in a prospector bar in the Zaibon belt; some
have been inducted into strange cults on Iderati; they traded for
dried beans on Faldor and now brew whisky and coffee from them; but
they have also been far outside the Imperium, communicated with
friendly aliens, fought unfriendly aliens (on the ground and, more
often, in space), and investigated a case of sabotage.  They're now
heading back towards the Imperium, not the least for a long-overdue
jump drive maintenance.  They have been involved in bad times,
suspicion, and violence, but it's not a necessary way of life forced
on them by the campaign background.
    There has to be room to be human.
    I chose to reject the Rebellion because everything suddenly
becomes too scripted and there is too little freedom for the players.
To me, a role-playing game is all about character development, and
that blossoms with freedom of choice.  All too often, the Rebellion
background seems to put characters in situations where there are no
choices and therefore no interaction and development.

So, if TNE is a good rules set, and I can convert readily from MT, I
may use it.  If it has a good fast-moving man-to-man combat system
using already-established Traveller weapons (snub pistol, ACR, FGMP,
etc.) where I can improvise NPC opponents on the spot (who knows which
tavern they will invade? :-) ), it will be worth buying for me.  The
background will not be useful to me, I fear, unless one of the
supplements is _We Have Always Been As We Are_ (a saying attributed to
Queen Victoria, I believe), which presents an alternate where the
Imperium never fell.  I suspect an upbeat background might sell well.

 ..but heck, what do I know?  I liked _Starship Operators' Manual_...
and _Space 1889_, come to that.  I suppose I'm just weird.

Martyn
- --------------sasmjw@unx.sas.com----(Martyn Wheeler)----DoD #293--------------
SAS Institute, Inc: (919) 677-8000 ext.7954    H: (919) 839-0092 (Raleigh, NC)

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

Bundle: 413
Archive-Message-Number: 4864
Subject: Welcome to TML, Loran! (and random ramblings)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:57:00 CST
From: goldman@orac.cray.com (Matthew D. Goldman)
Reply-To: goldman@orac.cray.com

I think that it is really nice to have VIP's take part in
the TML.  Although I am not very happy with the direction
Traveller has taken, I'm still interested to find out where
the official universe is headed.

Has anyone ever compiled all of the TAS news service info?
Loran?  Any of the other VIP lurkers?  How about a
'Supplement 14: TAS News service'?  It would be best if the
supplemnet was done in the format of the old Traveller books.
Perhaps with the red color from the origional box set?

As for the issue of if the TML is private or not.  Excuse me?
Private? Ha, ha, ha, ha, plop. (laughing my head off)  The TML
is passed out over the Internet and many other networks.  Many
people read it.  Many people archive it.  It would be nearly
impossible to keep the TML private.

Short thought: TAS news service sounds a great deal like the
former Soviet Union's news service.  Try pronouncing both!

Matt

- --
Matthew Goldman              E-mail: goldman@orac.cray.com
Fax: (612) 683-3099                   Work: (612) 683-3061

"Would you like fries with that sir?"

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

Bundle: 413
Archive-Message-Number: 4865
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:41:32 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Recent events on TML

Seth the Lesser <slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu> writes:
> Ah, but protium (hydrogen-1, the most common isotope) is useless for
> fusion unless you use a carbon-nitrogen cycle or some such.

This is one of the things that was covered in the "Traveller Done Right"
discussions; available in the archive is a good capsule description of how a
protium fusion power plant might work.


metlay@netcom.com (metlay) rants:
> ... The customer must be pleased, and
> communicate this pleasure to the seller.

This customer was not pleased, and has communicated this displeasure to the
seller.  If GDW wants to hear nice things, then they should publish only
those games that they can stand behind with pride (Twilight:2000 definitely
does fall int this category; unfortunately, it is not a genre in which I
enjoy playing.  The same goes for Dark Conspiracy).

Or are you telling me that I should only say good things about FSSI?  Well,
I suppose the artwork was OK; but the fact of the matter is that it was a
shoddy product that should never have been allowed out of the door.

There have been very few MegaTraveller products where I felt satisfied with
my purchase.  For reference, these exceptions have been the DGP Alien
volumes, the Flaming Eye sourcebook, and the GDW Hard Times.  I have also
just purchased Diaspora and Assignment: Vigilante (and detailed comments
will follow shortly) and my overall impression of these two is good.

> ... and I am NOT advocating that the TML scale back to the
> pulled-teeth wimpiness of the GEnie round tables.

Good!  I should certainly hope that TML will not change significantly in tone
or character.  A good amount of useful information gets exchanged here; and
refusing to discuss the flaws of a poor product out of "consideration" for
GDW's feelings will not help TML or GDW in the long run.

> If I sound overly sensitive about this,
> it's because of the one last factor in this issue that I haven't mentioned
> yet: the glass wall you're staring at right now as you read these lines
> of text. I've broken through it, and have done for over ten years.

If you're ever in the Washington DC area, send me E-Mail or call me at home
(301)-871-5104 and we can try to get together.  I'm always interested in
meeting TML members whenever it can be arranged; if there is anybody else
lurking out there that will be in the area, give a call and we'll at least
talk!

I don't believe that I've ever written anything (either for TML or for any
other public net.forum) that I would not have said in a print letter to or
in a face-to-face conversation with any of the persons involved.


SULAIMAN@ecs.umass.edu (Ameer) writes:
> [about the settlement of the sword worlds]

Perhaps the configuration of the sword worlds was so tempting (in terms of
easy jump-1 accessability, mineral resources, etc.) that the only fly in the
ointment (the existance of the Darrians nearby) was overlooked.

> Lastly from a lack of response can I presume that no one knows when
> the Solomani "Gene War" occured.....??

I don't know of anything published that nails down the date of the Gene
War.  But I have a proposal about the "Gene War".  Perhaps it could refer to
a war in wich a tailored bioagent was used in an attempted genocide?  The
Sword Worlders, being of fairly uniform ethnic background, would have made a
good target for such an attack.  Being the first such attempt, it may not
have been lethal enough to kill everyone infected.  On the other hand, after
surviving such an attack, I would certainly not stick around to see if the
enemy could get it right.  Perhaps such a war would have been over religous,
cultural, or philosophical differences; humans always have been, and still
are, and probably will be forever killing one another for reasons like
these.


b.borich@genie.geis.com writes:
>     Despite what people think or decide to believe. I do believe that
> GDW has TNE's best interests at heart, and it does look like they'll be
> opening up playtesting to other people, and hopefully here on the TML
> as well.

I don't know about anyone else, but I can see the rationale behind the new
rules set and the New Era background.  If well thought out, competently
written, and properly edited, it will be enjoyable to play and to write
for.  I want to do everything I can to make sure that TNE is the best game
that it can be.

>     Everybody already knows what a kludge MT was, so what's the sense
> in repeating that all the time? (I think by now even the densest person
> would get that point). Even Joe Fugate got to admitting what a
> mistake it was.

Speaking for myself (but I suspect that this is true of many others here as
well), I wouldn't be giving GDW so much heat if I didn't care about them
and about their products.  GDW has done some pretty amazing things in the
past, and (in my opinion) *SHOULD* still be capable of them.  This makes it
awfully dissapointing when products are so poor.  Recent MegaTraveller
products (in particular: Hard Times, Assignment: Vigilante, and Diaspora
Sector) have given me hope that GDW can remember how to do good work.

However, it bears repeating (yet one more time) that a careful editing job,
combined with outside playtesting would have caught almost all of the
crippling problems with MegaTraveller before they grew to embarrasing
proportions.

>     At the moment my main concerns are how open the playtesting will
> be, and hoping GDW doesn't rush the product out before the bugs are
> mostly removed at least (I'm more tired of others of seeing errata/updates
> put out because the product was rushed out to meet some deadline).

I have to agree.  It is in this area that GDW will make or break Traveller:
The New Era.  I, too would rather wait than have to put up with the kind of
mess that accompanied MegaTraveller.  If that sort of thing happens again,
it will probably kill Traveller.  Dead.  Forever.  And that would be bad.

Specific suggestions for GDW include:
  (1) A careful internal edit and review.  Preferably get someone who is
      interested but not already familliar with the material; this is the
      best way to quickly spot many types of errors.
  (2) Outside playtesting involving a large number of players of a broad
      range of experience levels.  This means getting TML and HIWG
      involved as well trying to pull in people who have never even seen
      a rpg before.
  (3) Remain open to outside ideas; nobody can think of everything all the
      time.  I am willing to bet that at least one playtest group comes
      up with an new idea that would significantly improve the game in
      ways the designers never even considered.


jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin) writes:
> To date, I have not seen the "complete" virus story.  I saw part of
> it (what I would consider a lead-in to it) in the insert in
> Challenge 64, but....  I would appreciate it if someone could
> synopsize it here.  I'd also appreciate seeing the alternate story
> you propose.

Believe it or not, I haven't had any comments on my virus posting yet.  For
this group, that is shocking!  Come on, folks!  If it was that bad, tell
me so and I'll shut up about it; if not, then tell me where it needs
fixing!

Come to think of it, I haven't heard anything on the starport traffic and
facilities generator, nor have I heard back on the vector movement system.

Aha!  My virus story took over everyone's computers and reprogrammed them
into artificial intelligence machines.  The newly-intelligent computers are
paranoid about role-playing games, and so are removing all references to
my postings from TML.  (to be taken with a *BIG* ;-)


metlay@netcom.com (metlay) writes:
> ... I, for one, am
> going to be watching to see not only who makes either a deliberate
> effort to be polite OR obnoxious now that GDW is here, but also
> to observe which formerly cantankerous posters suddenly lose the
> will to go head to head with the Keepers of the Canon Law. It should
> be a blast. |->

So far the only people whose postings are significantly different from
usual has been you and me! ;)

> (Five will get you ten that Bart Massey was referring to me, folx.)

Probably, but we like you anyway. :)


Cynthia Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM> (acutually Steve?) writes:
> No, but if I can read a copy in advance, and find out that it has a
> lousy starship combat system, I won't buy my own copy.  And if the news
> (rumours) going around about TNE don't imply that it has definitely
> shaped up from MT, I won't buy one UNLESS I can read it first and
> determine whether it is worth buying.

I've got to agree with Cynthia here.  MegaTraveller has cost GDW a good bit
of my trust; I feel as if I have been taken advantage of.  There was once a
time when I would buy a GDW product in a shrinkwrapped box, sight unseen.
Now I won't.  I used to recommend Traveller to my friends and acquaintances.
Now I can't.

> BTW, I missed something:  "pay for the privilege"?  What was that
> supposed to mean?

Loren Wiseman gets TML through the Genie<=>Internet mail gateway.  He
(presumably actually GDW) has to pay for each and every byte.  Ouch.

> If Loren Wiseman
> wants us to treat GDW like "people", then he should try posting
> occassionally.  Maybe after we nattered with him a while, we'd
> understand GDW's problems a little better, and care a little more what
> they thought of us...

This would be a good idea.  We're not talking about any sort of big
"secrets" here; most new TMLers (at least, the ones that don't begin by
asking questions) post something where they tell who they are, what they
do, how they feel about Traveller, and what they hope to get out of TML.

> Perhaps the "Official History" says
> they knew of the Darrians, but they were really caught flat-footed when
> they discovered their next-door neighbors (whom they didn't really
> want), and changed history to imply that they had planned it that way
> all along.

Hmmm.  This could work.  Or perhaps they did only a cursory survey (which
noted the existance of low-tech human settlements) and failed to notice the
remnants of the previous high-tech Darrian civilization.  Figuring that a
couple of backward planets wouldn't be too much to handle if ever there was
a need to, they went ahead and settled next door.


wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                         in the Far Future

------------------------------
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 414  4866 04-Nov-1992 "Bruce Pihlamae  Robots and Tech stuff << > Frankly, I w
 414  4867 03-Nov-1992 George William   Re: Laser Weapons & TNE Wish Lists << [
 414  4868 03-Nov-1992 Mark Watson      various << A few things, firstly on TNE
 414  4869 03-Nov-1992 Richard Johnson  Welcome << I, for one, would like to he
 414  4870 04-Nov-1992 Does it matter?  Antimatter fuel << Concerning antimatte
 414  4871 04-Nov-1992 "Bruce Pihlamae  VIRUS again << Well, I've only seen CHA
 414  4872 04-Nov-1992 David Johnson -  Wheres the stick on a plane << Adrian H
 414  4873 04-Nov-1992 BARANSKI@VEAMF1  Matter Replicators & Wildstar << Wildst
 414  4874 04-Nov-1992 BARANSKI@VEAMF1  Matter Replicators & Wildstar << Wildst
 414  4875 04-Nov-1992 BARANSKI@VEAMF1  Matter Replicators & Wildstar << Wildst
 414  4876 04-Nov-1992 CS171308011@UTS  RE: Alien controls << I sed:
 414  4877 04-Nov-1992 CS171308011@UTS  How deadly is this stuff? << Hans sez:
 414  4878 04-Nov-1992 CS171308011@UTS  Deadfall ordanance << Bruce sez:
 414  4879 04-Nov-1992 CS171308011@UTS  Beam vs. Pulse Lasers << Hi,
 414  4880 04-Nov-1992 CS171308011@UTS  Re: controls << Hi,

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4866
Date: Wed,  4 Nov 92 10:04:16 +1100
From: "Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au>
Subject: Robots and Tech stuff



> Frankly, I would not mind seeing a 'retcon' that artificial intelligent
> robots are a lot more common in Trav than they have been seen to be
> previously.  After all, we have all the stuff from book 8 onward saying
> that robots are ALL OVER the Imperium and its surroundings.  We see that
> At tech level 10, the maximum intelligence of a robot brain is average
> human intelligence (7)  So why is it such a strain that A.I. robots have
> been around since the beginning, but just aren't very important?

It would be interesting to have more robots around but two basic problems

1. At what (AI) intelligence level do robots become Imperial citizens?
   This leads you off into splinter groups for the freedom of toasters and
   the end of slavery for all machines 8-}.

2. This is the one that prevents robots or aware machines from continuing
   after the VIRUS.  On every planet where the VIRUS struck, one of the
   main methods of "getting even" with organic life-forms would be to take
   over all these robots and machines and kill everything.  This will of
   course leave some phobias to any mechanical-self-mobile-machine.  NOBODY,
   will want a robot around (as a cleaner, or waiter, or baby sitter, or
   mechanic, or doctor or dentist or anything).  I think the GDW's VIRUS
   idea just shot robots in the foot.

> Cyborgs?  Sure!  Why not?  One of the things I like about Trav is it is
> pretty versatile.  The incusion of cyborg rules won't change the flavor
> of the game unless it becomes the selling point of the game.  As it is
> NOT the flavor of the game, it Won't change anything we don't want.
> But cyborgs are popular & all the cyber punk stuff is selling, so put it
> in!

I especially like the Cyborgs in Daniel Keys Moran's books (Emerald Eyes and
The Long Run).

> Nano-technology?  Well, that's tricky.  As Bertil pointed out, if you've
> got Nano-tech, why bother walking around in Battle Dress with a fusion
> gun when you can just send a cloud of nanotech thingies out to do all
> that nasty fighting for you?  But, if it is done carefully, and limited
> enough, I think it could be included without changing the feel of the game.

Hmmm.  Everytime I think of Nano-technology sized hunter-killer weapons being
mass produced in some weapons factory the word "BERZERKER" comes to mind.  How
do they tell friend from foe when what they can _see_ is a 1cm area?  How
quickly do they advance from ready area to target?  What sort of ranges and
lifespans do they have?  I keep seeing DAVROS squeezing his fingers and
releasing the virus sized DALEKs to conquer the universe.  Such a universe
would be unplayable (RPG wise).

> Matter transportation?  Urf.  I don't like it.  But if it were sufficiently
> limited, it MIGHT be doable.  If handled like it is in some of Niven's
> stories, it could be done:  designated booths as transmitter & reciever.
> NOT like Star Trek.  A trasporter like Star Trek's would be out of control.
> If the players got a hold of one it would be utterly rediculous.  And any
> opponant with one would be unstoppable.

Blake's 7 required all transportees to carry a special device with them
which would allow the primary transporter to retrieve them.  Provided the
matter transporter was a transporter and not a destroy/rebuild type device
it should work.  Like having a one way doorway open up thus preventing the
transporter operator from "creating" several copies of the transportee.

> Matter manipulation/replication?  Just don't.  It would be worse than
> a trasporter by a longshot.

This is difficult.  If it cost a LOT more to build the object this way then
it would be feasible to allow it to exist but its still open to a lot of
abuse.  Star Trek TNG seem to hint at some sort of utopian environment
within the Federation where the prime pursuit is knowledge and fulfilment
etc.  I think this is somehow used to allow their matter replicators to
exist without society collapsing.  Maybe if you tied Nano-Technology with
manufacturing you could get some sort of interesting replicator at the
molecular level.

> To those who say that the players could destroy an entire planet with
> anti-matter, I gotta point out that a crew in a scoutship could destroy
> an entire planet with a cargo hold of pebbles.  (Accelerate to 1/10 speed
> of light {18 days @ 2G's} and drop the rocks on the planet.  @ speeds
> like that, a 10 gram pebble has the kinetic energy equivalent of a 1
> kiloton atomic bomb.)

There seems to be this conception in SF that if you take a tennis ball of
Anti-Matter and merge it with a tennis ball of normal matter then both
immediately destroy each other in a slugfest of radiation and energy.  I
don't think that would be the case.  The moment the first anti-atom and
normal-atom came in contact there would be a hugh amount of energy released
and the two objects would be flung apart.  The trick is to maintain the
contact.  In a total vacum in 1G gravity if you dropped an Anti-Matter
tennis ball on a normal-matter floor it would bounce (an awful lot) and
release hugh amounts of energy with each bounce.

Secondly, all those pebbles just burnt up in my planetary atmosphere like
small meteors do so Your Scout ship isn't as deadly as you thought 8-}.

Martin Snow writes:
> As for replenishing this water, it wouldn't be too hard to capture a comet
> or two and drop chunks of snow into the atmosphere.  A well-managed starport
> probably includes provision for environmental replacement, including
> replacement of ocean water.

Hmmm.  I had been thinking of each planet as a closed environment but if you
have to go to the trouble of replenishing from other sources wouldn't it be
cheaper to refuel directly from those sources in orbit or where ever?

>Subject: Sword worlds

If you can't rationalise the distance travelled then can you introduce a
misjump as an explanation?

Bruce...         pihlab@hhcs.gov.au

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4867
Subject: Re: Laser Weapons & TNE Wish Lists
From: gwh@lurnix.COM (George William Herbert)
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 12:17:43 -0800


[warning: the following article contains a graphic description of the
ballistic effects, if you'll pardon the pun, of laser weapons]

Scott Kellogg repeated one of the most oft-repeated and
least true beliefs about laser weapons: "You just wave
them around the target and burn them."  That's unfortunately
wrong, and here's why.

The concept of the "beam" laser is often thought to be the best
weapon by people who don't understand how laser weapons usually
damage a target.  It isn't.  Pulse lasers are much, much more
effective.  Presume you have two lasers, one beam, one pulse, that
put out the same amount of energy per second.  Say that this is about
oh say enough energy to boil 25 cm^3 of water.  Ok, the pulse laser hits
an human target, spends about 10% of its energy burning through the
clothes, and deposits a lot of energy fast in the first centimeter of
skin.  Bang, in addition to a burn you get impulsive damage as the
water vaporizes.  Not only do they hurt, but they likely fall over
stunned from the internal shock wave, not just damage.  They've got
one cm^3 of flesh gone, the surrounding 10 cm^3 charred, and are
suffering from about the same impulsive damage as a pistol round.
Sound painful?  Would be...  Ok, hit someone
else with the beam laser.  Now, since the weapon isn't being held steady,
and the beam is continuous, its impact is spread around a bit.  This
means that more of its energy is disspated burning clothes.  Ok,
but we've still got most of the energy.  Say that the beam wavered only a
quarter meter of total path during that second, and that most of the
energy still got through clothing.  Results?  A 25 cm long second
degree (maybe) burn, painful, but not necessarily even disabling.
Not convinced yet?  Armour the person a little bit.  Suddenly,
half the energy of the pulse is absorbed and doesn't get through, but
some does, still doing the same type of damage (if less).  On the
beam laser, since the beam is moving around, it never gets through
the armour.

Personally, I'll take a pulse laser.  Can you run it continously
at low-power mode to act as its own targeting aid?  Yes, sure, no problem
if you design it right.  Will firing it at the second it is held steady
on the target be easier than with a laser-sighted rifle or pistol? Nope.
Same problem, though you won't get recoil after you fire.

Enough lasers.  TNE wish list... umm ... umm... 8-)

Simplicate.  Try a quick character system for intro players.
(or, alternatively, include a few pages of sample characters...)
Combat, well, the T2k2/D20 system is reasonable, if you include the
explosive/antitank weapons lethality rule and apply it to (for instance)
plasma weapons.  DO A GOOD SYSTEM TO CONVERT MT CHARACTERS 8-)
Noncombat interactions:  Kick the T2k skills system a bit.
MT had a wonderful variety of USEFUL noncombat skills.  Don't lose
that.  Rescue the interstellar trade system from classic Traveller.
        Vehicle design: Seperate systems out, but make sure they're
compatable where they interact (you already were talking about that).
This allows some simplification.  Cull the rules that no longer make
sense (i.e. too much detail) from each resulting system.  Add reasonable
water and aircraft systems, though those can wait for a suppliment
(and I am willing to help with that, and the current systems do leave
enough room for improvement that starting over again might be good 8-)
Space Combat: High Guard was the high point.  It has gone
downhill since... try hard to retain elegant simplicity.  A slightly
more skill oriented HG variant might be just the thing...  Or, perhaps,
something based on the T2k vehicle system, with new orders of magnitude
of weapons (i.e., reasonable pen/damage values for space weapons, but
if you shoot a ground vehicle with one, multiply by 10 or something...
handle spinal weapons the same way: if you shoot something smaller than
10ktons with a spinal mount, multiply pen/damage by 10 (or whatever,
that's not the optimal point but you can probably get the idea).

The T2k2ed system has a lot going for it, mostly in a basic
simplicity of having evolved from a wargame.  Functionality can be
added without affecting that simplicity.   The Traveller background
is a good place to play with, even after the Hard Times.  It will
be challenging to play in.  Try hard to keep the quality level up
for the materials.  Help me convince more of these TML people
to put their pens/typewriters/word processors where their mouths are
(though that may be hard 8-).

Ok, that's my TNE wish list.  Have fun everybody 8-)

- -george william herbert
gwh@lurnix.com
gwh@retro.com (coming soon to an internet near you)



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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4868
Date: 03 Nov 92 18:44:56 EST
From: Mark Watson <100022.3361@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: various

A few things, firstly on TNE (and I'll try to make this brief):

I've been wondering what is going to happen to the lesser rules supplements
which found their way into the aggregated rules for Megatraveller. For
example .... Animal Encounters? Are GDW likely to provide Animal Encounters
a la Traveller/Megatraveller, which are complex and buggy, but in
combination with a judiciously written computer program can provide
a degree of "biodiversity" (ie lotsa animals). Or will it be like 2300AD
which seems slightly more realistic, but doesn't provide the referee with a
zooful of creatures? Or will these rules be there at all?

Also, it looks increasingly like the character generation rules, which many
people consider the one of the best things about the Traveller system (or at
least I do), will be replaced by the somewhat inferior one present in the
other GDW games. Question: does this include the horrible (again, my
opinion, maybe someone likes it) system for assigning motivation using
playing cards?

Now I don't own T2000, nor do I intend to ... I infer from skimming the T2000
stuff in Challenge that the character generation system is broadly similar
to 2300AD. Comparing 2300AD with Traveller, I generate a considerably less
complex NPC and then graft on as motivation out of nowhere, which generally
leaves him/her a lovesick psychotic, or a power mad hedonist, or ...

Way back in the early White Dwarf days, when Games Workshop licensed and
supported Traveller in the UK, there was an article on NPC generation,
which suggested a secondary character profile, 6 categories including
loyalty, ambition, etc. (can't remember them, I'll find it and post more
detail if there is interest). This produces a far better and more elegant
way of managing NPC interaction, especially in combination with the modern
task systems .. want to bribe an official? His/her loyalty rating is used
as a defensive mod on the task. It's also useful when one comes to generating
aliens - you can add default mods to their initial throw for the secondary
profile, and thereby ease the introduction of alien NPCs.

Otherwise, will there be a pack of playing cards in the TNE box?

Hmm... maybe not as brief as I'd have liked. Couple of other points:

Wildstar's starport generator: in pre TNE days, and especially during Hard
Times, location within the Imperium (or indeed outside) would also be a
factor, how about plus mods for the Vilani main, Core sector, Massilia, etc?
Also, I would suggest taking out the "referee assigned" prosperity factor
and having it generated randomly at intervals, possibly on a subsector wide
basis, to simulate the effect of an economic cycle ("really this is a high
traffic world but the local economy is in a downturn").

Scott (so you're the Perot voter): re your cockpit guide. I think (for
humaniti at least) that manual control systems are more likely to change
with tech level than with locale, given that this should be the greatest
determinant of the level of automation. I would expect at the higher tech
levels that the control systems are more to do with telling the computers
what to do and how to do it, rather than with doing the task oneself. This
is of course up to the point where the transponders form their own union.

Cheers
Mark


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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4869
From: richard@agora.rain.com (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Welcome
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 5:48:03 PST

I, for one, would like to heartily welcome all the newcomers to the TML.
(Not to mention andy corporate giants, but you know who you are.)

Please use the TML in its entirerty.  I don't know that you wil find
that much of tremendous impact in the archives, but you really should
take a look at them and perhaps glean a wonderful idea or two out of
them.

And finally, a question to GDW (whoever your rep is - I'll try to use
your real name next time): How do you handle computer-RPG spin-offs
of games?  I know you didn't do the MT computer games (was that Paragon,
I forget?) and am curious how and if you plan to work with some
company for the TNE series.  (and I'll understand if you can't tell me.)
- --
Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com
I'm sorry.  Last time that happened, it was an accident.

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4870
From: Does it matter? <vender@plains.NoDak.edu>
Subject: Antimatter fuel
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 0:55:09 CST

Concerning antimatter, the only problem I have is the concept of using it
  as a power source.  According to one theory of universe creation,
  matter/antimatter pairs pop into existence in random intervals,
  such that if combined, the mass/antimass of each would sum to zero,
  (thus keeping the energy/mass totals in the universe constant).

Keeping with this theory, particle accelerators could be used to generate
  matter/antimatter fuel, but no great energy release would be produced
  other from the combination.  However, there is a potential for power
  storage.  If the antimatter fuel is energized (or the matter portion
  of the fuel), all of the energy would be released into the environment.
  I.e.  all of the energy used to raise the energy levels in the atoms
  annihilated would be available.  5 Mw-days could be released as
  7200 Mw for a duration of one minute.  In this system, advanced tech
  levels would still use fusion or other power sources to energize the
  fuel.

Of course, antimatter would still be usable for a weapon.  Releasing all
  of the energy stored in your enemy's hull will still release alot
  of damaging power.

BTW:  Does anyone have the robotics book, and a willingness to help
  someone who cannot get ahold of it with some chart information?

- --Brad Vender (MT ref. in need of robotics)

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4871
Date: Wed,  4 Nov 92 21:29:02 +1100
From: "Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au>
Subject: VIRUS again


Well, I've only seen CHALLENGE 64's virus story so far and although it
hints at nasty things having happened it doesn't actually say bluntly
that the little silicon guys done it.

I read with interest the alternate cilicon virus posted in TML and it
made me shudder with fear.  If this is the future of TRAVELLER then
I for one will become anti-TECH and close all borders and go hide
in my cave (with a friend 8-}.

The second TML story about active computer AI running rampant through
the universe is more to my liking.

Personally, I think that provided GDW don't "set in concrete" that the
VIRUS was the prime cause for the downfall then I think there are a lot
of oportunities for GMs to play around the question of what really
happened.  I prefer to believe that the Zhodani woke something up on
their trip towards the core OR something else went wrong and the
current government line is that the VIRUS is the culprit.  Lots of
scope for the players to go find out what really happened.

Maybe the people of the IMPERIUM are just too proud to admit that they
caused the downfall and are blaming it on a rumour or some unrelated
facts.

I think that GDW should publish (or hint at) all these possibilities.
Don't set it in concrete.  Maybe several things happened that wiped
out separate parts of the Imperium while missing others.

Bruce...    pihlab@hhcs.gov.au

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4872
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:56 GMT
From: David Johnson - CIX Staff <djohnson@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Wheres the stick on a plane
Reply-To: djohnson@cix.compulink.co.uk


Adrian Hunt requests information I believe about location of throttle
and stick.

I can't speak for the American set up but the two seater plane that I
had a lesson in, The polit sets on the left, holds the stick with the
thumb and two fingers of his left hand. His right hand controls the
trim and the throttle of the plane. The flight manuals all discribe
this same method.

Dave

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4873
Date:    Wed, 4 Nov 1992 9:53:36 -0500 (EST)
From: BARANSKI@VEAMF1.NUSC.NAVY.MIL
Subject: Matter Replicators & Wildstar

Wildstar...

Just a quick note; I really did like your starport etc generator.

And your idea for the virus is about a magnitude better then what I've heard
from GDW, but I still don't like the idea of little bugs crawling around inside
my computer!  I believe something like that would end in the destruction of all
silicon based electronic components.  Cellophane went out of style real quick
after some bug decided it liked the stuff.  Perhaps the silicon based
components would be replaced by germanium or something else?  Could the virus
adapt to that?  Perhaps some races' computer system were already non-silicon,
and therefore they were spared the first onslaught of the virus?

Jim Baranski

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4874
Date:    Wed, 4 Nov 1992 9:53:58 -0500 (EST)
From: BARANSKI@VEAMF1.NUSC.NAVY.MIL
Subject: Matter Replicators & Wildstar

Wildstar...

Just a quick note; I really did like your starport etc generator.

And your idea for the virus is about a magnitude better then what I've heard
from GDW, but I still don't like the idea of little bugs crawling around inside
my computer!  I believe something like that would end in the destruction of all
silicon based electronic components.  Cellophane went out of style real quick
after some bug decided it liked the stuff.  Perhaps the silicon based
components would be replaced by germanium or something else?  Could the virus
adapt to that?  Perhaps some races' computer system were already non-silicon,
and therefore they were spared the first onslaught of the virus?

Jim Baranski

------------------------------
Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4875
Date:    Wed, 4 Nov 1992 10:00:17 -0500 (EST)
From: BARANSKI@VEAMF1.NUSC.NAVY.MIL
Subject: Matter Replicators & Wildstar

Wildstar...

Just a quick note; I really did like your starport etc generator.

And your idea for the virus is about a magnitude better then what I've heard
from GDW, but I still don't like the idea of little bugs crawling around inside
my computer!  I believe something like that would end in the destruction of all
silicon based electronic components.  Cellophane went out of style real quick
after some bug decided it liked the stuff.  Perhaps the silicon based
components would be replaced by germanium or something else?  Could the virus
adapt to that?  Perhaps some races' computer system were already non-silicon,
and therefore they were spared the first onslaught of the virus?

RE: Matter Duplicators:

Has anyone ever read an old SF short about these aliens that thought they could
destroy the earth's economy by dropping a pair of duplicators on earth before
they invaded?

Of course the insatiable earthmen changed their economy from buying and selling
quantity to buying and selling diversity; IE instead of mass producing and
selling a thousand cars, you hand build a hundred different cars, and duplicate
the exact car that the customer wants!  Diversity became the goal instead of
mere substance.

I forget the author...

Jim Baranski

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4876
Date:    Wed, 4 Nov 1992 10:55:02 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: RE: Alien controls

I sed:
> SOLOMANI (start off simple right?)
>      Solomani and most Imperial flight controls generally consist
> of stick, throttle, and rudder pedals.  The stick is usually
> mounted in the center of the console, but is sometimes on the left
> side, while the right hand generally controls the throttle.

Adrian sez:
}Are the Solomani left-handed in the far future, then?  Because, being
}right-handed, I'd want the stick in my right hand as that is the control
}which needs the most control, so to speak.  Someone will correct me if I
}am wrong, but I believe the F-16's cockpit is laid out like this - the
}stick is on the right.

You'd be surprised how much adjustment the throttle needs...

>the co-pilot or navigator (generally seated on the right)

}Is this correct?  Someone who knows the insides of a wide-bodied passenger
}jet, please comment.

Yep.  Most aircraft (all I've ever heard of) which have the pilot and
co-pilot in tandem have the pilot on the left and the co-pilot on the
right.  (Sorry UK drivers! :-)  In such an arrangement, the throttle is
always center mounted allowing the co-pilot access to the throttle.
Thus the pilot flies left handed and uses his right hand for the
throttle.  The F-16 is an exception to this.  As it is a single seater,
it doesn't make much diff.  But all other fighters I know of have
the stick center mounted or on the left hand.  Pilots will usually
keep one hand always on the throttle.  Since that is the right hand,
you do all your flying left handed so that's where they put the stick.

> VILANI
>      Lack of yaw control is compensated for by the presence of
> crosswind landing gear.  Crosswind gear allow the craft to land
> while the ship's nose is not pointing along the direction of
> travel.  The gear is mounted on casters akin to the wheels on a
> shopping cart.

}In a word, *@!%.  I have enough problems controlling a shopping trolley
}at low speeds in 2D.  (This comment is not on whether or not the Vilani
}would actually make such a system; I imagine that trained people would
}get used to it, just as frequent shoppers eventually get the hang of
}trolleys.  I just want to see a video of the face of the first Solomani
}pilot who tried to land a Vilani fighter. :-)

Heck, no problem to a B-52 pilot.  B-52s (and presumably any Vilani
craft large enough) have steerable crosswind gear.  The can land (not
quite) sideways.  Crosswind gear on smaller aircraft are semi-fixed
casters.  When you are travelling at low speeds, they function like
regular fixed wheels.  At high speeds akin to making a landing on the
runway, they rotate out and act as casters.  It's tricky to get used
to, but not impossible.  (B-52s have been around a LONG time...)

> ZHODANI

}That's a neat trick, building a shield round the controls only so as
}to leave the pilot unshielded, but also leaving the controls open to
}the pilot.  Is there just a small hole in the shield, pointed at the
}pilot?  What happens when the hole is also pointed at the Shivva?

Check out the Zhodani Alien module.  They pull the same trick with
noble combat armor.  Maybe there's a weird psi-bubble or something.
Hell, it's psionic.  It isn't SUPPOSED to make sence!

> HIVERS
> ...  Hiver controls are very difficult for anyone but a hiver
> to operate, thus, many of their ships employ dual control panels,
> to allow for a member race to use them.

}They're not the only ones!  What does a human do in a Droyne ship, given
}that the average human is even more lacking in the wing department than
}the average Droyne?

The average Droyne ship doesn't employ too many humans.  If they did,
they would have to pay to have different controls put in.  They would
presumably have to do so for a pilot who'd lost his wings somehow.

> VEGANS
> They rely heavily on inertial compensators as
> their somewhat weak limbs have difficulty overcoming high
> acceleration.  Ships which do not have inertial compensators in the
> entire ship will nevertheless have a region where they are
> installed:  around the pilot.

}What did they do before they invented/were given inertial compensators?
}Are there any low-tech Vegan aircraft?

I don't have Solomani Rim here, but if I recall, all the Vegan stuff is
TL 10+  More like TL12+ at a guess.  But the Vegans would have a lotta
difficulty with 9 G maneuvers.

2G Scott

Hans sez:
}Some of
}my players complain that their slug-throwers are too damn mundane for a
}science fiction game, but what's the fun of can't miss weaponry? Somehow
}I don't think that I'd like gaming in a REALLY realistic future milieu.

True, true, but I wouldn't mind a MORE realistic future milieu.
Otherwise it's space cowboys with six-guns and interstellar horses.  :-)

I've seen Trav stuff where people talk about air/rafts as if they were
ground cars.  They're much more like ultra-stealthy highly maneuverable
helicopters with enough endurance to stay up for DAYS.  That is very BAD.
When we introduce high tech weapons & stuff into something, we have
to give thought as to how they're gonna get used and how effective they
are going to be.  A Grav tank has about as much relation to an M-1 Abrams
Main Battle Tank as an AH-64 Apache attack helicopter does to a man
carrying a large stick.

2G Scott

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4877
Date:    Wed, 4 Nov 1992 10:56:14 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: How deadly is this stuff?

Hans sez:
}Some of
}my players complain that their slug-throwers are too damn mundane for a
}science fiction game, but what's the fun of can't miss weaponry? Somehow
}I don't think that I'd like gaming in a REALLY realistic future milieu.

True, true, but I wouldn't mind a MORE realistic future milieu.
Otherwise it's space cowboys with six-guns and interstellar horses.  :-)

I've seen Trav stuff where people talk about air/rafts as if they were
ground cars.  They're much more like ultra-stealthy highly maneuverable
helicopters with enough endurance to stay up for DAYS.  That is very BAD.
When we introduce high tech weapons & stuff into something, we have
to give thought as to how they're gonna get used and how effective they
are going to be.  A Grav tank has about as much relation to an M-1 Abrams
Main Battle Tank as an AH-64 Apache attack helicopter does to a man
carrying a large stick.

2G Scott

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4878
Date:    Wed, 4 Nov 1992 12:06:57 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: Deadfall ordanance

Bruce sez:
}1. At what (AI) intelligence level do robots become Imperial citizens?
}   This leads you off into splinter groups for the freedom of toasters and
}   the end of slavery for all machines 8-}.

"What is the point in buying a toaster with artificial intelligence if
 you don't like toast?!"  -- A Toaster  (Red Dwarf)

> To those who say that the players could destroy an entire planet with
> anti-matter, I gotta point out that a crew in a scoutship could destroy
> an entire planet with a cargo hold of pebbles.  (Accelerate to 1/10 speed
> of light {18 days @ 2G's} and drop the rocks on the planet.  @ speeds
> like that, a 10 gram pebble has the kinetic energy equivalent of a 1
> kiloton atomic bomb.)

}There seems to be this conception in SF that if you take a tennis ball of
}Anti-Matter and merge it with a tennis ball of normal matter then both
}immediately destroy each other in a slugfest of radiation and energy.  I
}don't think that would be the case.  The moment the first anti-atom and
}normal-atom came in contact there would be a hugh amount of energy released
}and the two objects would be flung apart.  The trick is to maintain the
}contact.  In a total vacum in 1G gravity if you dropped an Anti-Matter
}tennis ball on a normal-matter floor it would bounce (an awful lot) and
}release hugh amounts of energy with each bounce.

True.  *IN* a vacuum.  In an atmosphere you have what Martin the
Martian would call an Earthshattering Kaboom.

}Secondly, all those pebbles just burnt up in my planetary atmosphere like
}small meteors do so Your Scout ship isn't as deadly as you thought 8-}.

Think about it:  1 cubic centimeter of lead would have the equivalent
energy of a 1.3 kiloton bomb.  One cubic meter would have the equivalent
energy of a 1.3 GIGAton bomb.  A standard shipping container (2 'tons')
would have the equivalent energy of a 35.1 *GIGAton* bomb!  Now it may
release all that energy in the atmosphere, but the impact crater will
still be about the size of Lake Michigan.

2G Scott

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4879
Date:    Wed, 4 Nov 1992 12:07:29 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: Beam vs. Pulse Lasers

Hi,

George talks about beam vs. pulse laser and makes some decent points.
Yes, pulse lasers do more damage than beam lasers.  But Usually,
pulse lasers pulse in the kilohertz range.  This, to the human eye
makes it basically perform as a beam laser.  The reason more damage
is done is manly not for the arguments you make, but because, when a
powerful laser hits a target, it vaporizes the first layer of what it
hits.  That vapor (metal, water whatever) forms a cloud around what
has been hit.  That cloud reflects and refracts the beam of the laser.
A pulse timing allows the cloud to disapate so that the laser can
burn off the next layer of the target.

George's discription of a pulse laser is more along the lines of
one large pulse.  Over a short amount of time rather than over a
continuous beam.  Thus all the energy of the beam arrives at one
short interval (& small location)  This is akin to having a large
laser and turning the power up and down when it is on target.
The same pulse laser he describes should be able to be turned on
as a continuous pulse laser of a higher power draw, (with attendant
cooling problems) & it would drain the battery faster.

Now, beam or pulse (which ever you wanna call it)  A beam could
easily be expanded to attack a persons eyes.  It would be the
most common laser injury.  Imagine:  A laser weapon with a 1Kw beam
with a beam radius of 1 mm.  Zap!
Ok, as the beam is expanded, the power will drop off as 1/r^2.
So...  a beam with a 100 mm beam would have a localized beam strength
of .1 watt.  100mw.  Now a 100 mw beam is quite sufficient to cause
severe retinal damage (I'm pretty sure 100mw is a class 4 laser).
I got hit with far less power than that.  (Thank GOD!)
But your beam is now 20 centimeters in diameter.  That's like a small
flashlight.  It's pretty *hard* to miss with something like that.

}Personally, I'll take a pulse laser.  Can you run it continously
}at low-power mode to act as its own targeting aid?  Yes, sure, no problem
}if you design it right.  Will firing it at the second it is held steady
}on the target be easier than with a laser-sighted rifle or pistol? Nope.
}Same problem, though you won't get recoil after you fire.

But it will be easier for rapid fire than a rifle or pistol.

2G Scott

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

Bundle: 414
Archive-Message-Number: 4880
Date:    Wed, 4 Nov 1992 12:07:51 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: Re: controls

Hi,

Mark Watson sez:
}Scott: re your cockpit guide. I think (for
}humaniti at least) that manual control systems are more likely to change
}with tech level than with locale, given that this should be the greatest
}determinant of the level of automation. I would expect at the higher tech
}levels that the control systems are more to do with telling the computers
}what to do and how to do it, rather than with doing the task oneself. This
}is of course up to the point where the transponders form their own union.

Well, here at TL 8 we have computer assisted fly by wire.  Presumably
all trav starships & grav vehicles use this.  But you have to have a
method of Telling the computer how you want to orient your craft.  Some
control input to the computer.  Try any flight simulator computer program:
You DON'T want to fly by keyboard.  The control method chosen will differ
with culture.  (Shape/type of joystick or in the Hiver's case:
joyball. :-)

Metlay raves:
> (Five will get you ten that Bart Massey was referring to me, folx.)

Ya know, Metlay's the 3rd person I've heard take credit for pissing off
Bart.  I still say it musta been me.

Take it easy on the self recriminations out there friends,

2G Scott

------------------------------
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 415  4881 04-Nov-1992 Steven Owens     Lasers/Flashlights << George William He
 415  4882 04-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Replies from Wildstar (long) << Does it
 415  4883 04-Nov-1992 Cynthia Higginb  Cynthia's accumulated comments <<  Well
 415  4884 04-Nov-1992 Greg Givler      TravCom2 << Announcing the Release of T
 415  4885 04-Nov-1992 Eric Edward Moo  Re: Robots and Tech stuff << "Bruce Pih
 415  4886 04-Nov-1992 Eric Edward Moo  Economics << Personally I'm dying to ge

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

Bundle: 415
Archive-Message-Number: 4881
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 11:16:10 CST
From: uso01@unidata.com (Steven Owens)
Subject: Lasers/Flashlights


George William Herbert (gwh@lurnix.COM) sez:
> Scott Kellogg repeated one of the most oft-repeated and
> least true beliefs about laser weapons: "You just wave
> them around the target and burn them."  That's unfortunately
> wrong, and here's why.

Hm... I know little about lasers, but from what I've heard,
and from some of the details of the previous post, I think you're a
little off here.

> The concept of the "beam" laser is often thought to be the
> best weapon by people who don't understand how laser weapons
> usually damage a target.  It isn't.  Pulse lasers are much,
> much more effective.

A beam laser is very "accurate" in the sense of actually making a
connection with the target, but obviously will cut a swath rather than
drilling a hole.

> Presume you have two lasers, one beam, one pulse, that put out
> the same amount of energy per second.  Say that this is about
> oh say enough energy to boil 25 cm^3 of water.

Game system check: I don't archive TML digests, but I believe
the previous poster mentioned drilling through a 7cm metal plate or
something.  I'm probably way off with the numbers, but I definitely
got the impression that the average traveller laser weapon has more
power than boiling twenty-five cubic centimeters of water in one
second.

> [discussion of a pulse laser vaporizing a cubic centimeter
> of flesh deleted]

Note that the laser probably has to be "tuned" to flesh, to a
degree, to get maximum wound potential.  This would also tend to trade
off on effectiveness vs. armor.  It could be tuned the other way, of
course (armor-piercing lasers anybody? :-)

> Sound painful?  Would be...  Ok, hit someone else with the
> beam laser.  Now, since the weapon isn't being held steady,
> and the beam is continuous, its impact is spread around a bit.

You're making some assumptions about the time compression
factor here.  You stated before, each puts out enough energy to boil
25cm^3 in one second.  Here you've moved to the assumption that the
pulse laser puts it out all in one fraction of a second.  This is
reasonable, but make it clear...  What fraction of a second?  1/10?
So now you have a pulse laser with 10 times the intensity vs a beam
laser with 10 times the duration.

> Personally, I'll take a pulse laser.  Can you run it
> continously at low-power mode to act as its own targeting aid?
> Yes, sure, no problem if you design it right.

This is something I always found really silly about classic
traveller, the lack of a built-in "targeting" laser on a beam laser.
On a pulse-laser, on the other hand, you're probably going to need a
separate laser for targeting.

> Will firing it at the second it is held steady on the target
> be easier than with a laser-sighted rifle or pistol? Nope.
> Same problem, though you won't get recoil after you fire.

Yes and no.  I have a friend who sells firearms for a living
and is seriously into them as a hobby, who likes to say that no
marksman is more accurate than the weapon.  Taken another way, no
weapon is less accurate than the marksman firing it.  Obviously there
are exceptions - for example extreme long range - but it generally
holds true that a well built and maintained firearm will cause a very
small fraction of deviation from the target, compared to the marksman.

So a laser, being more accurate, still has to deal with the
steadiness of the user's hand, the hand-eye coordination for
targeting, etc.

On the other hand, a laser has no recoil, and gives a
perfectly flat and straight beam.  This makes it excellent at long
ranges by comparison, and probably makes it somewhat better at shorter
ranges, particularly (in both cases) where repeating fire is used (no
adjusting for recoil).

A comment on the difficulty of evading a laser, remarked upon
by the previous poster.  Try playing paintball, a combat-style game
using CO2-propelled, paint-filled gelatin capsules.  These capsules
move at just under 300 feet per second (if they move any faster, don't
play, it's unsafe).  MUCH slower than, say, a 9mm pistol round.
Should be rather easy to evade, eh?  Have fun.  Make sure your clothes
are old ones you won't worry about getting paint on.

Although it is *barely* possible to see a paintball coming and
duck it (easiest at long range), it is much harder than you might
think.  With paintballs, as with bullets and lasers, the best way to
dodge them is to not be there.

And, at close range, your attacker will get a shot at you
quite a bit before you can get behind some cover.  The main thing that
keeps these games going as long as they do (which isn't that long) is
the relative inaccuracy of the paintball guns, and the tendencies
among players to sneak up from behind cover and/or pop away at each
other from extreme ranges forever.

Steven J. Owens

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

Bundle: 415
Archive-Message-Number: 4882
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 17:01:28 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Replies from Wildstar (long)

Does it matter? <vender@plains.NoDak.edu> (Brad Vender) writes:
> The charts for the robotic brains, skills, and how to work
> building a robot in a CP based system.
> (Since book 8 is out of print, I assume and hope no laws would
> be violated by this information. :(

I recently (within the last 6 months) purchased a copy of Book 8; copies
may still be available from some of the stores that deal in old or used
games.  I purchased my copy from A Wargamer's Depot, but other copies
may be locatable.  Perhaps Loren Wiseman at GDW can help here?


SULAIMAN@ecs.umass.edu (Ameer) writes:
> > Steve Higginbotham writes:
> > In my TCS game, there are at least two ships, one
> > TL-10, one TL-12, that are theoretically capable of crossing the Rift.
> Two out of how many? What's their total useful tonnage?

Figure it out.  At TL-10, the best we can do is Jump-1; which requires 10%
of ship tonnage as fuel; at TL-12 we can make Jump-3 at a cost of 20%.  If
we assume drop tanks to make the initial jump then at TL-10 we will need
70% of the ship volume for jump fuel.  At TL-12, we can do it with 35% of
the ship volume as jump fuel.

I will agree, however, that the original Sword Worlders probably didn't
cross through the rift.  It makes much more sense for them to wander around
and through Corridor to get to the Marches.  As to why they went coreward
and then spinward, who knows?  Perhaps their only avenue of escape from
their enemies was to coreward, and they kept on running until they got to
the Vilani.  Stopping long enough to ask directions, they set out in a
direction that the Vilani had not explored (through Corridor and into the
Marches).  They then looked around until they found what they wanted.


Scott "2G" Kellogg writes from is multiple E-mail addresses:
> I wouldn't mind if TNE used A.I. much more extensively.  It would broaden
> the base appeal of the game, and if done carefully, wouldn't change it
> too much.  Let's face it.  We don't want EVERYTHING to be AI.

Wouldn't change it too much?  Heck, no!  It would be like a return to the
"good old days".  Back when I started playing Traveller, the Paranoia Press
suppliments were hot stuff (especially "Scouts and Assasins") and several
starships in the campaign had Delta Research LHeP(Or) computer systems with
the full artificial personality package.  Including one Model/9-fib that
read far too much Heinlien.

> And remember, Trav is a TL 7 game after all.  It needs an update:  it
> had Air/Rafts & other grav transportation listed as tech level 8.

Yes, and in my opinion, the tech level chart is in serious need of
revision.  Practical antimatter technology is currently no further away
than fusion power (and may be closer, depending on who you talk to).  It
might make sense to introduce antimatter at the same TL as fusion; fusion
for the large power plants, and antimatter as a smaller portable power
source.

With Hard Times and the Short Nap, technology levels are likely to get even
more confused.  The collapse of interstellar trade may take away some of
the capability, but not the knowledge: technology which can be produced
locally will be maintained.  This will lead to strange cases where some
facet of local technology is one or more tech levels higher than everything
else.

> I could not keep that beam off of me.
> Even with that clumsy binocular/laser arrangement I just
> could not evade that beam without good cover.
> Hitting a target with a laser weapon will be VERY easy.

Did they try giving you another binocular/laser so that you could "shoot
back" every once and a while?  I bet having to worry about *THAT* might
spoil someone's aim pretty quick!

> Solomani and most Imperial flight controls generally consist
> of stick, throttle, and rudder pedals.

It was quite a while ago, but when I designed the Gold of Zurrian, I was
told (and this was "official" information at the time) that most Imperial
vessels used the *VILANI* conventions, not the Solomani.  I don't believe
this has changed.

> The stick is usually
> mounted in the center of the console, but is sometimes on the left
> side, while the right hand generally controls the throttle.  This
> allows the co-pilot or navigator (generally seated on the right) to
> be able to reach the throttle.

Let me expand this a little bit.  In the Solomani tradition, vessels that
require more than pilot use side-by-side seating, with the co-pilot on
the right.  The throttles are typically placed between the pilots, and the
control stick is in the center of each console.  If side-sticks are used,
they will be on the opposite side from the throttles.

If there is only one pilot, then the throttles may be on either side,
depending on the whim of the designer; I believe that a left-side placement
is more common, because most Solomani are right-handed, and will want to
use their right hands for the control stick.  For the same reason, a side
mounted control stick will usually be on the right (this was certainly the
case of the F-18 cockpit mockup that I "flew" a number of years ago).

A craft with one pilot but other crewmembers (such as a navigator, weapons
systems operator, etc) may have a side-by-side arrangement, but a
fore-and-aft arrangement is at least as common.

Side-mounted sticks are usually force-sensitive, whereas center sticks are
not.  Moving a "normal" control stick causes the control surfaces to move
or the maneuvering thrusters to fire.  The more you move the stick, the
more control forces are applied to the craft; centering the stick causes
the control forces to cease (the stick should center itself if the pilot
lets go).  A force-sensitive stick does not actually move much (if at all).
Pushing, pulling, or pressing the stick from sided to side causes the
control surfaces to move or the maneuvering thrusters to fire.  The harder
you press, the more control forces are applied to the craft; letting go
causes the control forces to cease.  The "feel" of a force-sensitive stick
is very different from that of conventional controls.  Since the stick
doesn't move, there is an initial tendancy to over-control and press too
hard.  It is very easy to get the hang of, and is probably more sensitive
to small control inputs that a conventional stick.

> Engineers opted for a
> single design to ease training of pilots and to avoid their
> having to study their ship to understand what is going on.  Thus
> the same control panel exists on a Vilani fat trader as exists
> on their air/rafts and their most sophisticated fighters.

I think this sounds like a very Vilani thing to do.  Since the Vilani
design philosophy is more common in the Imperium, this would explain why
anyone with "Pilot" skill can fly anything from a Scoutship up to the
largest warship or transport.  It also explains the skill cross over
between air/raft, ship's boat, and pilot skills.

> The gear is mounted on casters akin to the wheels on a
> shopping cart.  However, they make high speed taxi difficult and
> hazardous as the wheels do not aide in turning the aircraft.

No, you don't let the wheels swivel freely like on a Adrian Hurt's shopping
trolley.  Modern-day crosswind gear is powered (hydraulically or
electrically), so that the pilot selects the crosswind angle with a cockpit
control, and the main gear swivels to match.  After you are down, you dial
it back to zero, and use a little steering wheel to steer the nosewheel.
This is the sort of system that is used on modern large transports (just
about everything since the Boeing 707).  No problem with high speed taxi.

> [Droyne controls]

I'm not convinced with this one, but it makes for a good story!

> The pilot lies in a couch arrangement with his
> four hooves touching the floor.  By leaning in one direction or
> another, the ship's attitude is changed.

This was tried in early human flight experiments (strapping the pilot
into a yoke and having him lean to control yaw motion).  This was
abandonded as ineffective, but it would be like the K'kree to stick
with the first system they thought of.

> Whaddya think?

Pretty darn good.

References: "Jet-Age Test Pilot" (Tex Johnston's autobiography, published
by Bantam).  "Smithsonian Book of Flight" (Walter Boyne, published by
the Smithsonian Press).  Visit the National Air and Space Museum.


Adrian Hurt <adrian@cee.heriot-watt.ac.uk> writes:
> That's a neat trick, building a shield round the controls only so as
> to leave the pilot unshielded, but also leaving the controls open to
> the pilot.  Is there just a small hole in the shield, pointed at the
> pilot?  What happens when the hole is also pointed at the Shivva?

Presumably if anybody could do it, the Zhodani could.  Perhaps the fighter
controls only respond to somebody sitting nearby, or maybe you have to
flick a special control when you start up the system, so that the computer
can store the pilot's mental pattern (flick-print?).  From then on until
flick control is turned off, the computer only responds to inputs from
the person with the right mental pattern.


surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman) writes:
> To get pure water to process for fuel what happens to all of the
> salts, especially from ocean water.

If processed by a starship fuel purifier, I presume that the salts and
other waste materials are purged overboard.  On a planetside fuel
refining operation, some of the extracts may be comercially viable.  Those
that aren't are probably put in a tailings pile or a landfill.

> BTW, is fuel liquid or compressed gas?

I've always assumed that it was liquid (probably under relatively high
pressure, and chilled to boot).  For this reason, I install "Basic
Environment" in the fuel tanks; to provide for insulation and a power
requirement for the chiller plant.


Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> writes:
> Based on the assumption that it takes two MCr worth of civilian shipping
> to generate the revenue to support one MCr worth of warship ...

How did you come up with this figure (inquiring minds want to know)?

> The above suggestion reconciles the two views. Of course, if you don't
> agree with the basic assumption the whole thing falls apart.

It sounds good to me, and I will use it.

> The thing that really needs to be done about the tech levels is to get them
> divorced from Terran historical dates. Just because we have it in 1990 it
> dosen't have to be TL 8, and just because we don't have it dosen't mean it
> can't be TL 8.

The problem is that there needs to be a quick and easy "memory handle" to
explain TLs to new people.  Relating a TL to a historical date fills the
bill (but it also leads to inaccuracies).  The TL chart could definitely
stand to be re-thought, but whatever the end result is, players and
referees will immediately start comparing it to historical developments.


ajeffrie@waite.adelaide.edu.au (Alex Jeffries) writes:
> [An interesting idea involving genetic algorithms!]
> Is this really that much different from the sophont chip story?

It is at least related to current research.  One possible problem is that I
personally find it difficult to believe that there is any unified computer
architecture throughout the Imperium, let alone with other interstellar
states.  The virus is going to have to be able to "port" itself from
operating system to operating system, running on radically different types
of hardware.

> Does it allow for some interesting roleplaying?

Any version of the story that ends with the dawn of the "New Era" will have
approximately the same role-playing potential.  The virus is a plot device
which allows us to go from Hard Times to the New Era.  The more consistent
and believable the plot device, the better the connection.  A good plot
device should allow other writers to extrapolate things that the creator
did not intend, but are nevertheless consistent, interesting, and playable.

> In my mind, 70 years, particularly in an
> interstellar community is diddly-squat for society to collapse. On high
> population worlds maybe but who could forget the Imperium in just 70 years? 
Look
> how much we know about WWI.

WWI did not permanently damage civilization on a worldwide basis.  The
"Short Nap" - the intervening 70 years - seems to me more like the time
between the fall of Rome and the rise of Charlemagne.  And probably the
light of civilization brought by the Star Vikings of the New Era will be
about as permanent as the Holy Roman Empire of Charlemagne.  Brilliant
conquerors will re-unite much of what was the old Imperium, but these new
empires will probably not last beyond their founders' lifetimes.


From: Martyn J. Wheeler <sasmjw@unx.sas.com>
>     What I like most about MegaTraveller it is the way I can run a
> game quite well by ignoring almost all the rules.  The task system
> works just fine, and with a feel for that almost anything can be
> improvised readily.  With the addition of a simple vector movement
> system, the ship combat system works.  The ship design system works.
> The world/system generation system (especially as in WBH) works.
> Admittedly, the man-to-man combat system is rather awkward, but with
> some hand-waving and improvising tasks it can be made to work without
> getting in the way of the game too badly ...

Just a curious question: is MegaTraveller your first exposure to Traveller?

The reason I ask is that just about everything you mention was available
for Classic Traveller.  The task system was introduced by Digest Group
Publications as an add-on to Classic Traveller.  A vector movement system
was included with the basic Traveller set, and another was available in the
Mayday boardgame.  High Guard provided a ship combat and ship design system
that worked.  World/System generation was available in the form of DGP's
Grand Survey and Grand Census in combination with the Scouts rulebook.  We
created a workable personal combat system out of Striker by adding in the
task system and a few rules of our own.

The way MegaTraveller was sold to me was as a way to combine, edit, and
generally clean up a mishmash of rules that required you to have 6 or 8
rulebooks, at least 3 suppliments (the two library data, plus the sector of
your choice), an adventure (Trillion Credit Squadron), and a couple of
boardgames (Mayday and Striker), plus a bunch of third-party products.

Instead, we got something which required you to be familliar with all of
that which I just mentioned, on top of which you got a bunch of all-new
errata, a dead emperor, and we were expected to buy more stuff (like the
Referee's Companion, the Rebellion Sourcebook, and COACC) to get back to
where we started from.  Plus we still had to refer to the Classic Traveller
material in order to find and fix errors.

>     The task system is (IMHO) the best thing to have ever happened to
> RPGs.  With a feel for it, I don't need character details for any NPC ...

I agree; the task system is the best feature in MT.  The conversion to
T2k2 rules bothers me a little, because I don't feel that it is as easy
and as intuitive as the current task system in MegaTraveller.  Then again,
this could just be my inexperience with the T2k2 system.  This is one reason
that I would like to be able to playtest TNE, is to prove to myself that
the switch is beneficial (or if not, to get a chance to try and fix it).

>     I am not thrilled at the concept of throwing out all the ship
> designs.  I have a lot of personal time invested in an interactive
> starship design programme.  Yes, the rules are complex. ...

One of the major problems is that most players and referees do not have a
computer available for this sort of work.  Here is definitely a case where
TML members are in the minority.

I don't have as much time invested in the current system.  I have a
computer spreadsheet that I use to create vessel designs; the spreadsheet
wasn't hard to create, and hides most of the problems with the system from
me, as I suspect your computer program does for you.  I am willing to
discard my existing designs if the new design system is an improvement over
the old one.  One of my reasons is that an improved system should make it
easier and faster to re-create the designs if need be than it was to create
them in the first place.

The current level of detail is OK, although if this level of detail
remains, then many systems should be examined for significance.  In other
words, should I really have to list an item costing Cr 150 in a ship design
that costs over Cr 1,000,000,000?  The major problem, however, has to do
with circular calculations.  There are a number of these in the current
design sequence (where one calculation depends on the result of another
which indirectly depends on the result of the first).  One that causes
frequent problems is agility, which depends on ship mass, which in turn
depends in part on the size of the power plant, which depends on the power
required to achieve the agility design goal.

>     I want a fun, detailed, ship design system.  Why not provide two
> levels of detail? ... Let one ship design be workable by hand, let the
> other be workable by paintaking hours of fiddling ...

I would support this idea.  A "basic" design system where ships are
constructed by assembling a small number of standard "modules" into
different configurations (much like the original Classic Traveller starship
design rules), and another where the designer has complete control over
every aspect of the design (and can even generate new "modules" for the
basic design system,).  I feel that if these two systems were designed and
playtested at the same time, they could be made completely compatible, so
that the designs would work together well without even the sort of
differences as was present between Book 2 and High Guard.

>     I do have one very strong negative on MT: whoever insulted our
> intelligence with that space-combat movement system must have a lot of
> bad karma.

There are also problems with the sensor rules.  As written, a ship with
only one battery (like a scoutship or most armed merchants) cannot fire at
a moving target.  The distinction (in terms of data gathered) between
active and passive sensors is also lost.  I believe I have a proposed fix
for those problems around here somewhere ...

> The
> background will not be useful to me, I fear, unless one of the
> supplements is _We Have Always Been As We Are_ (a saying attributed to
> Queen Victoria, I believe), which presents an alternate where the
> Imperium never fell.  I suspect an upbeat background might sell well.

What a great idea for a title!  I suspect that a good solid Third Imperium
sourcebook would be a great seller, too.

>  ..but heck, what do I know?  I liked _Starship Operators' Manual_...
> and _Space 1889_, come to that.  I suppose I'm just weird.

Me, too.  But don't tell anybody ;)


From: "Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au>
> Blake's 7 required all transportees to carry a special device with them
> which would allow the primary transporter to retrieve them.

I have successfully used this gimmic in other role-playing games.  With
proper limitations, it does not become too powerful; but as a general
rule, its not a good idea.

Player characters, should they get their hands on one, can use the thing
for painless, risk-free insertions and extractions ("Beam me up, Scotty!
They're about to kill me!").  This is definitely not a good idea, unless
they need this advantage to overcome an unending horde of enemies (like on
"Avon's 5"), or if it is a strictly controlled plot device (ala Star Trek).

> The moment the first anti-atom and
> normal-atom came in contact there would be a hugh amount of energy released
> and the two objects would be flung apart.

The problem with this theory is that the separation would not be instant.
In the intervening time, many more atoms would annihilate, releasing even
more energy.  More than enough to vaporize the antimatter and a good deal of
the nearby matter.  As the gas clouds mix, more matter and antimatter will
annihilate, releasing more energy.

> In a total vacum in 1G gravity if you dropped an Anti-Matter
> tennis ball on a normal-matter floor it would bounce (an awful lot) and
> release hugh amounts of energy with each bounce.

Nope, just one big bang; probably worth several dozen kilotons of TNT
(maybe more; I'm not sure), and a lot of matter and antimatter atoms blown
to escape velocity.  Any sort of containment at all would increase the
mixing and therefore the ultimate yeild.

> Secondly, all those pebbles just burnt up in my planetary atmosphere like
> small meteors do so Your Scout ship isn't as deadly as you thought 8-}.

That's just as bad; they still deposit the thermal energy into the
planetary atmosphere.  Given the speed of the pebbles, they will probably
penetrate a respectable distance (maybe even to the surface; I don't know)
into the atmosphere; the effect will be not unlike a nuclear airburst as
the pebble dumps its energy.  This was discussed in great depth a while ago
on TML; check the archives.


gwh@lurnix.COM (George William Herbert) writes:
> [about laser "ballistics" - good work!]

From some things I have read, I note that as the laser power increases,
damage efficency decreases.  This is because the laser pulse initially
heats what it has hit until it vaporises.  The light pressure from the
laser holds the vapor in; it can't expand much until the pulse ends.  After
this point, additional energy in the pulse serves mainly to superheat the
vapor (if made hot enough, the vapor will expand despite the light
pressure, scattering the beam and carrying energy away from the site of the
laser strike).  Double the energy at this point, and you get much less than
double the damage.  You may be able to increase the area of the laser beam,
and heat the vapor more (resulting in a bigger bang), but if the beam isn't
penetrating the armor plate, then the increased energy isn't doing any
good.

However, if the energy is increased by firing a train of pulses in quick
succession (fast enough that the target does not appreciably move in the
time from the first pulse to the last) then something interesting happens.
As each pulse ends, the resultant vapor gets a chance to expand.  The
following pulse starts vaporizing material at the bottom of the "pit" dug
by the previous pulse.  The result is a laser that will penetrate thicker
armor plate.

>         Simplicate.  Try a quick character system for intro players.
> (or, alternatively, include a few pages of sample characters...)

How about character templates like the Space: 1889 or Star Wars systems?  I
wouldn't want these as the only options for TNE character generation, but
it would be a good alternative to the normal character generation system
for first time players.  Some guidelines for referees, so we can create our
own templates might be a good idea, too.

I suggest putting the equipment lists and the players' version of the
background data into the players' manual (kind of like the character
generation and task system portions of the MT Players' Handbook combined
with the equipment lists and some of the background data from the Imperial
Encyclopedia).  The reason is so that players can actually use the players'
manual on an ongoing basis.  One problem with the way that MT was organized
was that the players needed access to the Players' Manual and the Imperial
Encyclopedia (but shouldn't be allowed access to other parts of the
Imperial Encyclopedia), while the referee needed access to all three books.

> DO A GOOD SYSTEM TO CONVERT MT CHARACTERS 8-)

Definitely.  Without that being available to every Traveller player that
picks up the TNE box, you may as well not call it Traveller at all.  GDW
may not want to take up space in the rulebooks with this.  A special
edition of "Imperial Lines" (or something similar) could talk about
character conversion and about bringing Classic or Mega Traveller
characters into the New Era.  This could be included in every box of the
first printing, and bound into Challenge at some point.  Such a conversion
system will probably mean importing many of the MT skills into the T2k2
system; losing skills in the conversion would be very bad; therefore, I
agree with the skill list suggestion.  I also agree with George's comments
about the trade system, vehicle design, and space combat.

> Try hard to keep the quality level up
> for the materials.  Help me convince more of these TML people
> to put their pens/typewriters/word processors where their mouths are
> (though that may be hard 8-).

Quality control is a must.  GDW's reputation in general, and Traveller's in
particular, took a rather heavy beating from MegaTraveller.  To drop the
ball again might well cost GDW the game.

Don't expect a group effort from TML; we're too much of an anarchy to do
that.  On the other hand, getting individuals to contribute may not be
as difficult as you might think.


From: Mark Watson <100022.3361@CompuServe.COM>
> Question: does this include the horrible (again, my
> opinion, maybe someone likes it) system for assigning motivation using
> playing cards?

I still chuckle about that one.  Obviously, someone at GDW has studied the
Tarot.  Maybe with TNE, GDW can include a "Traveller: The New Age" Tarot
deck in the game box ;)

> ... an article on NPC generation,
> which suggested a secondary character profile, 6 categories including
> loyalty, ambition, etc. (can't remember them, I'll find it and post more
> detail if there is interest).

Please do.  Consider this interest.

> Wildstar's starport generator: in pre TNE days, and especially during Hard
> Times, location within the Imperium (or indeed outside) would also be a
> factor, how about plus mods for the Vilani main, Core sector, Massilia, etc?
> Also, I would suggest taking out the "referee assigned" prosperity factor
> and having it generated randomly at intervals, possibly on a subsector wide
> basis, to simulate the effect of an economic cycle ("really this is a high
> traffic world but the local economy is in a downturn").

I was just thinking about that; try this on for size:

For Hard Times: -3 in Wilds, -2 in Outlands, -1 in Frontier, +0 in Safe.
                +1 if a member of a polity (in the Outlands or Wilds; this
                   DM does not apply to worlds in a faction's Safe).

Extra-Imperial Worlds: -2 for Non-Aligned, -1 for Client States
Extra-Imperial Polities: +0 (assumed to have their own internal economy)

The +1 for "designated trade route" can be applied to Hard Times as well as
to xboat and other trade routes in a stable interstellar state.  You could
even apply it to any well known and well-travelled mains, like the Vilani
Main and the Spinward Main.  It should definitely be applied to trade
"runs" like those described in the Diaspora sector.

The trading partners rule works out the DM for worlds that are on mains.
If a world is on a main it gets at least a +2 (one for each neihbor world)
and more if either of them have an A or B starport.

I preferred the referee assigned prosperity factor instead of a random one,
so that the referee could decide where and when to apply it.  If you want a
world that has a depressed local economy, simply (and arbitrarily; it's OK)
apply the -4 DM (or even more, if you feel like it).  Use this DM to paint
entire sectors as a heavily industrialized core, or to pick out individual
subsectors, clusters or even single worlds for deep depression or
spectacular productivity.

For extra-imperial explorations, the referee should probably look into
matters carefully; completely unexplored areas probably have no trade at
all.  The referee may want to compute the trade volume anyway; this could
be the world's "potential trade value" or some such.  Any independent
states out there should probably have a prosperity level assigned and local
trade generated.


wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                         in the Far Future


------------------------------
Bundle: 415
Archive-Message-Number: 4883
Date: 04 Nov 92 16:58:53 EST
From: Cynthia Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Cynthia's accumulated comments

Well, we're baaack!  BTW, I forgot to change the name on the header
back to Steve's last time I posted, so a bunch of his letters went out under
my name.  Sorry.  Any and all correspondence on p-p fusion and attitudes
toward GDW should be directed at Steve, those were his opinions, not mine.
The following are my opinions:

Wildstar lays out a starport system:

...I like it.  I just read it, so I haven't had time to apply it to
anything yet.  Gvurrdon may get the first application...

Rob Dean sez:

>I checked GEnie yesterday to see what the Internet rates are.  GEnie is
>currently charging $0.30/5000bytes of information flow, either incoming
>or outgoing.  So, getting the TML on GEnie is probalby going to cost
>about $45/month.  So, watch those inclusions, folks.

Same rate Compu$erve charges.  'S why we're switching to PsiLink as
soon as they can mail us an order form...

Scott "2G" sez:

>About updating Trav:
>Well, the feel for the game comes from the era in which it was written.
>Take a look at the old Tech level advancement charts.  The original
>appeared in '77 (25 Years ago), and to be frank, it shows.  IMO, the
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^
So, Scott, how is TNE doing in 2002?  Could you give us a report on
it? :)

>A couple of things in my private e-mail brought up cockpit design
>again.  So, I just thought I'd post my updated version about
>cockpit design.  I've changed a few things since you all saw it
last.

I still think that this is a nice idea for aircraft/vehicles & early
spacecraft, but mid-to-high tech spacecraft probably have cockpits that
look like the starship Enterprise or the Battlestar Galactica's.  And the
pilot probably operates them by saying, "Beowulf, calculate and execute
insertion into a 1600 km parking orbit" or somesuch.  Point being that the
computer probably handles the actual details of maneuvering for anything
bigger than an air/raft.

Bruce says:

>It would be interesting to have more robots around but two basic problems

>1. At what (AI) intelligence level do robots become Imperial citizens?
>   This leads you off into splinter groups for the freedom of toasters and
>   the end of slavery for all machines 8-}.

But of course!  This makes things interesting... As referee, my job
isn't to adjudicate things so Imperial citizens don't have to make tricky
moral choices ... it's to make things interesting/entertaining/enjoyable.
Will A.I.s help do that?  I think so, both in respect to themselves, and in
respect to society's reaction/adaptation to them.

>2. This is the one that prevents robots or aware machines from continuing
>   after the VIRUS.  On every planet where the VIRUS struck, one of the
>   main methods of "getting even" with organic life-forms would be to take
>   over all these robots and machines and kill everything.  This will of
>   course leave some phobias to any mechanical-self-mobile-machine.  NOBODY,
>   will want a robot around (as a cleaner, or waiter, or baby sitter, or
>   mechanic, or doctor or dentist or anything).  I think the GDW's VIRUS
>   idea just shot robots in the foot.

So you've got worlds that were unaffected by the "virus" that still
use robotic technology, and worlds where everybody has a pretty severe
"Frankenstein complex".  Some worlds might have had a Luddite reaction
to ALL hi-tech -- remember Andre Norton's "The Stars are Ours", where
the "Scientists" were blamed for the Big One, and anyone showing signs
of being educated was persecuted as an "evil" Scientist?


-- Cynthia (really!)

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

Bundle: 415
Archive-Message-Number: 4884
Subject: TravCom2
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 16:23:24 EST
From: Greg Givler <givler@bermuda.rain.com>

Announcing the Release of TravCom2, uh... TravCom1 lies in the deep
recesses of my hard drive.

What is TravCom2, well it is an attempt to integrate both Classic Traveller
and MegaTraveller Commerce systems. What I have done is create a program,
written in ARexx at the present time. That will read sector data and
create random passengers, Freight and Cargo with variable pricing.

For those of you who wish to look at the system I am looking for BETA
testers. Since the program is presently only in ARexx, Amiga owners with
ARexx are the first guinea pigs.

There are plans to port this to both Rexx, this should be easy, for OS/2
and QBasic, when I get the time, if there is enough interest.

Anyone who is interested let me know.

Features include:

Reading the GEnie Sector data for system information. You can enter
either the name of the system or the Sector Hex number.

Output to file or screen

A separate program to create Purchase and Sale forms.

Variable pricing per item ala Classic Traveller, so that a ton of
steel does not cost the same as a ton of diamonds. Also there are
trade modifiers.

Multiple Destinations, so a GM will have a set of cargos rather
than running the program multiple times.

Greg

- --
Greg Givler                 | "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics"
Commodore Product Assurance | - Mark Twain
givler@cbmvax.commodore.com |
===============================================================================

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

Bundle: 415
Archive-Message-Number: 4885
Date: Wed,  4 Nov 1992 18:52:28 -0500 (EST)
From: Eric Edward Moore <deathmaster+@cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Robots and Tech stuff

"Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au> writes:
> There seems to be this conception in SF that if you take a tennis ball of
> Anti-Matter and merge it with a tennis ball of normal matter then both
> immediately destroy each other in a slugfest of radiation and energy.  I
> don't think that would be the case.  The moment the first anti-atom and
> normal-atom came in contact there would be a hugh amount of energy released
> and the two objects would be flung apart.  The trick is to maintain the
> contact.  In a total vacum in 1G gravity if you dropped an Anti-Matter
> tennis ball on a normal-matter floor it would bounce (an awful lot) and
> release hugh amounts of energy with each bounce.

Where is the tennis ball going to go that it won't come in contact
with matter?  And why is all the antimatter going to stay together in
one lump with all this energy floating around?  At 300 K the avewrage
speed of these molecules will be somewhere around 10000 m/s this means
that the average number of collisions on one cm^2 will be on the order
of 10^25 collisions per second.  Each colission releases about 10^-10
J for a 10^15 Watt power output.  (back of envelope calculations,
subject to gross inaccuracies, but I can't be *that* far off).

What you would probably get is an expanding plasma cloud of antimatter
with a hot boundary where the antimatter is overtaking the matter.
Basically a big explosion....

> Secondly, all those pebbles just burnt up in my planetary atmosphere like
> small meteors do so Your Scout ship isn't as deadly as you thought 8-}.

Small normal meteors travel at considerably slower speeds and
therefore don't burn quite so hot (like A-Bomb+ temps) when they burn
up in your atmosphere...

-Love, Kisses, and a Neutron Bomb
-Eric the Finn

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

Bundle: 415
Archive-Message-Number: 4886
Date: Wed,  4 Nov 1992 19:11:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Eric Edward Moore <deathmaster+@cmu.edu>
Subject: Economics

Personally I'm dying to get a working understanding of imperial
economics (esp. trade).  What we need are some indexes of how much
cheaper certain things are to produce at various places, and the cost
to transport things.  The second can be worked out by figuring out the
minimal ship to move a ton of cargo (assuming say a REALLY big ship,
or ideally, best theoretical case).

(bulk) trade will occur when it's cheaper to buy abroad and ship than to
manufacture locally.

Example: suppose cost to ship is cr1000/ton and that stuff becomes 10%
cheaper to make every TL.  Then anything that costs more than
cr10000/ton to make on your TL14 world it will pay to import from the
TL15 world.

This example sucks, because the TL14 world has *nothing* to sell to
the TL15 world.  But if the cost to make food decreases by 5% per tech
level and the cost to make tractors decreased by 15% per tech level
then the two worlds will trade.  TL14 world makes food at cr20000/ton
and tractors at cr30000/ton TL15 world can make food at 19,000/ton and
tractors at cr25,500/ton.  At first glance it looks like the TL15
world will not want to trade, but if you consider it, they can make
*more* money by spending their time making tractors, and selling them
to the TL14 world, and paying the inflated food costs...  (I know,
volumes needed are not equal, but you get the point.)

Any ideas on where to fudge numbers from?

-Love, Kisses, and a Neutron Bomb
-Eric the Finn

------------------------------
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 416  4887 04-Nov-1992 Steve Higginbot  Rift Crossing made easy. << Sulaiman:
 416  4888 04-Nov-1992 Steve Higginbot  Various babbling.... << Wildstar:
 416  4889 04-Nov-1992 l.wiseman1@geni  Assorted Remarks <<  Steve Higginbotham
 416  4890 04-Nov-1992 Andrew Salamon   The Beginning of Cyber-not-so-punk? <<
 416  4891 05-Nov-1992 metlay           ImperialLines Magazine << As Historian,
 416  4892 05-Nov-1992 Theresa Verity   Attention video buffs... <<    I am tru
 416  4893 05-Nov-1992 CS171308011@UTS  More on Controls & Lasers << Hey folx,
 416  4894 05-Nov-1992 SULAIMAN@ecs.um  Traveller stuff for sale << Hi,
 416  4895 05-Nov-1992 Martyn J. Wheel  Various, ship design mostly << Wildstar
 416  4896 05-Nov-1992 Steve Higginbot  more Ramblings << Jim sez:
 416  4897 05-Nov-1992 Leonard Erickso  cost of mailing list <<
 416  4898 06-Nov-1992 grue@cs.uq.oz.a  Hull materials in trav << hi,
 416  4899 05-Nov-1992 Eric Edward Moo  Zhodani Controls << If psi shields are
 416  4900 05-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Vilani Pilots and Old Aircraft << CS171

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4887
Date: 04 Nov 92 19:53:57 EST
From: Steve Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Rift Crossing made easy.

Sulaiman:
<Better?  I apologize for the misspelling.  I get annoyed
enough when mine gets misspelled that I shouldn't do unto others>

>From: Steve Higginbotham
>         ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Hopefully this is correct :-)

It is.  Thanks...

>>How and why?  1090?  In my TCS game, there are at least two ships, one
>>TL-10, one TL-12, that are theoretically capable of crossing the Rift.

> Two out of how many? What's their total useful tonnage?

two DESIGNS.  Out of perhaps 100.  The smaller is a five thousand-tonner,
the larger is a 20,000+ tonner.  There are about 50 samples of the two
designs present.
In addition, there are perhaps 300 other ships (five or so designs) that
could cross the rift with a little advance preparation.  All these other
300 were MUCH larger.

>I think you missed the whole point of the argument. The problem isn't if
>its possible, the problem is whether its VIABLE. What is the ratio of
>useful cargo to fuel for such vessels? If you are transporting more than
>10 people what is its size?

Assuming that the larger rift-crosser (it isn't actually used for that, but
could do it), and assuming you were in no special hurry, you could carry
16,000T of useful cargo from the one side to the other, going through any
area in the rift with a Jump-8 path, or better.  Cut that to 10,000T if you
only have a J-10 route.  This would require 25,000T of drop tanks for each
J-8 (or J-10) transit.  Do that four times, and you are across the rift.
So that makes a cost of MCr100 for the tanks (plus, of course, the
machinery required to build tanks when you reach a system) to move 16,000T.
Cr6250 per ton moved.  Cr 3125 per person in low berth.  What's the big deal?


>The other problem is that as my reference to crossing of Reft and the
>original Aslan book reveals that the region was not mapped till recently.

The Aslan have been crossing the rift for about a thousand years.  Not my
definition of "recent".



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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4888
Date: 04 Nov 92 20:17:22 EST
From: Steve Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Various babbling....

Wildstar:

>Believe it or not, I haven't had any comments on my virus posting yet.  For

 Actually, I accidently overwrote it before I could comment on it.

>Come to think of it, I haven't heard anything on the starport traffic and
>facilities generator, nor have I heard back on the vector movement system.

Starport facilities:  good.  More complications for each world, but that's
what databases are for...

Vector movement system.  I hate to say this, but that was NOT simpler than
Mayday.  Not even in the same time zone as "simpler".


Metlay:

> (Five will get you ten that Bart Massey was referring to me, folx.)

And here I thought he was talking about me...


>> BTW, I missed something:  "pay for the privilege"?  What was that
>> supposed to mean?

>Loren Wiseman gets TML through the Genie<=>Internet mail gateway.  He
>(presumably actually GDW) has to pay for each and every byte.  Ouch.

I have to pay for it too.  I don't get bent out of shape when someone
disagrees with me.  I just try to convince them.

Steve

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4889
From: l.wiseman1@genie.geis.com
Date: Wed,  4 Nov 92 23:08:00 EDT
Subject: Assorted Remarks

 Steve Higginbotham:
 > BTW, I missed something:  "pay for the privilege"?  What was that
 supposed to mean?

 It means that GDW pays for Internet access...we don't have a university
 or a megacorp to pick up the tab. Actually, since its going to my private
 GEnie account, it means that _I_ am paying for the privilege of seeing
 TML (we'll see if Frank OKs the voucher I turn in).

 To the TML at large: Perhaps I should explain a couple of
 things...all BBS connections I do for GDW are done on my home
 machine, after working hours. The office phone lines are too noisy
 for a modem (and the phone company seems unable to fix that without
 large infusions of money). This all comes out of my so-called "free
 time." Only on rare occasions does Frank Chadwick or anyone else from
 GDW actually lay hands on my keyboard. All of the material people ask
 to be forwarded to them is transferred to disk or printed out and shoved
 under their respective noses.

 I get Biweekly TML delivery, so I won't be posting more than once or
 twice a week, although I'll try to answer Email letters faster.

 ******************

 Steve Higginbotham, Mike Metlay, Mark Watson, Lewis Taylor Goss,
 your notes have been given to Frank Chadwick and David Nilsen, as
 requested.

 ******************

 To Mike (the Rantmeister? ;- ) Metlay:

 I decided to sign up for TML acess after numerous individuals here
 strongly encouraged me to do so. I'm pretty thick-skinned (and I can
 curse in four languages if the situation warrants), but I see no point
 in carrying on endless "Oh Yeah, well you're another!" exchanges (they
 get in the way of free discussion).

 Let me clarify one final point: If somebody says a game I produce is a
 piece of crap, I can live with that (it happens often
 enough)...that's a matter of personal taste. If, however, somebody
 calls me an idiot, or says that GDW employees are totally lacking in
 brain cells, I see that as a personnal attack. I'll try not to engage
 in personal attacks, and I hope others will do the same.

 Rob Dean:
 One brief question for GDW, if you don't mind my asking--what sort of
 numbers are we expecting for common Traveller weapons in TNE?  Say, a
 laser carbine and a gauss rifle as examples.

 Good question. I haven't completely worked them out yet. This is a
 rather complicated undertaking, since bullet weight, muzzle velocity,
 and the other factors needed for the rating equation is not readily
 available for some of the Traveller weapons. Energy weapons are
 also a problem, as no rating formula has been worked up yet. There _is_
 a laser carbine rated in Dark Conspiracy, representing a primitive weapon
 with a back-pack power unit. I suspect that the ratings for the plasma guns
 and the like will prove to be deadly enough for you.

 ********************

 My thanks to John, Brian, Steve, and George for their expansions and
 clarifications on my brief discussion of the T2K2 system.

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

 Wildstar Your Vector (Delta-Vee) Movement System and Virus suggestions
 are in the hands of Frank and Dave. Frank, I know, has read the Virus
 material.

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

Well, that's all for now.

 Loren K. Wiseman
            representing GDW, Inc.

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4890
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 22:04:39 PST
From: salamon@jeeves.UCSD.EDU (Andrew Salamon)
Subject: The Beginning of Cyber-not-so-punk?

From Associated Press (hope they don't mind :)
LA Times  Friday, October 30, 1992

  Tiny electrodes implanted in a blind woman's brain allowed her to "see"
distinct dots of light- a method that may produce an artificial vision device
in several years, doctors said Thursday.
  The experiment "gives us firm evidence that artificial vision for the blinded
person is an achievable goal, hopefully before the end of the decade," said Dr.
Murray Goldstein, director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders
and Stroke.
  "Our initial goal is to develop a stadium scoreboard type of display so they
could read printed material and recognize street signs," navigate through
doorways and avoid obstacles, said Dr. Terry Hambrecht, an institute physician.
  The government experiment, part of a 20-year, $10-million research effort,
was revealed during the annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience.  It was
kept secret because "we didn't want to spread false hope if the experiment
failed," Goldstein said.
  The experiment on the 42-year-old blind woman started when she underwent
surgery in November, 1991, at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center
in Bethesda, Md.  The woman, a volunteer whose identity was not disclosed, lost
her eyesight due to glaucoma 20 years ago, Hambrecht said.
  During her operation, Drs. Conrad Kufta and Daniel O'Rourke removed a
1-by-2-inch section of her skull and implanted 38 "micro-electrodes" into her
visual cortex, the part of the brain that receives signals from the eyes.
  Tiny gold wires attached to each electrode protruded from her skull.  When
electric currents were applied to the wires, 34 of the 38 electrodes worked,
allowing her to "see" 34 dots of blue, purple, red and yellow light that ranged
from the size of a pinhead to the size of a nickel held at arms length and that
could be adjusted in brightness.
  Hambrecht and other researchers mapped where each electrode produced a dot in
the woman's perceived field of vision.  That let them apply current to four
electrodes so the woman could "see" the letter I, he said.
  Eventually, scientists envision a device that would include a miniature
television camera attached to eyeglasses frames:  The TV picture of a blind
person's surroundings would be sent to electrodes permanently implanted in the
brain and the user would experience the sensation of seeing a picture made up
of 250 to 1000 spots of light.

****End of Included Text****
  While I found this fascinating, the AP leaves a bit to be desired in terms of
references.  I searched Medline but found no reference to this experiment,
although I did find some of Kufta and O'Rourke's previous papers.  If anyone
hears anything else about this could you let me know?
  Another item they neglected to mention was how long the electrodes stayed
implanted and continued working.  I was always under the impression that this
was one of the most difficult parts about directly stimulating nerve cells:
they tend to die off.

  What does this have to do with Traveller?  Well...It's late and I thought
some of our more cyber-ish players out there might find it interesting, and
it's late...

Andrew
Etienne de Mer, Ex-Captain Imperial Navy.  Pilot, carries a fancy blade, slips
into a (bad) Neo-French accent in times of stress. deMer@engrg.uwo.ca

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4891
From: metlay@netcom.com (metlay)
Subject: ImperialLines Magazine
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 8:12:45 PST


As Historian, I'm supposed to keep this mag on file for reference.
However, my research commitments (and my music, and the PBeM) have
kept me from shopping around for it. How does one get it, what does
it cost, how many issues are out, and how tough is it to get back
issues? Does anyone have any issues I could borrow to look at and decide
if they're worth paying for? (I understand the price per page is
substantial...?)

- --
metlay            | and she's a master of return hitting
atomic city       | giving rhythm to her posts
                  | so you read her and think hey it sounds good
metlay@netcom.com | and wish her posts had a soundtrack too    (f. ercolessi)

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4892
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 11:37:36 -0500
From: Theresa Verity <uwfgamer%uwf.bitnet@utcs.utoronto.ca>
Subject:      Attention video buffs...

   I am truely sorry in interrupting the discussion, but this is an
urgent plea...  Does ANYBODY have a copy of the complete episodes of
an animation called AEON FLUX (it's not Japanese)?  It was one of the
strange shorts that ran like a series in M-TV's Liquid Television last
year...  I've only got about 3 episodes and I heard there was around
9 to 12 in the completed version...  I have also been told that the
complete version was included in some campus entertainment programs
and may have been used as a video backdrop in some alternative dance
halls...
   I THINK it's a French animation and was completed sometime in 1988.
Any help would be appreciated...  All coorespondance to: UWFGAMER @
UWF.CC.UWF.EDU or to P.O. Box 37614, Pensacola, FL  32526-0614.
   ... Now to your regular discussion >> BSSZZZreatchhh <<<.. (+)

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4893
Date:    Thu, 5 Nov 1992 13:46:02 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: More on Controls & Lasers

Hey folx,

Sorry for the sloppy editing yesterday, having computer troubles.

I sed:
>I just thought I'd post my updated version about
>cockpit design.

Cynthia sez:
}I still think that this is a nice idea for aircraft/vehicles & early
}spacecraft, but mid-to-high tech spacecraft probably have cockpits that
}look like the starship Enterprise or the Battlestar Galactica's.  And the
}pilot probably operates them by saying, "Beowulf, calculate and execute
}insertion into a 1600 km parking orbit" or somesuch.  Point being that the
}computer probably handles the actual details of maneuvering for anything
}bigger than an air/raft.

Yeah, voice control is nice, and possible.  The books I've read on cockpit
design talk about voice control & the possiblilities.  But for quick
control inputs (attack, evasion, landing) where piloting skill comes into
effect, you want that control stick.  I can move my left hand a LOT faster
than I can say "Break right!  Come to course zero nine five!"  I can make
my right hand move a lot faster than I can say "Full throttle!"
Ever play with a flight simulator?  Say like Wing Commander?  Imagine
trying to give all the control input's verbally...
Yes, the computer Does all the maneuvering, and not just for
air/rafts:  air/rafts have computers too.  But the control INPUT is from
a stick.

Remember that most of the high performance starships have the same maneuver
capabilities as the fighters.  As such they can perform the same maneuvers
and will require the same control inputs.

If all is voice controlled, then where does piloting control come in?
Why a dexterity bonus?  (Unless the pilot is a stutterer...  :-)
---------------
I sed:
> I wouldn't mind if TNE used A.I. much more extensively.  It would broaden
> the base appeal of the game, and if done carefully, wouldn't change it
> too much.

Wildstar sez:
}Wouldn't change it too much?  Heck, no!  It would be like a return to the
}"good old days".  Back when I started playing Traveller...

A yep.

Me:
> I could not keep that beam off of me.
> Even with that clumsy binocular/laser arrangement I just
> could not evade that beam without good cover.
> Hitting a target with a laser weapon will be VERY easy.

He:
}Did they try giving you another binocular/laser so that you could "shoot
}back" every once and a while?  I bet having to worry about *THAT* might
}spoil someone's aim pretty quick!

No.  I was 100 yards away without an extension cord.  But the point is
that that binocular/laser thing was about as clumsy a weapon arrangement
as you can imagine.  Picture this:  A pair of binoculars with a brick
attached.  No pistol grip, no rifle stock, just something you can barely
wrap both hands around to keep it from falling apart.  Now, I'm no
marksmen, (I fired a .22 ONCE *In the dark*) but I believe 100 yards is
pretty much outside pistol range.  Yet this clumsy thing was deadly
accurate.  At pistol range it would have been even better.

Me:
> Solomani and most Imperial flight controls generally consist
> of stick, throttle, and rudder pedals.

Wildstar:
}It was quite a while ago, but when I designed the Gold of Zurrian, I was
}told (and this was "official" information at the time) that most Imperial
}vessels used the *VILANI* conventions, not the Solomani.  I don't believe
}this has changed.

Where did you read this?  It kinda makes sence, even fitting with my
estimate, but where did it come from?  The Vilani setup I described
would be a lot easier to handle than the Solomani one with rudder pedals
if your feet were of the wrong configuration.  PLEASE tell me where you
read this.  I didn't know anybody else thought about stuff like this.

Me:
> The stick is usually
> mounted in the center of the console, but is sometimes on the left
> side, while the right hand generally controls the throttle.

Wildstar:
}If there is only one pilot, then the throttles may be on either side,
}depending on the whim of the designer; I believe that a left-side placement
}is more common, because most Solomani are right-handed, and will want to
}use their right hands for the control stick.  For the same reason, a side
}mounted control stick will usually be on the right (this was certainly the
}case of the F-18 cockpit mockup that I "flew" a number of years ago).

Most aircraft I know of, (where I've seen the cockpit) have a right hand
throttle.  I know the F-16 has a left hand throttle, and your testimony
for the F-18, but an F-14 pilot friend told me that that was the exception
not the rule.  I guess the Solomani of Trav will probably have both left
and right side sticks.

Me: (On Vilani)
> the same control panel exists on a Vilani fat trader as exists
> on their air/rafts and their most sophisticated fighters.

}I think this sounds like a very Vilani thing to do.  Since the Vilani
}design philosophy is more common in the Imperium, this would explain why
}anyone with "Pilot" skill can fly anything from a Scoutship up to the
}largest warship or transport.  It also explains the skill cross over
}between air/raft, ship's boat, and pilot skills.

MMM.  After all, what Vilani pilot will want to have to understand
all that technical stuff behind the control panel?
"When this light turns red:  That is very bad."
"What if the light is in a different spot on the panel?"
"It won't be."

}No, you don't let the wheels swivel freely like on a Adrian Hurt's shopping
}trolley.  Modern-day crosswind gear is powered (hydraulically or
}electrically), so that the pilot selects the crosswind angle with a cockpit
}control, and the main gear swivels to match.  After you are down, you dial
}it back to zero, and use a little steering wheel to steer the nosewheel.
}This is the sort of system that is used on modern large transports (just
}about everything since the Boeing 707).  No problem with high speed taxi.

Yeah yer right, but small aircraft don't have powered crosswind gear.
So Vilani, (taught as generically as possible) will have to be taught
DO NOT TAXI TOO FAST!  There's probably a governer in the computer
somewhere.

> [Droyne controls]
}I'm not convinced with this one, but it makes for a good story!

Well, before I ran outta money, I learned quite a bit as a student pilot.
One of the things I kept wishing for was more appendages, and an instict
for things like angles of attack, bank etc.  If I had wings and the
corresponding insticnt (even if it's vestigial) flying would be a LOT
easier.  After all, the earliest droyne flying machines
are basically gonna be mechanical versions of their wings.  Seems to me
that a mechanical linkage would be the easiest way to maintain control.
Why use your hands (which don't know how to fly) when your wings are just
as good (or better) and free up your hands to operate more secondary
controls.
I can imagine that the Droyne might install some large fans over the
pilot's station to give him a 'feel' for the way the ship or plane is
performing.  He could feel a stall building up by the airflow over his
wings inside the cockpit.
(I wonder what it'll be like when the Alcyon crew gets a load
of the Bernoulli's cockpit  :-)

Me: (on K'Kree)
> The pilot lies in a couch arrangement with his
> four hooves touching the floor.  By leaning in one direction or
> another, the ship's attitude is changed.

Wildstar:
}This was tried in early human flight experiments (strapping the pilot
}into a yoke and having him lean to control yaw motion).  This was
}abandonded as ineffective, but it would be like the K'kree to stick
}with the first system they thought of.

:-)  Now you got the idea!  When an alien has all those extra appendages,
USE 'EM!

Wildstar:
}References: "Jet-Age Test Pilot" (Tex Johnston's autobiography, published
}by Bantam).  "Smithsonian Book of Flight" (Walter Boyne, published by
}the Smithsonian Press).

I'd also recomend "Future Fighters" (Salamander books, I forget the author)
(M. Spinks?)

}Visit the National Air and Space Museum.

Have done many times.
Hey, Wildstar, go to Garber Flight Restoration Facility in Silver Hill.
Call in advance & find out when my brother Jim is giving a tour of the
hangers.  He's a docent on weekends.  :-)

}Adrian Hurt writes:
}[Concerns of Zho psi pilot station]

Wildstar:
}Presumably if anybody could do it, the Zhodani could.  Perhaps the fighter
}controls only respond to somebody sitting nearby, or maybe you have to
}flick a special control when you start up the system, so that the computer
}can store the pilot's mental pattern (flick-print?).  From then on until
}flick control is turned off, the computer only responds to inputs from
}the person with the right mental pattern.

Sounds good, thanks!  I'll use it!

2G Scott

------------------------------
Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4894
Date: 05 Nov 1992 14:45:42 -0500
From: SULAIMAN@ecs.umass.edu
Subject: Traveller stuff for sale


Hi,

I've got some old Traveller stuff that I'd like to get rid off. So
I would like to auction it off. All the stuff is in Good to Excellent
shape. Good meaning that covers are a bit scruffy and I might have
written inside with a pencil. Excellent, meaning like new or very close
to it. The minimum bid is $2.50 for the small books and $5.00 for the
larger ones. These items are all by GDW for Traveller.

Book 1Characters and Combat
Book 2Starships
Book 3 Worlds and Adventure
Book 4  Mercenary
Book 5High Guard
Book 6Scouts
Book 8  ROBOTS

Supplement 11001 Characters
Supplement 3Spinward Marches
Supplement 4  Citizens of the Imperium
Supplement 676 Patrons
        Supplement 8Library Data A-M
Supplement 9Fighting Ships
Supplement 10Solomani Rim
Supplement 11Library Data N-Z
Supplement 12   Forms and Charts

Adventure 2research station Gamma
Adventure 3Twilight's Peak
Adventure 4Leviathan
Adventure 6Expedition to Zhodane
Adventure 8Prison Planet
Adventure 9Nomads of the World Ocean
Adventure 10Safari Ship
Adventure 12Secret of the Ancients
Adventure 13Signal GK

Double Adv 1Annic Nova/Shadows
        Double Adv 2Across the Bright Face/Mission to Mithril
        Double Adv 3Argon Gambit/Death Station
        Double Adv 4Marooned/Marooned Alone
        Double Adv 5Chamax Plague/Horde

Big Books:
Atlas of the Imperium
Alien Module 3 Vargr

Please e-mail to

sulaiman@ecs.umass.edu

Cost of shipping will be added to overall cost.

Ameer

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4895
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 14:21:24 -0500
From: Martyn J. Wheeler <sasmjw@unx.sas.com>
Subject: Various, ship design mostly

Wildstar asks:
>Just a curious question: is MegaTraveller your first exposure to Traveller?

No, actually.  I started with Classic Traveller, although nothing like
as seriously as my current campaign.  I did not, however, equip myself
with quite as many supplements as most of the TML: I did not get
Mayday, Striker, TCS, or any of the Digest Group stuff -- I suspect
the DGP material was perhaps less readily available in England as in
the USA.  My first introduction to the task system was therefore in
MegaTraveller.

On ship design:

>The major problem, however, has to do with circular calculations.

They're not really circular, they are mutually interdependent.  As I
implemented it, you can change the power plant output and the agility
will be adjusted; you can change the agility and it will find the
power plant size by iteration.

The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of a two-level
design system.  I could really use a quick method of generating
designs in addition to the detailed one.  If GDW wanted to keep the
basic rules simple, a _Starship Operators Manual_ with the complex
design rules.

Your point about most players not having a computer is something that
has actually been brought home fairly heavily.  My programme was
written for an NCR Decision Mate V and although it ran MS-DOS on an
8088 the screen control characters were not exactly compatible with my
new IBM-clone PC -- I am faced with the prospect of a hurried porting
job in my copious spare time (hah!) and hoping the old compiler runs
on the new machine.  Meanwhile, I'm looking through the vehicle archives...

Now what I could *really* use is a Computer-Aided deck plan layout
system, preferably integrated with the design parameter system so I
could do everythign at once.  The characters in my campaign are far
too keen on boarding inoperative ships...

Martyn
- --------------sasmjw@unx.sas.com----(Martyn Wheeler)----DoD #293--------------
SAS Institute, Inc: (919) 677-8000 ext.7954    H: (919) 839-0092 (Raleigh, NC)

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4896
Date: 05 Nov 92 21:12:23 EST
From: Steve Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: more Ramblings

Jim sez:

>Cellophane went out of style real quick after some bug decided it liked
>the stuff.

        Is that what it was?  I always thought it went out of style because
it was *highly* flammable, and they developed less flammable replacements.

>Has anyone ever read an old SF short about these aliens that thought they could
>destroy the earth's economy by dropping a pair of duplicators on earth before
>they invaded?

        Yes.  I read it in either one of the Analog collections or one of
the anthologies of classic SF stories.  Long, long ago...

Greg Givler:

>What is TravCom2, well it is an attempt to integrate both Classic Traveller
 .....
>There are plans to port this to both Rexx, this should be easy, for OS/2
>and QBasic, when I get the time, if there is enough interest.

>Anyone who is interested let me know.

        Since I run OS/2 here at the office, I'm interested.  (Gawd, I love
OS/2 2.0!!)  What are the differences between ARexx and Rexx?

To Mark Cook/Dan Corrin:
        I've been altering your old xssv program to display a subsector
in a reasonable amount of screen acreage for a SVGA display.  It's still
an X program, tho.  Do you have a more recent version?  If I ever get so
inspired as to port it to DOS or OS/2 or Windows, does anyone want a copy?
Does anyone want to inspire me?  Does anyone know how to convert X bitmaps
to Windows .BMP files?

Wildstar sez:

>WWI did not permanently damage civilization on a worldwide basis.
        It did, however, do a good job of trashing Europe for a generation.
As did the U.S. Civil War to the South.  Both places experienced severe
economic depressions, loss of industrial base, some loss of population base...
They might provide a model for the Hard Times/Short Nap milieux.  Post-WWI
Europe (or post-100 Years War Europe) was splintered into a number of
economically damaged but independent states that were ripe for "any man on
a horse" to come along and "save" them.  I expect to see a similar situation
early in the "Short Nap" -- small polities ruled by dictators trying to
conquer their neighbors as a way of improving the situation at home (or
taking the populace's minds off their own problems).
        Contrariwise, the South after the Civil War was economically
damaged, but under the control of a healthy industrial state.  It merely
languished as a provincial backwater for about a century.  I expect to see
a similar situation in areas where the "Safes" (including the Empire of Deneb)
control Hard Times damaged areas (the Hard Times "frontiers").

>The "Short Nap" - the intervening 70 years - seems to me more like the time
>between the fall of Rome and the rise of Charlemagne.
        Poor example, Fall of Rome to Charlemagne is about 350 years, not
70.  Good example, in that I think the TNE should be set about 200-300 years
after, not 70.  In 70 years, too many people who remember the Imperium are
still around, and TOO MUCH IMPERIAL TECHNOLOGY STILL WORKS.  Two or three
hundred years is recent enough that PCs can have heard stories from their
grandparents about how it was under the Imperium, and late enough that
surviving TL 15 gear will be rare, delicate museum pieces if it exists at all.

>And probably the
>light of civilization brought by the Star Vikings of the New Era will be
>about as permanent as the Holy Roman Empire of Charlemagne.  Brilliant
>conquerors will re-unite much of what was the old Imperium, but these new
>empires will probably not last beyond their founders' lifetimes.
        See note above about "man on a horse".  Charlemagne's empire broke
up because of a poorly planned succession policy.  Alexander's empire had
the same problem.  For a contrary example, note how long Rome held on to
Caesar's conquests in Gaul.  The Romans had a well-established routine for
transfer of rule from one proconsul to another, and they were clearly
subordinate to Rome's authority; Charlemagne's sons and Alexander's heirs
were equals with no central authority to bind them together.
        Point being, viability of interstellar states will depend on internal
politics, not how many years after the collapse of the Imperium it is.

More on the starport codes:
        I still haven't tried it, so I can't suggest what tuning it might
need yet.  However, the Traffic code seems to be a natural to apply to
the Passengers Available/Cargos & Freight Available tables as a mod.
In addition to the existing mods, use it either as a direct add to the
number of passengers, or as a (Code/5) mod to the number of passengers.
For Cargoes & Freight, Traffic should be a *negative* mod to amount
available.  Why?  My reasoning is that the standard table should actually
be called the "Spot Cargoes and Unscheduled Tramp Freighter Consignments
& Passengers Table"; an entirely different table should be used for
"Subsidized Merchants and Scheduled Liners", and a really different one
for "Perpetual Contract Bulk Haulers".  (SOMEday I might draw them up...)
The more traffic/trade through a port, the more likely cargo and passengers
are to be flying on a subsidized, *regularly scheduled* merchant or liner,
or consigned to a contracted bulk hauler.  Thus, fewer cargoes or passengers
for unscheduled tramp freighters (read: free traders).

                -- Cynthia

"Microwaves are teeny, weeny little waves" -- wireless LAN salesman

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4897
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 13:46:08 PDT
From: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: cost of mailing list


Cynthia Higginbotham says that Compu$erve charge for Internet mail are in the 
$0.30/5000 bytes range.

This is incorrect. If you use the "standard" pricing plan it is true. If you 
use the *alternative* pricing plan you only get charged for connect time.

At 9600 bps, it costs $24.74/hr. Assuming only 4800 bps "real" troughput, it 
costs about 7 cents per 5000 bytes.
- --
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson
Internet: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4898
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 13:12:55 +1000
From: grue@cs.uq.oz.au
Subject: Hull materials in trav

hi,

Sorry about throwing things back, but I'm catching up on missed messages
and I couldn't let this pass by (-:

I think that there may be a way to produce a ship hull without
all the problems about welding plates together and so forth.  If the hull
is originally formed as a solid lump of whatever you are building it out
of.  We might as well assume that it is something disguisting to work
with (like the titanium stuff or supa-dense).  Cast on big lump in the
approximate shape you want the finished product to be (this isn't even
totally necessary) and then cut away all the bits you don't want with
something that will cut stubborn materials (fusion torch?  plasma welder?)
In effect you tunnel the ship out of a hunk of iridium or whatever.  While
doing this smoothing out the exteriour wouldn't prove too hard.

Traveller already assumes that this is how planetoid hulls are produced, would
there be any major problems making all hulls this way (except for the huge
wastage it entails)?



        Pauli

Paul Dale                       | grue@cs.uq.oz.au
Department of Computer Science  | +61 7 365 2445
University of Queensland        |
Australia, 4072                 | Did you know that there are 41 two letter
                                |     words containing the letter 'a'?

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4899
Date: Thu,  5 Nov 1992 23:19:58 -0500 (EST)
From: Eric Edward Moore <deathmaster+@cmu.edu>
Subject: Zhodani Controls

If psi shields are directional we can prevent unautorized flicking by
using two orthogonal shielded "flickers" such that only the person at
the intersection can flick the controls.  easier than a "flick-print"

-Love, Kisses, and a Neutron Bomb
-Eric the Finn

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

Bundle: 416
Archive-Message-Number: 4900
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 23:49:13 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Vilani Pilots and Old Aircraft

CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU (Scott Kellogg) writes:
> Wildstar:
> }It was quite a while ago, but when I designed the Gold of Zurrian, I was
> }told (and this was "official" information at the time) that most Imperial
> }vessels used the *VILANI* conventions, not the Solomani.  I don't believe
> }this has changed.
>
> Where did you read this?  It kinda makes sence, even fitting with my
> estimate, but where did it come from?  The Vilani setup I described
> would be a lot easier to handle than the Solomani one with rudder pedals
> if your feet were of the wrong configuration.  PLEASE tell me where you
> read this.  I didn't know anybody else thought about stuff like this.

I designed the Gold of Zurrian the Tukera Lines luxury passenger liner
featured in Travellers' Digest #4.  Joe Fugate specifically requested
that I draw deckplans for the *whole* ship, including things like all of
the bridge positions and the layout of the engineering compartments.

Without thinking about it, I laid out the bridge with the pilot and
copilot all the way forward, and with the pilot on the left.  Behind and
to either side of the pilot, I placed the engineering bridge repeater,
and the internal systems monitor station.  At the aft end, I placed the
navigator and the ship's computer primary console; both of these facing
in the opposite direction, towards a large (2 meter diameter) spherical
holographic display.

After Joe Fugate and Marc Miller had reviewed the plans, a few small
changes were made.  The pilot and copilot positions where switched "the
arrangement of pilot and copilot with the pilot on the right follows
Vilani tradition" (Travellers' Digest #4, p25).  At the time, I was told
that most ships in the Imperium followed Vilani tradition (this may be
documented in a letter from Joe Fugate, but I cannot locate it with a
quick search of my files).

Designing the ship was a good bit harder than most starship designs I
have done.  Part of the problem was that drawings of the exterior of the
ship (in particular, those done by Keith for the Traveller Adventure);
any deckplans had to match the exteriors.  What I did then (and what I
still do for deckplans) is make a mathematical model of the shape (break
it down into basic geometric shapes, and relate them to one another: the
conical nose section is 1.5 times as long as the body is high, etc).
Then I solve for the volume of the hull (and try to err on the side of
slightly too much volume, rather than too little).  In many cases, the
same shape gets re-used for other ships, scaled up or down in size, or
"stretched" in one dimension or another.  There is precedent for this:
the Russian aircraft design bureaus use standardized airframe shapes,
scaled in size to fit the mission.  This is why many Russian aircraft
look so much like bigger or smaller versions of other Russian aircraft.

Then I can do a dimensioned exterior drawing of the ship, and a
cut-away.  I then divide the cut-away iinto decks, and figure out the
planform of each deck.  Meanwhile, I use the ship design to figure out
the size of all of the components in terms of deck-plan squares.  I
xerox the planforms several times, and block in the major components in
different ways until I am happy with their placement.  This rough sketch
is refined, and details filled in.  Using this as a guide, a scale
drawing is prepared (to the same scale, 1/2"=1.5m, as was used by the
Azhanti High Lightning, if at all possible).  Copies are made (most copy
shops can duplicate drawings up to 11"x17") at full scale, and in
reduced size (almost any copyier today can reduce 11"x17" down to
8.5"x11" with a standard setting).  And that's it: deckplans for every
purpose.

> Hey, Wildstar, go to Garber Flight Restoration Facility in Silver Hill.
> Call in advance & find out when my brother Jim is giving a tour of the
> hangers.  He's a docent on weekends.  :-)

I intent to very soon.  I just finished Boyne's "The Treasures of Silver
Hill" and I want to go out there and see all the neat stuff.  The "Jug"
(WWII Thunderbolt fighter) is currently on temporary display at NASM,
and I understand that the Ar-234 (the WWII German jet bomber) will be
next.


wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                         in the Far Future

------------------------------
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 417  4901 06-Nov-1992 Alex Jeffries    Virtual gravitics in starships <<
 417  4902 06-Nov-1992 Jeff Zeitlin     starship fuel << TML::>BTW, is fuel liq
 417  4903 06-Nov-1992 "Pedro A.C. Tav  T2000 mechanics: vehicles << ****** #1
 417  4904 06-Nov-1992 Michael A. Surm  On agriculture production and tech leve
 417  4905 06-Nov-1992 eabaltz@Athena.  Anti-tennis balls << The conversion fro
 417  4906 06-Nov-1992 metlay           PBEM Update and Announcement of Player
 417  4907 06-Nov-1992 Steve Higginbot  carving a hull, and agriculture in Gamb
 417  4908 07-Nov-1992 Does it matter?  Robots and Starship operation << Thanks
 417  4909 07-Nov-1992 PPUGLIESE@pimac  DOS ports << This in reply to Cynthia's
 417  4910 07-Nov-1992 Hans Rancke-Mad  Merchant navies & TLs. << Wildstar writ
 417  4911 07-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Calculations and CAD packages << Martyn
 417  4912 08-Nov-1992 Hans Rancke-Mad  The Sword Worlds << Here's some ideas a
 417  4913 07-Nov-1992 Seth the Lesser  Robotic brains and starship design << R
 417  4914 08-Nov-1992 Todd Bradley     Snapshot << Hi.  I'm a Classic Travelle
 417  4915 08-Nov-1992 Eric Edward Moo  Re: Zhodani Controls << Seth the Lesser
 417  4916 08-Nov-1992 ""Tan-Quang B.   Character Generation << Could someone p

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4901
From: ajeffrie@waite.adelaide.edu.au (Alex Jeffries)
Subject: Virtual gravitics in starships
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 18:11:44 CST



                Hello again,

        The recent talk about starship/air-raft flight controls reminded me of
a random thought I had some time ago. I was reading an article in Science
(1992, vol.256, pg.s 616-617) called, "Virtual acoustics put sound in its place"
The article explains that audial perception of the real world is more than
simply the triangulation effect. Something that is implicit in having two ears
that are seperated by the thickness of the head (and boy!, some people I know
have very thick heads! :-) Sonic information is significantly effected by its
passage through/past the outer ear. It is a challenge to audio engineers to try
and understand this process and simulate it using computers so as to give a
truely realistic impression of the spacial dimension of sound using only a
"simple" stereo headset.
         Atari, Nintendo, Sega etc. are spending mega-bucks on this concept for
their vidio games as would be expected. However, some very serious uses are also
envisaged. The one cited is for air trafic controllers and pilots. It is
strongly felt that the directional cues given by such a system can improve
response times by fractions or even whole seconds which can be a very important
thing.
        To cut a long story short, this all led me to think that any "task that
is three-dimensional in nature" can be enhanced by virtual technology, and I'm
thinking of other than the visual/data glove virtual reality which is so popular
at the moment. In sci-fi where artificial gravity within space ships is so
common, one could easily loose all cues with the spacial dimensions of the
outside world. If we assume that at least in some instances (and probably very
crucial instances) direct control of a ship by its pilot will occur, it seems
to me that any technologically advanced society will be using some of these
virtual tricks to improve flying effeciency. Not only acoustics but also subtle
changes inthe  gravitational directions of the flight deck could give real
appreciation of the spacial state of the ship. The idea of having fans blowing
onto Droyne pilots is in the same vein. It may look a little amusing at first
but there would be a very good and serious reason for it.
        Unfortunately, I have gotten to the end of this and had the thought that
it's all pretty obvious and may well have been said before, and probably right
under my nose. If so.....oooppps, sorry!

                Alex Jeffries
================================================================================
Alex Jeffries
Molecular Virology Lab.
Waite Agricultural Research Inst.          ajeffrie@waite.adelaide.edu.au
The University of Adeliade
Glen Osmond, South Australia
Australia
================================================================================
If you think having a Grand Prix in your back yard is exciting, well YOU WRONG!
It's noisy.
================================================================================

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4902
From: jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Date: 6 Nov 92 (04:52)
Subject: starship fuel


TML::>BTW, is fuel liquid or compressed gas?

   Based on what I've seen in ship designs, and based on what would
   make sense, fuel has to be in liquid form.

   First, the design issue:  Many designs that I have seen plans for
   indicate that there are surge baffles _in_ the fuel tankage.  If
   fuel were compressed gas, baffles wouldn't be needed.  But, as the
   level of liquid in the tanks drops, the potential for sloshing
   grows.  The baffles prevent the sloshing from getting too out of
   hand and perhaps doing damage somewhere or other (turning as he
   watches the bulkhead rupture...).

   Second, the "what makes sense", which is partially based on one of
   the thing I learned in high school physics:  With the exception of
   a few strange compounds like dihydrogen monoxide (Water), the solid
   form is always the form whose bulk is the least.  If you try to
   compress a gas to the same volume, it'll collapse to a liquid well
   before that point, and to a solid at the volume.  However, managing
   a replenishable solid fuel is rather awkward, so liquid is normally
   accepted, as it is easier to manage, yet with a relatively small
   volume.

  J/
  jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com

 * OLX 2.2 * Where am I?  And why am I in this HANDBASKET??
- --
Executive Network Information System  (914) 667-4567
International ILink Host

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4903
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 06:39:10 -0500
From: "Pedro A.C. Tavares" <ftavares%ptearn.bitnet@utcs.utoronto.ca>
Subject:      T2000 mechanics: vehicles

****** #1
Bertil,

In your reply you said that weapon skill is not involved in area fire.  The
same happens in 2300 and at the time I started playing it I asked some friends
in the army what they thought of it.  They told me that for auto-fire you just
have to hold the weapons steady, more-or-less in the direction
of your target.  It doesn't take much practice to do this and being a good
sniper won't really help much.  So the assets for this type of firing would
be strenght and dexterity (or equivalent).  At least in their opinion.


****** #2
Just another question on T2000 game mechanics...
How is vehicle combat handled in this game?  I'm basicly talking about shotting
from a running car of from a flying gunship.  In this chapter,2300ad (the basic
rules at least) only accounts for missile fire.

Pedro A.C. Tavares
ftavares@ptearn.bitnet

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4904
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:02:34 -0600
From: surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
Subject: On agriculture production and tech levels

The Gamba subsector discussion between Rob Dean, Steve Higginbotham
and others about agriculture production and tech levels got me to
thinking.

What prevents a low tech agricultural world from importing high tech
farm  equipment(financing not being a problem)? Who prevents technology
transfer between worlds? The Imperium or the local governments? Or is
is even regulated? It doesn't seem to be defined very well in the
rules.

If it's regulated it is relatively easy to bypass these restrictions
and if not it's a non issue. Which brings up the point. Why wouldn't
a world import higher tech items? The only restriction I can see
would be maintenance. But even that can be worked around. If you
import a piece of machinery it would be obvious to import the repair
kit and manuals for it and maybe even a repair robot. Either hire a
technician for a temporary period to train some of the locals or
send some of the locals to schools on the higher tech world.

The scenario I'm thinking about is this:

A rich local or offplanet individual or corporation buys up a large
amount (several thousand acres) of farm land. Basically sets it up
as an agribusiness by importing the higher tech equipment and
training locals or importing the technicians as farm hands.

I've been digging through some agriculture statistics (one of the nice
things about working on a campus - great resources!). I've limited
it to Louisiana only and to those farms that are greater that 2000
acres. These are 1987 numbers taken from the Census of Agriculture.

Number of farms of 2000+ acres                    545
Land in farms                               2,021,437 a
Total cropland                              1,141,716 a
Average size of farm                            3,709 a

Value of land & buildings              $1,558,886,000
Average per farm                           $2,860,341
Average per acre                                 $771

Value of machinery & equipment           $129,140,000
Average per farm                             $238,266

Total sales                              $247,989,000
Average per farm                             $455,026

Government payments & other income        $28,429,000
Average per farm                              $63,316

Total farm production expenses           $186,487,000
Average per farm                             $342,807


               Average        Per cent
Crop           Production     land used      Production
Corn            100 bu/a          5            18,545 bu
Sorghum          60 bu/a          3             6,676 bu
Wheat            34 bu/a          4             5,044 bu
Rice             46 bu/a          6            10,237 bu
Cotton          1.7 bales/a      12               757 bales
Soybeans         29 bu/a         35            37,646 bu
Sugarcane        26 t/a           6             5,786 t
Hay               2 t/a           2               148 t

(bu/a = bushels/acre, t/a = tons/acre, bale = 480 lbs)
(bu = 35 liters, in MT 1 ton = 13.5 kiloliters)

Converting the production numbers to MT numbers yields:
85,480 kiloliters or 6,332 tons.

Which is equivalent to 78 free traders or 102 far traders or 32
subsidized merchants. And that is just from one farm of 3700 acres!
It doesn't include animal products either.

The initial investment in the farm would be quite large but loans
could be secured once it was shown that quite a profit could be
made in a reasonable amount of time. In fact the profit from the
above numbers is about $118,000 per year which is pretty good.
And the way MT numbers workout it will probably be even larger.

With the imported higher tech level equipment and methodologies
greater yields would be able to support the local population and
create a large quantity for export.

Mike


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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4905
From: eabaltz@Athena.MIT.EDU
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 13:05:55 -0500
Subject: Anti-tennis balls

The conversion from megatons to joules is 1 megaton = 4.2x10^15 joules.  This
is from a textbook on nuclear physics, so I believe its accurate.  Since
E=mc^2, 1kg of antimatter annihilating with 1kg of matter puts out the same
energy as a 43 megaton explosion.  Thus the 1cc chunks of anti-lead (about 10g)
are equivalent to a 430 kiloton bomb.  The cubic meter would be equivalent to
a 430 gigaton bomb.  Most of this energy is released in the form of HARD gamma
rays, so even without the impact, the target is going to be really toasty.


Ted Baltz
eabaltz@athena.mit.edu

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4906
From: metlay@netcom.com (metlay)
Subject: PBEM Update and Announcement of Player Openings!
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 11:01:17 PST


This is another PBEM UPDATE, with your host, Mike Metlay.

This is an official request for contacts from TML members (or friends
of TML members with Net access) who wish to join the TML PBeM game,
now in its fourth year of action. This game is an interactive email
game describing the trials and tribulations of the crews of the
merchant Jump tender Alcyon, the Free Trader Korondor Talisman, the
scout ships Aurora, Paladin, Gemini Arbiter, Westwind, and Bernoulli,
and the Aslan ship Trakh, as they hurl themselves into the Great Rift
seeking the truth about rumors that a Ringworld has been discovered
circling an uncharted star.... (If I could figure out a hook for it,
I'd write up an article for CHALLENGE about it, as it's set a number
of records for Traveller games. Would GDW be interested in something
this off-the-wall, Loren?)

We have strictly limited admission to this game since Mark Cook and I
took over from Richard Johnson two years ago; this was necessary because
the PBeM is an INTERACTIVE game, and every new member was another mail
stream to deal with. This is a nonstructured system in that game turns
do not have fixed lengths-- in fact, when you have thirty people all
talking at once, one hour of game time can take a year of real time
to play! This is the largest game of its kind ever, and in fact we
were glad of the thinning ranks of players as the years went by. But
now we have a glut of very good characters with no one to play them,
and we want to put them back into people's hands.

People in the TML PBeM game as of now, who are not running two
characters at once already, are also free to ask for a second
character, and will get first choice of whom to play since they know
of the characters in question already. However, we will not honor all
such requests, and will gently but firmly refuse players whom we feel
are better suited to handling only one character at a time. We
anticipate that this will leave us with two or three openings for new
blood. People from the Listeners list will be considered first, but
only if they can meet the criteria given below.

So if you're interested, please send Email to pbemref@engrg.uwo.ca and
let us know. BUT be aware of the fact that this is NOT a first-come,
first-served matter. We will want people who can deal with the limitations
and stipulations of the game, as follows:

1. You'll be issued an existing character. You will have a choice of
whom you play, but some characters have extensive histories that you'll
need to read up on before you can jump in. No exceptions allowed.

2. Your mailer must be able to handle a HUGE amount of mail. When the
action starts flying thick and fast, we can generate nearly 100k per day
of mail messages. (Before you ask: I work during working hours, and
keep up with this stuff during lunches and evenings, with occasional
breaks for music, food, sleep, and tummybumping.)

3. You must read over the previous year's worth of consolidated Turns,
a total of nearly one megabyte of text, to get a feel for the game and
the characters, before starting play. You must also read, understand,
and agree to abide by the Rules for Posts that all players receive.

4. You should be willing and able to absorb a lot of data on the fly,
and at LEAST to have the capability of posting a short move (say, five
lines of text or so, to give a brief answer to a question) once a day.

5. We reserve the right to reject people whose Email connections are
sporadic or flaky, and we prefer but do not insist upon people who
either own their own accounts on public-access systems or who are
connected through jobs etc. No one believed that this game would still
be in its opening stages now, when we started it in 1988. It has enough
potential to be still going strong well into the 21st century, and we
prefer people who can stick with it for more than a year at a time.
We won't reject college students out of hand, but you must give us an
honest appraisal of how long you expect to be connected. One recent
addition made Mark and me jump through unbearable hoops to create his
character (it was Greyson, for those in the know), then QUIT at the
end of the school year. I nearly had an embolism on the spot.

6. This is not a democracy. Mark and I haven't thrown anyone out yet,
but we'll be glad to make a precedent with any willing volunteer.
This game has been running for four years, and those involved have a
strong sense of community and friendship. New people who act in a
disruptive or unpleasant manner will be ejected with extreme prejudice.
We do our damndest to make sure that our rulings are fair and equable,
but if you're one of the large subcommunity of the TML who find me or
Mark a pain in the neck, all you need to keep in mind is that in
this game you'll be dealing with both of us on a daily basis. 'Nuff said.

Also, for those who would like a taste of what's going on in the game,
the latest Turn has been compiled and is available for ftp from
ftp.engrg.uwo.ca, in the compressed file ~ftp/pub/traveller/pbem/Turn.92.03.Z
which uncompresses to one big file. A note about this file, it's actually
in two parts, running in parallel to one another, because this last Turn
was so big that it was impossible to edit into one smooth timeline. We
hope our new rules will prevent having another 500k Turn like this one....

Hoping to hear from y'all (players and new folx alike) soon,

- --
dr. michael metlay       | and she's a master of return hitting
atomic city              | giving rhythm to her posts
p. o. box 81175          | so you read her and think hey it sounds good
pittsburgh pa 15217-0675 | and wish her posts had a soundtrack too
metlay@netcom.com        |                               (f. ercolessi)

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4907
Date: 06 Nov 92 22:11:04 EST
From: Steve Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: carving a hull, and agriculture in Gamba...

Paul Dale:

>I think that there may be a way to produce a ship hull without
>all the problems about welding plates together and so forth.  If the hull
>is originally formed as a solid lump of whatever you are building it out
>of.  We might as well assume that it is something disguisting to work
>with (like the titanium stuff or supa-dense).  Cast on big lump in the
>approximate shape you want the finished product to be (this isn't even
>totally necessary) and then cut away all the bits you don't want with
>something that will cut stubborn materials (fusion torch?  plasma welder?)
>In effect you tunnel the ship out of a hunk of iridium or whatever.  While
>doing this smoothing out the exteriour wouldn't prove too hard.

This is all very nice, but wouldn't it be easier to just cast a hull if you
wanted to go this route?

This sounds too much like how the sculptor carved a statue of an elephant:
Take a big rock and cut away everything that doesn't look like an elephant.


Mike Surman, re Gamba:

>What prevents a low tech agricultural world from importing high tech
>farm  equipment(financing not being a problem)? Who prevents technology
>transfer between worlds? The Imperium or the local governments? Or is
>is even regulated? It doesn't seem to be defined very well in the
>rules.

Actually, I always assumed that you would import heavily.  But then you
probably wouldn't qualify as a low TL world anymore.  If you assume that TL
indicates local production ability, then low TL worlds with high TL
neighbors can and should import heavily so that standard of living is
higher than TL-low.  Which is why I use three different TL indicators:  one
for total economic strenght, one for production capability, and one for
standard of living.
I don't think that the Imperium regulates that sort of trade, though
there have been indications that people lower than TL5 or so are placed on
a restricted-import list, to keep from upsetting the status quo there too
much.
In general, any piece of machinery made close enough to make importing
it practical is also close enough to import spare parts/technicians/tech
manuals/whatever.


>The scenario I'm thinking about is this:

>A rich local or offplanet individual or corporation buys up a large
>amount (several thousand acres) of farm land. Basically sets it up
>as an agribusiness by importing the higher tech equipment and
>training locals or importing the technicians as farm hands.

Sounds pretty reasonable to me.  I would expect that when these things
begin, the world is on its way to being moderate TL within a decade or two
at the most.  Face it, when gross world product starts to rise, the locals
will have more money to buy that neat high tech stuff, more money to send
the kids to school off-planet (which is how my longest running character
got his start, years ago - go to school on a TL11 world and bring back the
knowledge to his TL5 homeworld - he got distracted, and never got back.
Though he has sent a couple billion Imperial credits back over the last 30
years), that sort of thing.  Just a matter of time till the world matches
the TL of its neighbor to within a point or two.

Your statistics do not tell the whole story in Traveller.  Energy costs in
Trav are EXTREMELY low, and they will end up being the vast majority of the
expenses of running such a place.  Yes, I know that you spend a s**t-pot
full of money on fertilizers and insecticides.  Remember that the local
insects probably don't like your food that much, and that fertilizer is a
matter of taking LOTS of energy and adding air, water, dirt, etc.


>The initial investment in the farm would be quite large but loans
>could be secured once it was shown that quite a profit could be
>made in a reasonable amount of time. In fact the profit from the
>above numbers is about $118,000 per year which is pretty good.
>And the way MT numbers workout it will probably be even larger.

Be aware that the profitability of this operation will be a function of
available merchant traffic.  In my universe, where merchant traffic tends
to be among the most extreme of the people of the TML, this would be money
in the bank.  If merchant traffic were restricted to the very low level
required for luxury trade only (classic traveller), then you would lose
your shirt if you tried this.  Remember that it would take seven free
traders working full time in the classic traveller picture just to deal
with the output of this one farm.

---Steve
^Z

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4908
From: Does it matter? <vender@plains.NoDak.edu>
Subject: Robots and Starship operation
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 92 2:20:26 CST

Thanks to everyone who helped in my search for the robotics design information.
  Although there are differences between the Traveller and Megatraveller
  systems, I should have more than enough to accomplish what I need.

BTW:  Although a robotic ship would still require control panels and computers
  to operate, has anyone considered simply building a robotic brain into
  the crew stations?  Although it would not do for engineering
  (where the need for mobile units is obvious), a gunnery unit has
  very little need for mobility outside of its station.  Considering that
  the interface would be almost direct, would there be a change in the CP
  ratios (say an automatic addition to the CP multiplier), or should
  a 'Direct data link' panel be added to the charts for simplicity?

Another side note:  In Blake's 7, the computer systems were semi-intelligent.
  Does anyone out there have an opinion on:
    The computer systems become semi-intelligent naturally as they increase
    in complexity.
    -or-
    These computer systems had robotic brain elements added to them to
    eliminate excess crew members and make the ship easier to operate.

- --Brad

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4909
Date: 07 Nov 1992 03:04:45 -0700
From: PPUGLIESE@pimacc.pima.edu
Subject: DOS ports

This in reply to Cynthia's statement about porting stuff over to
MS-DOS.

PLEASE DO SO! I would love to have something like this. Jo Jaquinta's
program is terrific but the more the merrier , I say.

I'd also prefer it to be in 800x600x16 screen format if you go with
SVGA. 800x600x2 or 640x480x16 would be OK too.

PHIL
PUGLIESE


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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4910
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Merchant navies & TLs.
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 92 17:12:10 MET

Wildstar writes:
>Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>writes:
>>Based on the assumption that it takes two MCr worth of civilian shipping
>>to generate the revenue to support one MCr worth of warship ...
>
>How did you come up with this figure (inquiring minds want to know)?

From the campaign book (can't remember the title) of FGU's "Chivalry &
Sorcery" game. They had rules for setting up fantasy realms, including
how to calculate merchant and fighting navy sizes. I've made a half-
hearted attempt to find some figures for modern day navies to compare
with but haven't found anything useful.

>>The thing that really needs to be done about the tech levels is to get them
>>divorced from Terran historical dates. Just because we have it in 1990 it
>>dosen't have to be TL 8, and just because we don't have it dosen't mean it
>>can't be TL 8.
>
>The problem is that there needs to be a quick and easy "memory handle" to
>explain TLs to new people.  Relating a TL to a historical date fills the
>bill (but it also leads to inaccuracies).  The TL chart could definitely
>stand to be re-thought, but whatever the end result is, players and
>referees will immediately start comparing it to historical developments.

Sure, but emphasize to the players that the TL charts are the rule, the
Terran dates just a memory handle. I was in a campaign where the Referee
let us buy into a newly-opened planet and run a small country. The planet
was TL 4, and the Imperium embargoed import of military stuff of TL 6 and
above. Thus the locals were restricted to singleshot rifles, because they
were specifically mentioned in the charts, and we could import magazine
rifles. Fair enough. But he ALSO allowed us to import Spitfire-type
fighter planes, because they weren't specifically mentioned in the charts,
but were 1939 tech, thus TL 5! (We had a lot of fun with that Referee. He
cured me of by-the-book playing for good!)


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "A  subsector  official  pompously states that the
        subsector  armed  forces  have  four Kinunir class
        ships in service,  each with enough troop strength
        to put down any military operations that threathen
        the peace of the Imperium."

                        ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4911
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 92 11:46:07 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Calculations and CAD packages

Martyn J. Wheeler <sasmjw@unx.sas.com> writes:
> They're not really circular, they are mutually interdependent.  As I
> implemented it, you can change the power plant output and the agility
> will be adjusted; you can change the agility and it will find the
> power plant size by iteration.

Quattro Pro calls that a "circular reference", and there are several
such in my MegaTraveller starship design worksheet.  Because I use a
spreadsheet, I can customize it for whatever I want to optimize in the
design by putting a formula in the data entry cells.  For example, if a
design requirement is a certain agility, I put the a formula for total
power required in the cell for power plant size.  Then I go to the
summary page and press "recalc" until the thing either converges on a
solution, or "blows up" indicating that the design is impossible and I
have to try again.

> The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of a two-level
> design system.  I could really use a quick method of generating
> designs in addition to the detailed one.  If GDW wanted to keep the
> basic rules simple, a _Starship Operators Manual_ with the complex
> design rules.

Me too.  One thing I would like is to be able to get the "advanced"
design rules for *EVERYTHING* in one book, so it's all in one place.
Everything from lasers and CPR guns to starships, aircraft, watercraft,
tanks, grav vehicles; all in one book.

> Now what I could *really* use is a Computer-Aided deck plan layout
> system, preferably integrated with the design parameter system so I
> could do everythign at once.  The characters in my campaign are far
> too keen on boarding inoperative ships...

I tried one of the available CAD packages several years ago.  I came to
the conculsion that it would work well, except for a couple of things:
First, I would need to sit down and create a library of parts for every
common object on the starship (chairs, stateroom furnishings, consoles,
hatches and iris valves, etc).  Then designing a starship would actually
be easy and fast, probably faster than doing it by hand.  Finally, I
would have to find a large plotter: dot-matrix printouts just don't cut
it, either in size or quality --- one of my pencil sketches would be
better.  Since I couldn't afford the kind of plotter I felt I needed to
do good deckplans by computer, I have up.

wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                         in the Far Future


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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4912
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: The Sword Worlds
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 1:54:23 MET

Here's some ideas about the settling of the Sword Worlds:

What we know about the Swordworlder's ancestors:

They left Terra in -420.
They were of Germanic and Nordic stock, but these terms had only lin-
guistic meaning by this time.
Assuming that the present day official language of the Sword Worlds
still is fairly close to the the language spoken by the original
settlers, they spoke a variant of Icelandic borrowing heavily from
other Nordic languages as well as from Germanic tongues and from
Vilani (and the socio-political events that produced that little mix
is a facinating object for speculation in itself :-)
They arrived in Spinward Marches ca. -400.
They carried out a survey that detected the Darrian worlds, but did not
contact them as they wanted to create their own indpendent community of
worlds.
They settled the first Sword World, Gram, in -399.
They colonized 4 or 5 worlds in addition to the first one (Gram) in one
century and 12 more in the next.
(The selection of the first four worlds settled after Gram demonstrates
a typical "wargamer" attitude: Joyeuse, Colada, Tizon, and Hrunting. Not
the best worlds of the cluster, but the ones facing the Darrians, thus
preempting these worlds. Cunnonic must have had a viable population to
discourage settlement.)

Well, after some thought I've come up with something that uses most of
these elements. Here it is: The early history of the Sword Worlds:

In -420 the Old Earth Union was in the middle of a civil war. The Sword
Class troop transport GRAM had left Terra carrying 40.000 troops, part
of an invasion force. The capital ships had pounded the defenses into the
ground and the troop transports were moving in to unload when a relief
fleet jumped in and caught them deep in a gravity well. Most of the
invasion fleet was destroyed or captured. The Gram and a few lesser
escorts escaped by jumping from within the jump limit. On the way back
to Terra they learned that their side had lost, and that they had been
branded as war criminals. Eluding the pursuing squadrons they fled
towards the core because that happened to be the way where pursuit was
weakest. They avoided the Vegan Polity and the Easter Concord to avoid
being apprehended and turned over to the Union.
After some discussion it was decided to find a suitable planet or set
of planets and settle down there. Precisely why they decided to leave
the area of the Rule of Man completely is unclear, but that was the
alternative they selected. It became clear, however, that the engines
of the Gram would soon need a thorough overhaul. This presented a problem
since they did not carry much in the way of valuables. The solution was
to find an empty, mineral rich world and set up a small mining operation.
It took 18 years to dig out and refine sufficient precious metal to pay
for a complete overhaul of the Gram and its escorts. They then travelled
through Corridor and Deneb and eventually came to The Spinward Marches.
They might have travelled father yet, but during the jump to Spinward
Marches 1223 they experienced severe jump sickness. They surveyed the
worlds around them and despite detecting the Darrians decided against
risking any further jumps.

The Gram was a 100.000 T, Jump-2 Troop Transport with a crew of 756 and
the capacity to carry 40.000 troops in low berths and an additional 500
passengers (thus enabling staff members of the troops being transported
to be concious during flight). It had been carrying a michellany of units:
The 8th Scandinavian Army Unit[1], various specialist units, including a
mobile field surgery, an Engineer Regiment, and three German Jaeger
Battallions, and a colonial regiment from Agidda. Since Gram had been
sceduled to unload last all of the troops were still on board. The navy
element had a male/female ration of close to 1:1, but the army troops
had a m/f ratio of 4:1. It was therefore decided to allow women to extempt
themselves from dangerous jobs. This was the background for the male-
dominated society developed by the swordworlders. However, a sizable
fraction of the women naturally refused to avail themselves of this, thus
establishing the easy acceptance of females in "male" jobs that is also a
part of swordworlder society.

The common language of the first generation was the anglic of the Old
Earth Union armed forces, but with over 80% of the original settlers
speaking sagamal[2], anglic disappeared in less than a generation,
replaced by a mixture of sagamal, other nordic tongues, germanic, and
the vilani of the Agidda troops.


[1] An army unit is an intermediate step between a division and an army
    used by the Old Earth Union at the time.

[2] "Saga-tounge", an artificial language based on the old Icelandic
    sagas during the Cultural Roots Revival of the 10th Century PI
    and spoken by all scandinavians in the 5th Century PI as a second
    language and by many of them as a first.

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

Well, let me know what you think.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "A  subsector  official  pompously states that the
        subsector  armed  forces  have  four Kinunir class
        ships in service,  each with enough troop strength
        to put down any military operations that threathen
        the peace of the Imperium."

                        ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4913
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 92 22:19:52 EST
From: Seth the Lesser <slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu>
Subject: Robotic brains and starship design

Re Brad Vender's questions on robotic brains running the gunnery
stations on starships:

I often include robotic gunnery controllers in private ship designs, but I
also include normal control panels for a human operator's use.  Robotic brains
do occasionally malfunction, you know, and somehow they always seem to wedge
just before a couple of pirate type T's emerge from the sensor-shadow of a
nearby moonlet.  (If they didn't, the PC's could out-fight anything from the
Spinward Marches to the Solomani Rim, just by buying lots of levels of Ship
Tactics for their gunnery controllers and piling on the tactics-pool DM's.
This is bad.)

Also, if there are no control panels, it's impossible to calibrate the gunnery
program.  I assume that the robots need to be "fitted" to the ship by having
dummy sensor input fed in from the ship's computer and recording the robot's
responses, then tweaking the program's parameters, similar to the way a human
gunner gets the "feel" of a new weapon by running drill tapes from the
computer's memory and letting it grade his performance.

Regarding semi-intelligent computers, _Starship Operator's Manual_ indicates
that all high-TL starship computers have some synaptic circuit elements and a
limited capacity for AI.  This is done to increase productivity (e.g., the
watch officer, concerned about possible unrest among the middle passengers,
tells the computer to "alert me if anything unusual happens in the passenger
lounge area," and trusts the computer to come up with a sensible meaning of
"unusual" based on archived sensor data and programmed parameters of
acceptable passenger behavior).

Seth "the Lesser"
slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4914
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 12:46:27 -0700
From: Todd Bradley <bradleyt@spot.Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Snapshot

Hi.  I'm a Classic Traveller player from way back (1981 or so)
who just recently started referreeing a game.  I have a copy
of Snapshot (the shipboard combat system) which is pretty much
new, but a little mysterious: the box is fairly worn (perhaps
from sitting on a shelf for years) and says that it is copyright
from 1983.  However, the rules booklet inside is copyright 1979.

My first question is, is this disparity in copyright dates typical
for this game?

Secondly, the game is in new condition.  The cardboard counters
have never been punched out, the rule book is mint, there's even
a GDW customer reply card inside which offers to put the buyer on
a mailing list to receive catalogs of their games (I was thinking
of sending it in just to see if anything would ever come back).
Before I start using the game (and dirty up the book and punch out
the counters), is this game worth anything?  If not, is it ever
likely to be valuable?

I'm not a collector of such things but I know that sometimes these
old, out of print games can fetch a decent price.  I'd appreciate
any information you can give me.

Todd.

| Todd Bradley -- Official Microsoft Spokesman
|
| Trust me.

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4915
Date: Sun,  8 Nov 1992 16:44:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Eric Edward Moore <deathmaster+@cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Zhodani Controls

Seth the Lesser <slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu> writes:
> Huh!??!? Explain the geometry of this arrangement, please.  ASCII art
> might help to make it clear.

               ^
              |*|
              | |
       ---
      <*     pilot
       ---

the stars are the controls the lines are psi shields.  the pilot can
flick both but no-one else can flick both at the same time.

-Love, Kisses, and a Neutron Bomb
-Eric the Finn

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

Bundle: 417
Archive-Message-Number: 4916
Subject: Character Generation
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 17:08:58 -0500
From: ""Tan-Quang B. Pho"" <tbpho@mailbox.syr.edu>

Could someone please post *very BRIEF* summaries of character generation
as it is in Traveller: 2300 and MegaTraveller. Specifically, are they very
different from classsic Traveller on a *conceptual* level? Are players still
ending up with seasoned veteran-type characters? Thanks!


q

------------------------------
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 418  4917 09-Nov-1992 "Bruce Pihlamae  anti-matter << >The conversion from meg
 418  4918 08-Nov-1992 Mark F. Cook     Updated TML Posts Index available << Re
 418  4919 09-Nov-1992 Chris Ewels      << please subscribe me
 418  4920 09-Nov-1992 Rob Dean         Snapshot value << Snapshot's collector
 418  4921 09-Nov-1992 metlay           PBEM is CLOSED again << We've filled th
 418  4922 09-Nov-1992 Martyn J. Wheel  Re: Calculations and CAD packages << Wi
 418  4923 09-Nov-1992 Martyn J. Wheel  Effects of single-ship orbital bombardm
 418  4924 09-Nov-1992 Mark Watson      Various << NPC MOTIVATIONS:
 418  4925 10-Nov-1992 "Bruce Pihlamae  RE: Effects of single-ship orbital bomb
 418  4926 09-Nov-1992 kirsch@rhea.inf  Required time for GG refueling ?! << He
 418  4927 10-Nov-1992 James T Perkins  Re: Updated TML Posts Index available
 418  4928 10-Nov-1992 Matthew D. Gold  Sector Maps to postscript. << I'm looki
 418  4929 10-Nov-1992 Matthew D. Gold  tnc.c trade programme << I've made addi
 418  4930 11-Nov-1992 "Bruce Pihlamae  Refuel'ing from ice << Assuming that yo
 418  4931 11-Nov-1992 Bertil Jonell    Re: Calculations and CAD packages << >
 418  4932 11-Nov-1992 Blair Haworth    Orbit-to-ground bombardment << [Subject
 418  4933 11-Nov-1992 Martyn J. Wheel  Re: Effects of single-ship orbital bomb
 418  4934 11-Nov-1992 gwh@lurnix.COM   Re: TML nightly: Msgs 4917-4923 V47#19
 418  4935 11-Nov-1992 Cynthia Higginb  Shipping <<           For those of you

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4917
Date: Mon,  9 Nov 92 11:30:47 +1100
From: "Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au>
Subject: anti-matter

>The conversion from megatons to joules is 1 megaton = 4.2x10^15 joules.  This
>is from a textbook on nuclear physics, so I believe its accurate.  Since
>E=mc^2, 1kg of antimatter annihilating with 1kg of matter puts out the same
>energy as a 43 megaton explosion.  Thus the 1cc chunks of anti-lead (about 10g)
>are equivalent to a 430 kiloton bomb.  The cubic meter would be equivalent to
>a 430 gigaton bomb.  Most of this energy is released in the form of HARD gamma
>rays, so even without the impact, the target is going to be really toasty.

I assume that the anti-matter is enclosed in some field which prevents
detonation until it reaches its target otherwise it would destroy itself
on the first piece of real matter (read atmosphere) it encountered.

How big is the containment device going to be?  You're delivering an anti-matter
powerplant to the target and then switching off the safeguards?

BTW: I've just finished a series (the series isn't finished yet) of 7 books
about a character called STEN.  The empire in this series is run solely by
anti-matter and interstellar travel is impossible without this form of large
scale energy release.  It's no bad but a bit dated.

In 1984(?) I attended the 42nd World Science Fiction convention in LA with a
friend.  He managed to attend a panel discussing energy or something and the
topic of anti-matter as an energy source came up.  (Now I'm telling this 3rd
hand so I don't know all the details discussed but...)  The general idea was
that if you place normal matter on the EAST of a compass then anti-matter
would go on the WEST side (opposites and such) BUT they postulated the
existence of two other types of matter (NORTH and SOUTH) which could be
handled separately with ease (ie bare hands) but when brought together
would react just like EAST-WEST matter did.  The NORTH and SOUTH matter is
created using lots of energy (solar power, fusion whatever) in fact, more
energy than you get out of the resulting matter interaction.  The big
advantage of such matter is that the NORTH-SOUTH powerplant is very tiny,
delivers the energy in vast immediate quantities, is very very safe, and the
ingredients are very very very safe.

Has anybody heard anything about this before?

Bruce...             pihlab@hhcs.gov.au

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4918
From: Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.com>
Subject: Updated TML Posts Index available
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 19:17:05 PST

Recently, I was asked by another TML member if there was a way to index
the TML archives available on Sunbane.  I replied that there was a
table of contents file available, but it was way out of date.

Since receiving that question, I've discovered that I myself have a need
to be able to quickly scan the archives from time to time for various bits
of information.  As a result, I've taken it upon myself to, at least part-
ially, extend the TOC and bring it up to date.

There are now 2 Table-of-Contents files available for anonymous ftp from
ftp.engrg.uwo.ca.  The original file (~pub/traveller/TOC.1) is an index
for TML postings from the beginning of the TML up through note #2731
(bundle 223, dated 7 Sept. 1991).  The new file (~pub/traveller/TOC.2)
contains an index continuing from where the first file ends, and extends
through note #4586 (bundle 382, dated 31 Aug. 1992).

        Mark F. Cook

USMail: Hewlett-Packard
        User Interface Technology Division - Corvallis (Tech. Marketing)
        1000 NE Circle Blvd.  Corvallis, OR 97330

INTERNET: markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.com
          markc%hpcvss.cv.hp.com@relay.hp.com

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4919
Date: 09 Nov 1992 10:33:29 +0100
From: ewels@aldix.mpi-stuttgart.mpg.de (Chris Ewels)

please subscribe me
Please subscribe me to this list : Chris Ewels : EWELS@ALDIX.MPI-STUTTGART.MPG.
DE
Thanks!

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4920
From: Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.com>
Subject: Snapshot value
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 10:55:55 -0500 (EST)

Snapshot's collector value is minimal.  I've seen lots of them for sale at
various conventions.  As to the rules: I have both the small box ans the 8 1/2
by 11 flat box versions of the game, but I've never compared the rules.  If the
rules are the same size as the box, rather than the same size as the old style
TYraveller books, they are the right ones for that package.  I'd advise using
the game for its intended purpose.  I've found the Type S and Type A deck
plans to be useful occasionally, even if they are a bit primitive by
current graphics standards.

As to the customer card--well, GDW's address hasn't changed, so I don't
see why they wouldn't send you a catalog. (-:

Rob Dean

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4921
From: metlay@netcom.com (metlay)
Subject: PBEM is CLOSED again
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 14:46:42 PST


We've filled the available spaces for this iteration. Thanks to
everyone, both in and out of the game, who volunteered.

- --
dr. michael metlay       | and she's a master of return hitting
atomic city              | giving rhythm to her posts
p. o. box 81175          | so you read her and think hey it sounds good
pittsburgh pa 15217-0675 | and wish her posts had a soundtrack too
metlay@netcom.com        |                               (f. ercolessi)

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4922
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:00:25 -0500
From: Martyn J. Wheeler <sasmjw@unx.sas.com>
Subject: Re: Calculations and CAD packages

Wildstar says:
>Me too.  One thing I would like is to be able to get the "advanced"
>design rules for *EVERYTHING* in one book, so it's all in one place.
>Everything from lasers and CPR guns to starships, aircraft, watercraft,
>tanks, grav vehicles; all in one book.

I like this.  Most of the people who want the detail will probably
want it everywhere, or at least be given the option of the fields they
want expanded.

>I tried one of the available CAD packages several years ago.  [...]

Now you mention it, that reminds me... When the Lisa (remember that
machine?)  first came out, we had one at NCR Ithaca.  I tried deck
plan stuff with it (Classic Traveller at that time), but never really
got beyond playing with it.  I suspect I could do something similar
with the current draw-whatever packages, but I could really use it
tailored for Traveller ship design -- I'd love a status window that
tells me how many "squares" of computer room or gunnery controls I
need to add, for example, or how much mess room space I have left.  I
doubt that the market is big enough to justify the software investment
for a commercial company, however, and I know practically nothing
about the programmability of current commercially available drawing
programmes...?

With the advent of laser printers (not that *I* have one), your
concerns about the quality of hardcopy output are probably less
significant these days.

(I was going to add some other stuff, but I'll put it under a
different subject heading, I think...)

Martyn
- --------------sasmjw@unx.sas.com----(Martyn Wheeler)----DoD #293--------------
SAS Institute, Inc: (919) 677-8000 ext.7954    H: (919) 839-0092 (Raleigh, NC)

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4923
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:16:09 -0500
From: Martyn J. Wheeler <sasmjw@unx.sas.com>
Subject: Effects of single-ship orbital bombardment

This may have been covered on the TML before; if so, could someone
please point me towards the correct issue(s)?  If there is an
obtainable supplement/adventure to use as a reference, I'd like to
know that too.  Also useful would be real-world references with a clue
as to how to relate to MT numbers (preferably not too expensive a book).

What are the effects of orbital bombardment on un-hardened ground
targets?  What are the range of effects of a single-ship nuclear or
conventional missile attack on a target such as a troop encampment, a
starport, or a government building?  Obviously, point-defense and
area-defense will alter the situation, but if the effects on
defenseless targets are known then it should be relatively simple to
take into account other factors.
    I would basically like to know the capabilities of a battery-round
from a single missile turret (standard 3-missile rack), and from a
100t missile bay, using conventional and nuclear anti-ship munitions
as might be found on an average merchant ship. :-)
    Exact numbers are not too important as such, but I do want a feel
for the general capabilities of this sort of weapon.  If my players
want to take out a large downtown building, say, or wipe out a
guerilla camp, what are their options, assuming local air-space
superiority and an insufficient ground troop capability?  I imagine a
lot depends on how much collateral damage they are prepared to
inflict...?  (At least they have no anti-matter tennis balls.)
    How would the capabilities vary with TL?  I imagine precision
would improve greatly at higher TL's, but what about yield?

Martyn
- --------------sasmjw@unx.sas.com----(Martyn Wheeler)----DoD #293--------------
SAS Institute, Inc: (919) 677-8000 ext.7954    H: (919) 839-0092 (Raleigh, NC)

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4924
Date: 09 Nov 92 20:35:38 EST
From: Mark Watson <100022.3361@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Various

NPC MOTIVATIONS:

Couple of people have asked me about the secondary character profiles. Best
reference is to get hold of Andy Slack's "Expanding Universe" rules
extensions for Classic Trav, revised and reprinted in "Best Of White Dwarf
Articles Vol 1", publ 1980, since there is a lot of other useful stuff in
there. The secondary profile stuff had come from an earlier article by Tony
Bath which I no longer have, but is mentioned here as part of a quite
decent alien generation system (which works up to a point ...).

Basically, roll 2D6 for the following: Disposition, Morals, Generosity,
Loyalty, Courage and Ambition. For classic trav (ie pre task system)
throw less than or equal to the characteristic most relevant to the
interaction you are dealing with, modifying by factors such as role playing
ability, referee's mood etc (didn't call it classic for nothing). So for
offering a police officer a bribe, modify by bribery skill, what you think
of the amount offered, maybe law level (for the police officer's fear of the
consequences of getting caught) relative to a sensible mean (say 7) and
throw against morals.

Using the task system, apply the relative NPC characteristic mod,just as you
do for PC characteristics, to appropriate tasks.

Given the appropriate choice of characteristics (and I'm not sure that
the WD set is the right one) this is a very effective way of managing NPCs
in game terms, and of differentiating between them (note also that aliens
will get mods on their initial throws).

WISH LIST:

(Actually, I don't really have a wish list as such, so please don't take
this as complete ... I'm sure there's another few things I could think of):

1) Don't do it! Oh well ...

2) Learn from what DGP did right. Although the MT stuff for GDW was, erm,
lacking in several departments, what DGP published under their own marque
was generally of the highest standard. The picture:text ratio was right
(looking at for example the Dark Conspiracy material in our local shop I
feel it has too many illustrations) and supplements (or in the case of the
the Aliens stuff, each half of each supplement) were generally illustrated
throughout by the same artist, to maintain a consistent feel. And the
artists were excellent, of course.

Also what they published, and what they
planned to publish. I would like to see the equivalent of
following material (darn it I would have liked to see it for MT):
- - the 5 alien supplements, esp the minor race one
- - starship operators manual, vols 1 AND 2 - I got the impression that this
  would lead into a set of sourcebooks for particular types of ship
- - combined scenario / sector sourcebooks, like the Flaming Eye, like the
  planned Black Duke, etc.
- - World Builder's Handbook, and the planned Grand Explorations book (how I
  was looking forward to that one).

I also thought that the Keith brothers' idea expressed in MTJ3 of having
sourcebooks based around particular professions was a good one. If we had
had the old character generation system, the WBH could have had the expanded
char generation for Scientists, for example. I would have liked to have
seen some of the Medical Digest stuff from TD compiled and expanded as
a medical sourcebook.

Finally on this point, I'd like to see the DGP equipment charts and task
libraries (assuming there is still some form of task system) continue
in some form, rather than have the dreary and less useful equipment lists
I can see in other games (including the original MT rules).

3) Related point - sort out your licensing! Get some licensees to replace
the lost ones ... they add to the vitality of the game. In particular find
a miniatures license - my personal preference would be Grenadier but I'm not
fussy.

I'd also like to see some of the old licensed material, in particular
the Paranoia stuff, rehabilitated and reprinted if possible. Alot of people,
including me, liked it and felt it added something to the game (including
a number of interesting new and significant aliens, for which there is
a crying need).

4) Um, that's it for now ... (it's late)

HISTORICAL DIGRESSION:

Cynthia writes:
>>The "Short Nap" - the intervening 70 years - seems to me more like the time
>>between the fall of Rome and the rise of Charlemagne.
>        Poor example, Fall of Rome to Charlemagne is about 350 years, not
>70.  Good example, in that I think the TNE should be set about 200-300 years
>after, not 70.
I disagree, although the reason is that I don't think such a complete
collapse is likely anyway. Less than a hundred years after Theodosius the
Great, Theodoric had established an Ostrogothic kingdom that
stretched from France to Yugoslavia. And the Eastern Empire was more
or less intact through most of this period. Point being that larger polities
inevitably emerge to fill such vaccuums, which is where I think Hard
Times goes wrong. As for technology, very little was lost; what was lost
was the ability to advance further. Economically and militarily important
technologies are in such times the most jealously protected; notably noone
during the dark ages forgot how to ride a horse from Rome to Byzantium, it
just got a lot more difficult and alot less safe. Same applies to the 30
years war - the balance of power shifted in Europe to a bunch of more
stable states at the periphery, who took advantage of the advances made
in military technology during the war.

>        See note above about "man on a horse".  Charlemagne's empire broke
>up because of a poorly planned succession policy.  Alexander's empire had
>the same problem.  For a contrary example, note how long Rome held on to
>Caesar's conquests in Gaul.  The Romans had a well-established routine for
>transfer of rule from one proconsul to another, and they were clearly
>subordinate to Rome's authority; Charlemagne's sons and Alexander's heirs
>were equals with no central authority to bind them together.
>        Point being, viability of interstellar states will depend on internal
>politics, not how many years after the collapse of the Imperium it is.

Agreed on the last point, although the smaller the power which establishes
hegemony (and we are being told that at this point they are very small) and
the faster it is established, the more unstable that hegemony will be. Rome
took a lot longer to get there and stopped while it was ahead ...

Again, though, note what happens when these empires do break up ... even
very unstable powers such as these collapse into relatively stable smaller
empires - the Short Nap shouldn't actually happen.

I've often thought that the period
after Alexander provides a good model for the post-Rebellion era - a number
of strong and stable rump states (for Egypt and the Seleucid Empire read
Deneb, Vland and Antares), a few which fall pretty quickly (Gushemege,
Illelish for the Greek and Indian possessions) and the gradual infringement
of newer and more vital empires at the periphery (for Rome and Parthia,
provide the alien empires of your choice).

When Alexander was asked on this death bed as to who should
rule the empire after his death, legend has it that his reply was "kratistos"
(to the strongest). I've often thought this would make quite a good
Rebellion era scenario title ... maybe it's not to be.

FINALLY:

I'm in Austin, Tx. next week on business and would like to supplement my
collection, not only of traveller stuff but for other games - anyone know
any good gaming stores in town?

Mark

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4925
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 15:44:41 +1100
From: "Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au>
Subject: RE: Effects of single-ship orbital bombardment


Would you really use ship-to-ship nuke missiles against ground targets?
I would have thought you'd need specialist missiles for atmospheric
re-entry and atmospheric operation.

Assuming you get the warhead to the target then it should be fairly
easy to calculate blast radius etc for current day Kiloton payloads.

Variation with TL?  There must be a limit to how effecient you can make
a nuke of a given payload.  Would the size change much?  Would the bomb
be a LOT cleaner (or dirtier)?

Should be cleaner and less stopable to simply use a streamlined
kinetic weapon than a nuke.

Has anyone done some design work on what a kinetic missile should look
like, costs, size, damage etc?

Bruce...         pihlab@hhcs.gov.au

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4926
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 10:43:57 EST
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: Required time for GG refueling ?!

Hello folks,

I had some trouble concearning wilderness refueling at my last MT session.
I don't know if anyone of you has ever thought about the time, a starship
needs to get close to a large or small GG. I don't have my rulebooks with
me, but I think a typical Far Trader oder a Subsidized Merchant using a
Maneuver=1 drive needs 18 hours from the jump exit (100 diameters) to a
small GG. Even worse, if they approach a large GG. Even if the ship has
a purification plant which take 6 hours for purify, the ship will need
more than two days, before refueling is done.

   If I remember the ideas of refueling by asteroid ice, discussed in this
list earlier, I think mining an ice asteroid could take much less time for
a small ship. It takes only minutes to approach an asteroid, an then do
the necessary mining in one day. Mining an asteroid is not so difficult,
if you have done some engineering work, before the crew attempts to do so.
I suggest a small robot with a heater to melt the ice and a pump, to pump
the resulting water per tube into the ship. Don't forget to use the
purification plant though :-).

Any Comments ?

Juergen

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4927
Subject: Re: Updated TML Posts Index available
Reply-To: traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Administrator)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 01:18:03 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@sp-eug.sp-eug.com>


Bravo, Mark! Clap clap clapclapclapclapclap!

Thank you!
James

__   __/         /   /    Internet Traveller Mailing List, Administrator
    /     /  /  /   /   James T. Perkins in Eugene, Oregon, USA
 __/   __/__/__/ _____/   traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4928
Subject: Sector Maps to postscript.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 15:33:13 CST
From: goldman@orac.cray.com (Matthew D. Goldman)
Reply-To: goldman@orac.cray.com

I'm looking for c-code or shell scripts that will turn sector
data into postscript.  Anyone have anything that works and
produces clear output?  I tried xsv; however, while the output
looks nice on my screen, the window dump printed on the local
printer does not look so great.

Matt

- --
Matthew Goldman              E-mail: goldman@orac.cray.com
Fax: (612) 683-3099                   Work: (612) 683-3061
      "Say George, I don't mean to interrupt, but
       there's a glowing red dot on your forehead."

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4929
Subject: tnc.c trade programme
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 17:48:18 CST
From: goldman@orac.cray.com (Matthew D. Goldman)
Reply-To: goldman@orac.cray.com

I've made additions to tnc.c and have passed the changes
onto Mark Cook for the sunbane archive.  I quote here from
the header information and the tnc.doc file:

tnc.c:
* Most of the origional code for this programme was written by
* Mark F. Cook, Thanks to him for letting me play with his code.
*
* I've added the following stuff:
*   1) Can redirect output to stdout.
*   2) You can run through multiple destinations
*      for one source planet
*   3) minor cleanup of code -- I use really wide windows.
*   4) Lots and lots of white space
*   5) a define to take care of making this standard to traveller.
*

tnc.doc:
     NAME
          tnc - Random trade & commerce data generator for
                MegaTraveller

     SYNOPSIS
          tnc [out_file]

     DESCRIPTION
          Tnc is a trade & commerce generator which produces random
          lists of freight, cargo, and passengers, based on attributes
          of a source and destination star-system pair, plus the
          abilities of the crew negotiating for those goods.


Enjoy!

Matt

- --
Matthew Goldman              E-mail: goldman@orac.cray.com
Fax: (612) 683-3099                   Work: (612) 683-3061

      "Say George, I don't mean to interrupt, but
       there's a glowing red dot on your forehead."

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4930
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 13:27:38 +1100
From: "Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au>
Subject: Refuel'ing from ice


Assuming that you don't use raw WATER for fuel aren't you going to have
to melt and process an awful lot of ice to get the right amount and
form of fuel?

Bruce...      pihlab@hhcs.gov.au

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4931
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Re: Calculations and CAD packages
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 12:50:40 +0100 (MET)

> From: Martyn J. Wheeler <sasmjw@unx.sas.com>
> Subject: Re: Calculations and CAD packages
>
> Wildstar says:
> >I tried one of the available CAD packages several years ago.  [...]
>
> With the advent of laser printers (not that *I* have one), your
> concerns about the quality of hardcopy output are probably less
> significant these days.

  I've done some plans with ClarisCAD on a SE/30 and it came out ok IMHO.

  Of course, I still have to compute the number of squares of each type of
compartment by hand and I've had some problems in making fit them into
something shiplike.

  What it does automate on the other hand is the drawing of the 1.5m deck
squares... (oops, hope they keep the 1.5m squares in TNE...) and once I had
a library of chairs, autogalleys and couches, the crew areas are rather easy
to detail.

  It is the drives that are the real pain.

- -bertil-
- --
"Ack! Phht!" - Bill the Prez

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4932
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:19:17 EST
From: Blair Haworth <wbh@mail.lib.duke.edu>
Subject: Orbit-to-ground bombardment

[Subject line doctored by TML Admin, forwarded to broadcast alias -- James]

          >Would you really use ship-to-ship nuke missiles against
          >ground targets?  I would have thought you'd need specialist
          >missiles for atmospheric re-entry and atmospheric
          >operation.
          >
          >Assuming you get the warhead to the target then it should
          >be fairly easy to calculate blast radius etc for current
          >day Kiloton payloads.

          [...]

          >Bruce...         pihlab@hhcs.gov.au

          Some arm-waving: Specialist ortillery nukes would probably
          be better, but it would be embarrassing to have the wrong
          kind.  At the same time, given the prevalence of laser
          antimissile weapons, you probably want some hardening for
          your missiles.  Why not an ablative heat shield?  Lots of
          details of course...

          I seem to recall that the old _Striker_ rules said that
          standard nuke missile yields were 150 kT@ for turret
          missiles, 250 kT@ for bays.  But that's hazy and I'm an old
          fart, firmly committed to _High Guard_ design practice.

          Any other OF's out there to swap Book 5 designs with?


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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4933
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:56:23 -0500
From: Martyn J. Wheeler <sasmjw@unx.sas.com>
Subject: Re: Effects of single-ship orbital bombardment

Bruce Pihlamae says:
>Would you really use ship-to-ship nuke missiles against ground targets?
>I would have thought you'd need specialist missiles for atmospheric
>re-entry and atmospheric operation.

Many ships in civilian operation have ship-to-ship missiles, while
space-to-ground weapons would be hard to justify, both in economic
terms and to the authourities.  Occasionally, someone is going to have
the desire to hit something on the ground, and they just have to use
what's available.
    I agree that a ship with a design mission that includes ground
attack would have specialised weapons, in which case I would expect
both MIRV-type warheads and slow-entry stealthy precision-target
drones (it's hard to be stealthy on a fast atmospheric entry, to say
nothing of the radio communication problems under those conditions).
    Remember also that not every target is in some place with an
atmosphere... although in that case an analogy with ship combat can
probably provide an excellent approximation.

>Assuming you get the warhead to the target then it should be fairly
>easy to calculate blast radius etc for current day Kiloton payloads.

Yes, but what *is* the payload of a standard anti-ship missile?
Surely someone has worked this out already?

Martyn

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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4934
Subject: Re: TML nightly: Msgs 4917-4923 V47#19
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 14:37:32 -0800
From: gwh@lurnix.COM


Some random comments on NPC personalities and then replies on antimatter
and on orbital bombardments.

The NPC motivations index that's been suggested is good; T2k2 already
has the "Card Deck" NPC type generator, which is one way of doing things,
and the second set of stats that's been proposed here is another.
Personally I'd guess that GDW will go with keeping the T2k2 system,
but you never know.  The bigger system has advantages if you want
to detail people.

Antimatter:
I'm not quite sure who generated that compass-directions view of
antimatter and normal matter, but it doesn't jibe with physics.
There aren't intermediate states between antimatter and matter;
antimatter and matter both gravitationally attract each other,
(and themselves), behave normally electrically (though with
opposite sign charge) etc.

Also, when you get a big ball of say anti-iron together, it does
not simply go "boom" when exposed to air.  What happens is that
you get minimal ionization off the surface of the ball,
which also ionizes a lot of air around, leading to a high temperature
and pressure but low density (and low reaction rate) plasma around
the antimatter.  If it starts to impact something solid, you get some
rebound effect, but mostly you get a slow, difuse reaction as the
ball boils off into the plasma and the plasma self-anhilates.
Slowing it down more is the fact that most of the actual anhilation
will be electron/antielectron anhilation (unless the room's made
of iron walls or until the plasma is hot enough for the anti-iron to
fission).

The ball will rebound off the floor if it falls onto it, but
won't go "bang".


Bombardments:
An orbital bombardment with nuclear missiles will look a lot like
any other nuclear missile bombardment: bang.  There are plenty of films
of open-air nuclear tests to see what happens....

- -george william herbert



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

Bundle: 418
Archive-Message-Number: 4935
Date: 11 Nov 92 23:39:03 EST
From: Cynthia Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Shipping

          For those of you interested in traffic levels, here's the
     Marine Log for Saturday, November 7, 1992 from the New Orleans
     Times-Picayune.  New Orleans is either the 2nd or 3rd busiest port
     in the U.S. (vies with Houston, New York City is #1), and has
     hundreds of wharfs, all kinds of facilities, and several
     shipyards.  In short, it's a Class A seaport, by Traveller
     standards.  You all know the population of the U.S. (about 250
     million, give or take), so think of New Orleans as the #2 A
     starport on a population 8 world...
          I have deleted the Agent & wharf information as irrelevant,
     and please remember this is just the big stuff -- doesn't show the
     tons of Mississippi River traffic (interplanetary traffic??) and
     small boats.

     --------                           ----------
     ARRIVALS                           DEPARTURES
     --------                           ----------
     Friday                                                       Dest.
          Anantel Atlas                 Tug Alice Moran & Barge  Foreign
          Golden Luck                   Miroslawiec              "
          *Kathrine Sif                 Holger Sif               "
          Kapitan Stankov               Chios Star           Venezuela
          Inger                         Swan Cape                Foreign
          *Birdie                       Tatay                    "
          Timi                          Santa Rita               "
          Hua Tong Hai                  Texas Sun                "
          Profitis Elias                Tug Leopardo Grande & Barge "
          Far Eastern Grain             Tomas Hope               "
          *Brigit Maersk                Sunderland Spirit    "
          Knock Ardy                    Leslie Lykes             "
          Sulby                         BT Neptune               "
          Mega Buck                     Kotor                    "
          Western Trade                 Bertina                  Houston
          Hoegh Dene                    Aston Trader             Florida
          Stassfurt                     Rapel                Coastwise
          *Enchanted Seas               Aristidis            Foriegn
          Sam Houston                   BL Helene                "
          Pergamos                      Golden Chase             "
          *Ulan Bator                   Emil S                   "
                                        Seamaid                  "
                                        Hope                     Mexico
     Saturday
          Forum Victory                 *Kathrine Sif            Panama
          Blue Sapphire                 *Brigit Maersk       Charleston
          Alpha Sun                     *Ulan Bator          Rotterdam
          Sea Merchant                  Botany Tradition         Foriegn
          Focomar                       *Enchanted Seas          Jamaica
          Jahre President               Cleo                     Florida
          Marlin                        Ilya Erenburg            Foriegn
          Hoegh Forum                   Argus                    "
          Ocean Ever                    Onda Bianca              "
          Anangel Ares                  Scenery Sea              "
          Chubut                        Sarla                    "
          Gas Fueguino                  Liberty Victory          "
          Sealand Challenger            *Birdie                  "
          Angelique                     Elpida                   "
          Deneb                         Ioannis P                "
          New Glory                     Oksywie                  "
          Mayaguez                      Vera Martyetskaya        "
          Fort Windsor                  Proteus                  "
          Rachel B.                     Christina C              "

          Note that ships tagged with an (*) arrived one day, presumably
     loaded/unloaded, and left the next day...fast turnaround.  Many of
     these ships exceed 2000 TRAVELLER tons in displacement.  No
     supertankers, New Orleans is not a deep enough port.  So on *one*
     *day*, we had at least 40,000 - 50,000 Traveller displacement tons
     (Fermi figure) of shipping in and out... times 365 days =
     18,250,000 Traveller tons?  Even with the MegaTraveller
     "interlinked economies" model of trade, that's a lot of traffic.
     Twenty ships comparable to an Akerut, Oberlindes, or Imperial Lines
     freighter every day.  So what's traffic like on pop A world?
          I notice that names vary from the romantic to the appallingly
     mundane.  (I like "Mega Buck", tho.  Shows a certain amount of
     chutzpah.)  Shipping lines often give their ships names of the same
     type/flavor; for example, Lykes Lines has a tradition of naming all
     its ships ships after female members of the Lykes familiy.  In the
     _Traveller Adventure_, we are given the ship name styles of several
     of the major shipping lines, btw.  Just another little something to
     add flavor to your universe, eh what?

                                             -- Cynthia

------------------------------
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 419  4936 12-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Antimatter, Virus, Lasers, and Trade <<
 419  4937 13-Nov-1992 "Bruce Pihlamae  adjusting laser intensity << >>
 419  4938 13-Nov-1992 "Bruce Pihlamae  primitive portable laser << I remember
 419  4939 13-Nov-1992 Cynthia Higginb  << Bcc: Blind Recipients List:;
 419  4940 13-Nov-1992 metlay           On lasers << Wildstar:
 419  4941 13-Nov-1992 Mark Watson      Cockpit controls << [ I said control sy
 419  4942 13-Nov-1992 Cynthia Higginb  Submarine controls... << Mark Watson:
 419  4943 14-Nov-1992 CS171308011@UTS  Controls and maneuverability << Hi!
 419  4944 14-Nov-1992 Steven Owens     On lasers <<
 419  4945 15-Nov-1992 Seth the Lesser  Re: Controls and maneuverability << Sco
 419  4946 15-Nov-1992 Bertil Jonell    Re: Submarine Controls << > From: Cynth
 419  4947 15-Nov-1992 Bertil Jonell    Re: Controls and Maneuverability << > F
 419  4948 15-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Performance and Flight Controls << CS17
 419  4949 16-Nov-1992 s3007048@mackay  contacting Lauren << I was quite excite
 419  4950 16-Nov-1992 Steve Hunter     Acceleration << Scott 2G Kellog wrote:
 419  4951 16-Nov-1992 CS171308011@UTS  Maneuver controls << Howdy,

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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4936
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 13:54:39 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Antimatter, Virus, Lasers, and Trade

Here are some (belated) responses to items discussed last week.

Someone named "Does it matter?" <vender@plains.NoDak.edu> writes:
> [about antimatter fuel]

Quite a while ago, I read an interesting article (I believe that it was in
Analog's Science Fact column) that attempted to determine whether or not
there were any large quantities of antimatter nearby (such as in this
Galaxy).  The conclusion was that there is not, based on observed
characteristics of cosmic radiation.

So any antimatter fuel will have to be created in a particle accellerator.
Doing so will consume more energy than anihallating the antimatter will
produce; so no energy is created.  Instead, antimatter is only an efficent
way to store energy.


"Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au> writes:
> I read with interest the alternate cilicon virus posted in TML and it
> made me shudder with fear.  If this is the future of TRAVELLER then
> I for one will become anti-TECH and close all borders and go hide
> in my cave (with a friend 8-}.

Well, I'd call that a sucessfully achieved design goal.  The virus was
supposed to be a plot device which causes the complete collapse of
interstellar society.  Everyone throws away or stops using anything more
sophisticated than an internal combustion engine, and wants to have nothing
to do with starships or space travel.  Even (nay, ESPECIALLY) when a bunch
of interstellar merchants show up and try to trade.

> I think that GDW should publish (or hint at) all these possibilities.
> Don't set it in concrete.  Maybe several things happened that wiped
> out separate parts of the Imperium while missing others.

The "true story" behind the what happened is supposed to be a mystery.  The
common knowledge (so far, anyway) is what happened in Challenge #64; there
should be hints and clues that point to the conclusion that the common
knowledge is not actually what happened ... Exactly what the truth is
should be up to each individual referee; my virus story was intended to be
one such possibility (the details were provided so that referees can leave
appropriate clues for the players to pick up, and eventually solve the
mystery).


CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU (Scott "2 accounts" Kellogg) writes:
[Summarised to save the expen$ive net.bandwidth.  Mark Watson posts that
 control systems should probably vary with tech level more than anything
 else.  Scott counters with an argument based on extrapolation of current
 technology.]

It could also bear pointing out that after the initial period of crazy
experimentation, the current control system layout (joystick, rudder
pedals, throttle) has become a de-facto standard, even as controls advanced
from direct mechanical linkages to power assisted controls, to the modern
"fly-by-wire" electronic control systems and the current "fly-by-light"
all-digital controls.  It seems likely that the "user interface" will
remain standard, while the "brains" behind the control system improve.


uso01@unidata.com (Steven Owens) writes:
>         Game system check: I don't archive TML digests, but I believe
> the previous poster mentioned drilling through a 7cm metal plate or
> something.  I'm probably way off with the numbers, but I definitely
> got the impression that the average traveller laser weapon has more
> power than boiling twenty-five cubic centimeters of water in one
> second.

Well, if we assume a 1cm beam (arbitrarily chosen); the vaporized area will
be slightly larger than the beam.  let's say approx 1.15cm, then we have a
vaporized area of 1cm^2.  If we are vaporizing 25cc of water (flesh), we
have a 25cm deep hole (about 10 inches deep; enought to ruin your whole
day!).  Water requires a suprising amount of energy to vaporise it!  The
absorption of metal plate will of course be different than that of water;
and so will the energy required to vaporize it.  But a 7cm deep hole does
not sound so unreasonable.

>         Note that the laser probably has to be "tuned" to flesh, to a
> degree, to get maximum wound potential.  This would also tend to trade
> off on effectiveness vs. armor.  It could be tuned the other way, of
> course (armor-piercing lasers anybody? :-)

Probably.  Most lasers would probably be constructed to operate on a good
general-purpose setting, and would not be adjustable.  On the other hand,
some expensive models would offer adjustable settings.  However, changing
the frequency of a laser would require some power loss, so these would
either accept the lower beam energy (unlikely), or have a higher power
draw.

> So now you have a pulse laser with 10 times the intensity vs a beam
> laser with 10 times the duration.

The pulse duration is probably more like 0.01 second or less.  3G3 treats
beam lasers as pulse lasers that fire 100 pulses per second; I would assume
a pulse width of 0.005sec and a 50% duty cycle (ie: 0.005sec on followed by
0.005sec off).  Compared to a CW (continous wave) beam laser, the multipulse
beam is twice as intense, but is "on" for only half the time.  Although both
lasers deliver the same amount of energy to the target over the same time
period, the short, rapid pulses will probably do more damage.

A monopulse laser which delivers the same energy in one large pulse (with a
duration of maybe 0.01sec) would have a beam 100 times as intense as the CW
beam laser (but of course, lasting only 1/100th the time).  Such a pulse
would do far more damage to the target than the CW beam laser.

There are limits to the intensity of a laser beam or pulse.  If the laser
light is travelling through an atmosphere, it can reach a point where the
beam ionizes the air as it passes through it.  This ionized air will absorb
and refract far more energy than un-ionized air would.  However, this
ionized air is a good channel for an electric charge or a charged particle
beam.

>         This is something I always found really silly about classic
> traveller, the lack of a built-in "targeting" laser on a beam laser.
> On a pulse-laser, on the other hand, you're probably going to need a
> separate laser for targeting.

Or operate the pulse laser at reduced output and increase the pulse
frequency.  After all, enough pulses per second (and it doesn't take many)
looks like a beam to the human eye.

>         A comment on the difficulty of evading a laser, remarked upon
> by the previous poster.  Try playing paintball, a combat-style game
> using CO2-propelled, paint-filled gelatin capsules.

Or try playing Photon.  You shoot at each other with sort-range infra-red
in a cluttered, dimly-lit, sometimes smoked-up maze (rather like boarding
action combat aboard a disabled starship, come to think of it).  You need
to stay alert, trust noone, and keep your laser handy (oops, wrong game!).
Seriously, though, the major problem is to stick with your buddies and not
get ambushed from around the corner or side passage.


Eric Edward Moore <deathmaster+@cmu.edu> (Eric the Finn) writes:

> What we need are some indexes of how much
> cheaper certain things are to produce at various places, and the cost
> to transport things.

One possibility is the exchange rate chart (most recently incorporated into
Striker, also printed in several other places in Classic Traveller).  I
still use this chart, although (as far as I know) it is not official with
MegaTraveller.

> This example sucks, because the TL14 world has *nothing* to sell to
> the TL15 world.

That all depends; for example, labor might be cheaper on less-developed
worlds.  According to Striker, the average per-capita income (in local
credits) for a world correlates to tech level.  In other words, higher TL
workers get paid more.  The exchange rate chart magnifies this effect by
making these local credits worth even less as starport quality and local
tech level decrease.

This means that labor-intensive goods will be less expensive if produced at
a lower tech level.  High-tech worlds without the labor forces to be
classified as "Industrial" may mass produce unfinished components to be
completed and assembled wherever the work force is both plentiful and less
expensive.  Other possibilities are mineral resources.  If the resources
are readily accessible and of high quality it may be economical to mine
them elsewhere and ship them to where they are needed.



wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                         in the Far Future

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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4937
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 13:46:44 +1100
From: "Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au>
Subject: adjusting laser intensity


>>         Note that the laser probably has to be "tuned" to flesh, to a
>> degree, to get maximum wound potential.  This would also tend to trade
>> off on effectiveness vs. armor.  It could be tuned the other way, of
>> course (armor-piercing lasers anybody? :-)
>
>Probably.  Most lasers would probably be constructed to operate on a good
>general-purpose setting, and would not be adjustable.  On the other hand,
>some expensive models would offer adjustable settings.  However, changing
>the frequency of a laser would require some power loss, so these would
>either accept the lower beam energy (unlikely), or have a higher power
>draw.

I have a cartoon on the wall at work that shows a picture of the ultimate
mouse trap.

Has a dial for the type of cheese to simulate (BREE, CHEDAR, EDAN, etc) as
well as a PSI setting (SCARE, STUN, MAIM, KILL).

What types of settings would you have on a laser?  Just low thru high or
something like on your clothes iron?

Bruce...          pihlab@hhcs.gov.au

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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4938
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 14:02:14 +1100
From: "Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au>
Subject: primitive portable laser


I remember a seminar/conference I attended about 8 years ago where one
of the panel members was a Hollywood special effects/demolitions/
electronics guy.  I can't remember his name at the moment.

Anyway, he claimed that he coupled the BIC Lighter friction method of
igniting the gas in the Lighter (the wheel thingy at the top of those
throw away gas lighters) WITH a standard revolver pistol.  The cartridges
were replaced with crystals (suitable for producing laser light) and the
action of the hammer falling provided sufficient current to produce a
dangerous but very very short laser pulse.

He claimed that the original was a single shot weapon because the crystal
heated up (or something) and so he evolved to the revolver setup.

It was a large audience (read 100+) of science fiction fans and nobody
called him a liar at the time.

Such a hand weapon would have no need for a power-source but would be
limitted to the speed of trigger movement and crystal cooling between
shots.  The chap actually claimed that it was a registered weapon
because it would burn you (or was it blind you?).

Would any of the experts care to comment on this.

I raise it because if feasible it would change the way laser guns
operate --- perhaps.

Bruce....     pihlab@hhcs.gov.au

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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4939
Date: 13 Nov 92 07:29:10 EST
From: Cynthia Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>


Bcc: Blind Recipients List:;
Subject: Possibly the last MT ship design??
Message-ID: <921113122909_71035.1211_CHJ23-1@CompuServe.COM>

Thirz Ueghzgi Class Corvette TL 13

A fighting ship of the Thirz Empire (Thirz Uerra) in Gvurrdon Sector.
The Thirz have very few yards capable of capital ship construction, but
quite a few yards capable of producing good ships under 5000 tons.  One of
the mainstays of the Thirz Navy is the Ueghzgi Class Corvette, a fast
maneuverable escort-size ship with heavy missile armaments.  Unlike the
escort, she is not used as a support vessel in a cruiser squadron, but is
organized into squadrons of her own type and used as the primary offensive
vessel of the Thirz Uerra.  Weak Vargr Corsairs have a marked dislike for the
ship, as it is deadly as an opponent, but does not carry enough cargo to be
useful as a lone corsair.  Strong Vargr Corsair bands are very fond of its
firepower and survivability in fleet actions; loot-hauling is for freighters.
It is also known for its incredibly cramped accomodations; "hot-racking"
is the norm on this vessel.  It is said that on this ship, Frozen Watch
is a desirable assignment because they get a whole low berth to themselves.
Needless to say, sharing a stateroom rather than a bunk is a sign of
charisma; ranking officers who share full-size staterooms are always high-
charisma Vargr.  In spite of the accomodations, the Corvette is considered
a charismatic assignment; she's a deadly fighting ship.  Only high-performance
fighters and the few Thirz capital ships are considered better (more
charismatic) assignments.
Note that performance was gained at the expense of endurance; her
designers assumed that any high-speed pursuit will be over in less than 7
days, as 7 days @ 6G is enough delta-V to span most solar systems and reach
almost all jump points; she has enough maneuver fuel remaining for 1G cruising
for the rest of the month, plus a total of 72 hours of weapons firing.

CraftID: Thirz Ueghzgi Class Corvette, TL= 13, MCr 2623.064
 (with discount) MCr 2098.451 (std price) MCr 2549.718

Hull: 2700/6750,Disp= 3000, Config= 4SL, Armor= 52F
Unloaded= 66916 tons, Loaded=  70470 tons

Power: 489/978, Fusion= 66000 MW,
Duration= 7 days @Full Maneuver, +23 @1-G, +3 for weapons
 1/2, Solar = 16.30MW, Duration=indef
 3/6, Fuel Cells = 54.86MW, Duration= 1.0

Loco: 459/918,Jump= 3, Maneuver= 6G Thrusters, Agility= 5

Commo: Radio=System x2, LaserComm=System x1, MaserComm=System x1,

Sensors: EMMasking, ActEMS=FarOrbit x2, PassEMS=Interstellar x8,
Neutrino=100kw x2, Densitometer=HiPen/100m x2, EMSJammer=FarOrbit x1

Off: Missiles=x90
    1
   1

Def: DefDM=+12
Repulsors=x7x, Sandcasters=xx9
   1 1
   1 1

Control: Computer=Model 7x3, Panel=Dynalink x575, Special= HeadUpHolo x10
LargeHoloDisp x1, Environ=BasEnv, BasLS, ExtLS, Grav, Inertial Comp,
Airlocks x5

Accom: Crew= 54 (Cb=7,Ce=11,Cc=7,Cg=7,Cs=1,Cd=1,Cfz=15,Ct=20)
State=2 SmState=10 Bunks=15 Low=15
SubCraft=50 tons

Other: Cargo= 2427 kl, Fuel= 16099 kl, Fuel Cell fuel= 35 kl,
Fuel Purifier= 31.000 kl/hour, Fuel Scoops,
ObjSize=Large , EmLevel=Faint

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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4940
From: metlay@netcom.com (metlay)
Subject: On lasers
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 6:58:40 PST

Wildstar:
>Steve Owens:
>>         Note that the laser probably has to be "tuned" to flesh, to a
>> degree, to get maximum wound potential.  This would also tend to trade
>> off on effectiveness vs. armor.  It could be tuned the other way, of
>> course (armor-piercing lasers anybody? :-)
>
>Probably.  Most lasers would probably be constructed to operate on a good
>general-purpose setting, and would not be adjustable.  On the other hand,
>some expensive models would offer adjustable settings.  However, changing
>the frequency of a laser would require some power loss, so these would
>either accept the lower beam energy (unlikely), or have a higher power
>draw.

Heh. Anyone ever see the shortlived (six episodes, one BBC "season") series
STAR COPS? Stupid name for IMO the best SF series in history, the ongoing
story of an ex-policeman's attempts to forge an effective international
investigative team for crimes occurring off the earth in the early part
of the 21st century. How do you handle crimes whose very definitions and
existence change with technology? Kidnapping fertilized ova, cloning,
pharmaceutical terrorism, sabotage in labs that can be opened to vacuum, etc.
Highly recommended. Anyway, one plot concerned the development of a tunable
portable laser weapon, which (at the cost of power loss) could be tuned
so as to have variable effectiveness against armor, space suits, or flesh.
In fact, it could be tuned finely enough (I think the math works, too) to
give a caucasian a nasty skin burn but blow a hole in a black man. As one of
the lead characters (a black American astronaut) mutters, "Great. Racist
weaponry!" |-< |-P

I can see the Solomani issuing lasers to their troops that would only
torch a Suerrat....

(The use of politics on the show is interesting too BTW. Every episode, they
pick a new supergiant to slam on: the USA, the EEC, the Indians, the Arab
oil sheiks, the Japanese megacorporations, etc.)

>>         This is something I always found really silly about classic
>> traveller, the lack of a built-in "targeting" laser on a beam laser.
>> On a pulse-laser, on the other hand, you're probably going to need a
>> separate laser for targeting.
>
>Or operate the pulse laser at reduced output and increase the pulse
>frequency.  After all, enough pulses per second (and it doesn't take many)
>looks like a beam to the human eye.

This works very easily. You could build it into an existing laser for pennies;
the UI would be the most expensive part. I've always ruled that lasers are
self-targeting, in my games. Squeeze the grip, get a bead; squeeze the trigger,
shoot.

>>         A comment on the difficulty of evading a laser, remarked upon
>> by the previous poster.  Try playing paintball, a combat-style game
>> using CO2-propelled, paint-filled gelatin capsules.
>
>Or try playing Photon.  You shoot at each other with sort-range infra-red
>in a cluttered, dimly-lit, sometimes smoked-up maze (rather like boarding
>action combat aboard a disabled starship, come to think of it).  You need
>to stay alert, trust noone, and keep your laser handy (oops, wrong game!).
>Seriously, though, the major problem is to stick with your buddies and not
>get ambushed from around the corner or side passage.

*Embarrassed blush* I am and have been for a long time a pretty good pistol
shot, but I made a complete fool of myself in the Naperville Photon Arena.
Shooting and being shot at are two very different things, and it takes a
long time to develop reflexes (and a lot of money, too). You also learn a
few things about encumbrance. They strap a helmet and a huge battery pack
on you, and suddenly it's not quite as easy to do the acrobatics you see
in the movies. |->

It would also help if the SFX in your internal helmet speaker for "fire,"
"hit scored on opponent" and "hit scored on you" were easier to differentiate
amidst all the noise and screaming. |-\

- --
dr. michael metlay       | and she's a master of return hitting
atomic city              | giving rhythm to her posts
p. o. box 81175          | so you read her and think hey it sounds good
pittsburgh pa 15217-0675 | and wish her posts had a soundtrack too
metlay@netcom.com        |                               (f. ercolessi)

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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4941
Date: 13 Nov 92 16:36:59 EST
From: Mark Watson <100022.3361@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Cockpit controls

[ I said control systems would vary by technology rather than race. Derek
  and Scott disagree ]

Well, maybe for small craft with high agility and a single point of control,
like current aircraft, that may be true. But for a low agility craft I would
see joystick/rudder/pedals as pretty useless ... are large submarines
steered that way? (Steve?) Once you have something like that then it might
make sense to extrapolate a common interface which was useful for piloting
all kinds of craft across the range. Or maybe not -
 its difficult to imagine given that the extent to which our perspective,
based on 60 or so years of experience compared with the thousands of years
for the Imperium. Truth is you can't see that kind of change coming till
it hits you in the face. For example, this device I keep trying to talk into
is called a mouse :-) (paradigm shift, anybody?).

Mark


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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4942
Date: 13 Nov 92 21:55:07 EST
From: Cynthia Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Submarine controls...

Mark Watson:

>Well, maybe for small craft with high agility and a single point of
>control, like current aircraft, that may be true. But for a low
>agility craft I would see joystick/rudder/pedals as pretty useless
 ... are large submarines steered that way? (Steve?) Once you have
>something like that then it might make sense to extrapolate a common
>interface which was useful for piloting all kinds of craft across the
>range. Or maybe not - its difficult to imagine given that the extent
>to which our perspective, based on 60 or so years of experience compared
>with the thousands of years for the Imperium. Truth is you can't see
>that kind of change coming till it hits you in the face.

A submarine uses two control yokes similar to an airliner's (one to
control the planes and one for the rudder), plus a wheel about 30"
across (speed control forward) , plus a 20" wheel (speed control
backwards).  Plus the guy who controls trim, who sits at a panel full
of switches and pushbuttons.  Plus the guy who actually gives the orders,
of course.  He just stands around drinking coffee and trying to look
like he knows what is going on.
Most Navy surface ships have similar controls, though I am given to
understand that the newest stuff has a wheel about half the size of your
car's steering wheel, plus a throttle.

---Steve



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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4943
Date:    Sat, 14 Nov 1992 15:14:07 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: Controls and maneuverability

Hi!

Mark suggested that on spacecraft with low maneuverability a
stick and rudder type control system is not necessary.  When you're
moving really slowly, or don't have much agility, you don't really
need a high performance type control panel for low performance
engines.  This is mostly true.

However, the normal traveller spacecraft is capable of at least 1G
acceleration for maneuvering.  Now let's look at a comparable
performance:  The only aircraft *I* know of with a large production
that has a 1 to 1 thrust to weight ratio (hence 1G acceleration)
is the high performance fighter, the McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle.
Therefore, those clunky old 1G Type A Free Traders got a whole
hullovalot more maneuverability than most people realize!

The only powered traveller space craft that have less than 1G
maneuver are those equipped with either Mass Drivers, or Ion
Drives.  Even those craft will need some sort of directional
controllers and maneuvering jets.  So, why would one design a
control panel just for those two cases that would require special
training in order to operate them?  If the pilot trained on a
control stick (or one of the other types I mentioned) why bother
changing it?  I don't know for certain, but I'm willing to bet you
that the Skylab, Salyut, Mir, and the proposed Station Freedom all
had/have/will have joystick attitude controllers for the rare times
that the stations need re-alignment.

Traveller space craft that have less thrust than one of today's top
interceptors are the exception, not the rule.  Now, the F-15 may be
capable of 9G turns, so maybe you disagree with me over the
definition of maneuverabilty/thrust.  But, as a student pilot, I
was not allowed to put the Cessna 152 into maneuvers that were more
than 1G (60 degrees angle of bank)  (My CFI had this temper ya
know... :-)  Anyway, I'll tell ya.  *I* wouldn't wanna fly
maneuvers like that without the kind control afforded by a stick or
some similar control system.  1G is a *lot* more than it sounds
like.  If you don't like plane analogies, 1G is more maneuver than
ANY automobile is or will be ever capable of.

Scott 2G Kellogg

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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4944
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 19:11:41 -0600
From: Steven Owens <uso01@mailhost.unidata.com>
Subject: On lasers


>>>         This is something I always found really silly about classic
>>> traveller, the lack of a built-in "targeting" laser on a beam laser.
>>> On a pulse-laser, on the other hand, you're probably going to need a
>>> separate laser for targeting.
>>
>> Or operate the pulse laser at reduced output and increase the pulse
>> frequency.  After all, enough pulses per second (and it doesn't take many)
>> looks like a beam to the human eye.
>
> This works very easily. You could build it into an existing laser for
> pennies; the UI would be the most expensive part. I've always ruled
> that lasers are self-targeting, in my games. Squeeze the grip, get a
> bead; squeeze the trigger, shoot.

I was speaking of a slow, "single-shot" laser, i.e. pulse, wait
one second, pulse, etc.  A fast-pulsing laser would be functionally
equivalent to a beam laser in terms of beam continuity, targeting, etc.

>>>         A comment on the difficulty of evading a laser, remarked upon
>>> by the previous poster.  Try playing paintball, a combat-style game
>>> using CO2-propelled, paint-filled gelatin capsules.
>>
>> Or try playing Photon.  You shoot at each other with sort-range infra-red
>> in a cluttered, dimly-lit, sometimes smoked-up maze (rather like boarding

Actually, I've played paintball in such surroundings.  Photon
doesn't do much for me.  I just deleted about a paragraph's worth of
ranting about how horrible photon is.  This isn't the place.  I've
played paintball in one of the best indoor fields I've ever seen - it
used to be a state mental hospital.  Three floors, hallways, rooms,
windows, stair wells, roofs, etc.  Tons o' fun.  Several games we
played with LZ-marker smoke flares to provide an interesting
environment.

> *Embarrassed blush* I am and have been for a long time a pretty good pistol
> shot, but I made a complete fool of myself in the Naperville Photon Arena.
> Shooting and being shot at are two very different things, and it takes a
> long time to develop reflexes (and a lot of money, too).

Well, the first right reflex is pretty easy to develop - get
down behind cover as fast as possible.  The problem is unlearning this -
figuring out when you should be up and moving.

> You also learn a few things about encumbrance. They strap a helmet
> and a huge battery pack on you, and suddenly it's not quite as easy
> to do the acrobatics you see in the movies. |->

This is certainly true.  When I play paintball I generally
wear a camo jumpsuit with lots of pockets for 12-gram CO2 and paint,
and carry a Rapide or similar paintball gun, slung SMG-style.  On
occasion I've worn belts with ammo pouches, canteens, etc, but they
always get in the way, they generally bounce around when you have to
run, and most importantly (for me), they tend to get caught on things
when you're slithering through knee-high grass and undergrowth to get
in for a close-up...

> It would also help if the SFX in your internal helmet speaker for "fire,"
> "hit scored on opponent" and "hit scored on you" were easier to differentiate
> amidst all the noise and screaming. |-\

The constant "noise" from the photon helmet speaker was quite
annoying.  You can learn a LOT about what's going on around you if you
listen.  The helmets also limited peripheral vision far too much, for
no good reason.

Steven J. Owens
uso01@unidata.com


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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4945
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 1:14:36 EST
From: Seth the Lesser <slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: Controls and maneuverability

Scott 2G Kellogg said:
> However, the normal traveller spacecraft is capable of at least 1G
> acceleration for maneuvering.  Now let's look at a comparable
> performance:  The only aircraft *I* know of with a large production
> that has a 1 to 1 thrust to weight ratio (hence 1G acceleration)
> is the high performance fighter, the McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle.
> Therefore, those clunky old 1G Type A Free Traders got a whole
> hullovalot more maneuverability than most people realize!

Huh.  Kinda makes you wonder just what sort of control panel a craft with a 6G
maneuver drive and an agility of 3 or so would have.  Must be something pretty
special.

On the other hand, keep in mind that the forward acceleration of 1G for a Type
A doesn't translate to 1G of *lateral* acceleration; thrusters only get 40%
of normal efficiency parallel to the plates, so that's only 0.4G lateral
acceleration.  You'd know better than I would, but isn't lateral acceleration
more closely related to maneuverability and "crankiness" than forward
acceleration is? 0.4G is an *awful* lot less than the 9G that you say an F-15
can pull in a tight turn.

Seth "the Lesser"
Pardon me if I don't make sense; I've got 30% of a case of the mumps.

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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4946
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Re: Submarine Controls
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:51:41 +0100 (MET)

> From: Cynthia Higginbotham <71035.1211@CompuServe.COM>
> Subject: Submarine controls...
>
> A submarine uses two control yokes similar to an airliner's (one to
> control the planes and one for the rudder), plus a wheel about 30"
> across (speed control forward) , plus a 20" wheel (speed control
> backwards).  Plus the guy who controls trim, who sits at a panel full
> of switches and pushbuttons.  Plus the guy who actually gives the orders,
> of course.

  Newer Swedish subs use one 'airliner' yoke to handle all the pitch and yaw
steering. I have reasons to suspect that the same person also holds the
throttles. The trim I'm not certain about.

  And, btw, there is still one extra person there to give the orders:)

> ---Steve

- -bertil-
- --
"Ack! Phht!" - Bill the Prez

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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4947
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Re: Controls and Maneuverability
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:01:43 +0100 (MET)

> From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
> Subject: Controls and maneuverability
>
> However, the normal traveller spacecraft is capable of at least 1G
> acceleration for maneuvering.  Now let's look at a comparable
> performance:  The only aircraft *I* know of with a large production
> that has a 1 to 1 thrust to weight ratio (hence 1G acceleration)

  Eh, looks like we're back to the old agility vs acceleration thread again:)

  If you are going to compare the maneuverability of a 1G ship and a
jet fighter, you can't use the fighters engine acceleration as a input,
since the fighter uses airfoils to turn, not thrust.

  The comparision should be made between the ship that can do 1G turns and
the aircraft that can do 9G turns (And probably 15G for high-TL hybrids that
mount 6G compensators).

  So while a good scout ship (2G) should be able to outclimb almost anything
TL8 or less (except SAM's:) almost anything including a WWI fighter should
be able to outturn the scout ship.

  (It won't do them any good however, since almost all spaceships mount
turreted weaponry)

> I don't know for certain, but I'm willing to bet you
> that the Skylab, Salyut, Mir, and the proposed Station Freedom all
> had/have/will have joystick attitude controllers for the rare times
> that the stations need re-alignment.

  I'm resonably certain that the Shuttle use a joystick for in-orbit
maneuvering.

> Scott 2G Kellogg

- -bertil-
- --
"Ack! Phht!" - Bill the Prez

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


Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4948
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 16:21:54 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Performance and Flight Controls

CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU (Scott "2G" Kellogg) writes:

> The only aircraft *I* know of with a large production
> that has a 1 to 1 thrust to weight ratio (hence 1G acceleration)
> is the high performance fighter, the McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle.
> Therefore, those clunky old 1G Type A Free Traders got a whole
> hullovalot more maneuverability than most people realize!

Don't for get the Harrier!  It probably has more in common with
Traveller spacecraft than just about anything else flying today.  It
uses a stick, rudder pedals, and throttle just like a conventional
aircraft.  The stick and rudder controls are also connected to a
reaction control system, which uses small jets of engine bleed air (high
pressure air from the engine) to control the aircraft at low speeds
where the aerodynamic control surfaces would be ineffective.

The harrier also has a thrust vector control, on the same side as the
throttle, as I remember.  Because of this arrangement, you can't change
the thrust vector at the same time as you work the throttle.  That's OK,
becaue you usually don't need to (example: you use the vector control to
bring the aircraft to a hover, and then use the throttle to reduce
thrust and lower it to the ground).

Other aircraft with a thrust/weight ration of about 1:1 are: Mirage 2000
almost makes it with an "air combat" load (within 1,000 lbs with the
burner lit).  The F-16 is slightly over 1:1 with an AAM load and full
afterburner, as is the F-15 in the same configuration.  The MIG-21/bis
with half internal fuel and a "typical" load also makes it.  The
Yak-36MP also qualifies (being the Soviet equivalent of a Harrier).
Data extracted from Gunston and Skick's "Modern Air Combat" (Crescent
Books, 1983).  By no means an authoritative or exhaustive reference.

> I don't know for certain, but I'm willing to bet you
> that the Skylab, Salyut, Mir, and the proposed Station Freedom all
> had/have/will have joystick attitude controllers for the rare times
> that the stations need re-alignment.

I'm not sure, but I'd bet that the American vehicles all have pilot
controlled backup or emergency attitude control systems.  The presence
of this kind of equipment has saved missions and possibly lives ever
since the original astronaut corps insisted that they be installed early
in the US space program.  (If I remember correctly, the first US
rondezvous was completed manually, with one astronaut looking up figures
on a table, because the computer was on the blink).

I'm not so sure about Russian equipment; they tend more towards
automatic or ground controlled spacecraft.

wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                         in the Far Future


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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4949
From: s3007048@mackay.mpce.mq.edu.au
Subject: contacting Lauren
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 10:50:41 GMT

I was quite excited to discover that a GDW staff member had acquired
email access to Internet.  But unfortunately, I think there is a small
problem, as I cannot email Lauren directly.  Has anyone else had similar
problems?  Also, Lauren if you're listening, try and email me?

Dratz...

Regards,

Mike.
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Internet:s3007048@mackay.mpce.mq.edu.au
    Phone:+61 43 841525

                     "I have a cunning plan..."- Baldrick (Black Adder)
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Michael Glew - School of Math Phys Comp & Elec - Macquarie University
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------


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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4950
From: swhunter@teaching.cs.adelaide.edu.au (Steve Hunter)
Subject: Acceleration
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 10:36:06 CST

Scott 2G Kellog wrote:

>performance:  The only aircraft *I* know of with a large production
>that has a 1 to 1 thrust to weight ratio (hence 1G acceleration)
>is the high performance fighter, the McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle.

        I may be utterly wrong, be 1G acceleration on modern day
military aircraft would surely be common (or even exceeded) .. if
they are structurally capable of 9G turns, and commonly do 4-6G
turns ..... can anyone tell me for sure?

>             Anyway, I'll tell ya.  *I* wouldn't wanna fly
>maneuvers like that without the kind control afforded by a stick or
>some similar control system.  1G is a *lot* more than it sounds
>like.  If you don't like plane analogies, 1G is more maneuver than
>ANY automobile is or will be ever capable of.

        Hmmm .. the difference in size between the bulk of the
ships in Traveller and modern day fighters (and Cessnas :) is
pretty large .. so I would suggest that whilst a control yoke is
consistent with what we expect, perhaps (due to the large
role of automation) we may have something more like options on a computer
console (it would be quite complex to maneuver a large bulk in zero-gravity)
 .. I don't know .. interesting topic tho'.

Quickly, 1G may be more than the average family saloon is capable of .. but
Formula 1 GP cars accelerate at 1.3G, brake at 4G, and corner at 4.5G ..
so I would guess that modern sports cars would maneuver at 1G in some cases
(and think of the acceleration of modern day super-bikes .. 0-100km/h in
less than 3-3.5 seconds? seems pretty impressive 2 me ...)

Sorry this is a little off topic .. Steve

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

Bundle: 419
Archive-Message-Number: 4951
Date:    Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:25:07 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: Maneuver controls

Howdy,

I looked up a few things in the CRC handbook.  I was wrong.  An
automobile *is* capable of more than 1G acceleration.  The static
coefficient of friction of rubber on 'solids' ranges from 1 to 4.
That would be the max accel for a car.

Now, someone suggested (sorry I forget who) that the old type A
trader will only turn at 0.4G's not 1G for lateral acceleration.
Now, a corresponding angle of bank for an aircraft is about 45
degrees.  Now most aircraft rarely exceed that.  It's kinda rare
that you get on an airliner that banks that steeply.  Flying
traffic patterns (landing & take off) under normal circumstances
you only use a 30 degree angle of bank (0.15G's).  Having any less
control than a stick and rudder for routine delicate maneuvers like
that would be needlessly risky.

Have you tried any flight simulator programs?  Well, it's a heck of
a lot easier to fly with a stick than it is with a keyboard.
(mouse... etc.)

Wildstar:
Yeah, I forgot about the Harrier & the Forger.  That's what you get
for posting with a stuffed head.  But I rather doubt that about the
MiG-21.  One of my flight instructors was an ex soviet frontal
aviation pilot.  He said the MiG-21 was a pig with weight to thrust
somewhere around 6 : 1.  Also, when they get *That* light on fuel,
you can't afford to go very far.  And there's a *huge* amount of
unusable fuel in the MiG-21's tanks.

2G Scott^Z

------------------------------
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 420  4952 16-Nov-1992 Matthew D. Gold  Sector mapping utilities... << I wrote
 420  4953 17-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Missiles, Deckplans, and Misc Stuff <<
 420  4954 17-Nov-1992 "Cynthia Higgin  CHANGE OF ADDRESS << Our e-mail address
 420  4955 18-Nov-1992 Corran J. Webst  TNE... << Hi there,

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


Bundle: 420
Archive-Message-Number: 4952
Subject: Sector mapping utilities...
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 16:36:37 CST
From: goldman@orac.cray.com (Matthew D. Goldman)
Reply-To: goldman@orac.cray.com

I wrote a while ago asking about sector mapping utilities that could
generate postscript output from datafiles such as those on the archive
site.  There are a number of nifty subsector mapping tools; however,
none of them quite fit the bill.  I've been working on a tool, it is
based upon the mapsub.c programme written by James T. Perkins.
Basically I took his postscript header file, reworked it,  and then
wrote a new C programme driver for header file.  I have enclosed
the output below of my test data sector.  I will post the programme
to the archive after I get it working all the way.  I welcome comments


Matt

- --
Matthew Goldman              E-mail: goldman@orac.cray.com
Fax: (612) 683-3099                   Work: (612) 683-3061
      "Say George, I don't mean to interrupt, but
       there's a glowing red dot on your forehead."

- ----- cut here ----- cut here ----- cut here ----- cut here -----
%!PS-Adobe-1.0
% Traveller subsector map and mapping functions
% Most of this was taken from James Perkin's earlier program
% for mapping subsectors.
% @(#)mapsector.pro     1.5; Matt Goldman (goldman@orac.cray.com) 11/16/92

%-----Constants-----
/cm { 28 mul 2.54 div } def     % cm >> points
/unit { 1 cm mul } def


/topOfPageX 3 cm def
/topOfPageY 70.1 cm def
/nameFontSize 5 def
/nameWidthLimit 1.9 unit def

/nameFont /Helvetica findfont nameFontSize scalefont def
/portFont /Helvetica findfont 4 scalefont def
/numberFont /Helvetica findfont 4 scalefont def

%-----Basic Functions-----
/xboat {
/A exch def
/B exch def
/C exch def
/D exch def
gsave
.75 setgray
5 setlinewidth
newpath
B A mapCoords
getCoords moveto
D C mapCoords
getCoords lineto
stroke
grestore
} def

/hexSegV {
currentpoint translate
1 unit 0 lineto
60 rotate
currentpoint translate
1 unit 0 lineto
-60 rotate
} def

/hexLineV {
%Now move to the upper left corner of
%first hex.
gsave
newpath
curX curY moveto
120 rotate
currentpoint translate
1 unit 0 moveto
120 rotate
%Now print a segment for each
%side of the hex
40 {
hexSegV
} repeat
stroke
grestore
}def

/hexSidesV {% - >> -
gsave
2 setlinewidth
0 setgray
%go to the defined top of page
%this will be the center of the
%first hex
/curX topOfPageX def
/curY topOfPageY def
5 {
hexLineV
/curX curX 12 unit add def
} repeat
grestore
} def

/hexSegH {
1 unit 0 lineto
-60 rotate
currentpoint translate
1 unit 0 lineto
60 rotate
currentpoint translate
1 unit 0 lineto
60 rotate
currentpoint translate
1 unit 0 lineto
-60 rotate
currentpoint translate
} def

/hexLineH {
gsave
curX curY moveto
%Now move to the upper left corner of
%first hex.
120 rotate
currentpoint translate
1 unit 0 moveto
%Orient yourself so that you are facing
%along the hex row
-120 rotate
currentpoint translate
16 {
hexSegH
} repeat
stroke
grestore
} def

/hexSidesH {
gsave
2 setlinewidth
0 setgray
newpath
%go to the defined top of page
%this will be the center of the
%first hex
/curX topOfPageX def
/curY topOfPageY def
5 {
hexLineH
/curY curY 3 sqrt unit 10 mul sub def
} repeat
grestore
} def

/hex {                             % - >> -
  gsave
  -1 unit 0 rmoveto
  currentpoint translate
  60 rotate
  5 {
    1 unit 0 lineto
    currentpoint translate
    -60 rotate
  } repeat
  closepath
  stroke
  grestore
} def

/rowOfHex {                       % x y >> -
  moveto
  40 {
    hex
    0 0 3 sqrt unit sub rmoveto
  } repeat
} def

/hexMap {                         % - >> -
  gsave
  .3 setlinewidth
  0 setgray
  /curX topOfPageX def
  /curY topOfPageY def
  16 {
    curX curY rowOfHex
    /curX curX 1.5 unit add def
    /curY curY 3 sqrt 2 div unit sub def
    curX curY rowOfHex
    /curX curX 1.5 unit add def
    /curY curY 3 sqrt 2 div unit add def
  } repeat
  grestore
} def

/hexGrid {
hexMap
hexSidesV
hexSidesH
} def

/mapCoords {                   % HexX HexY >> -
  /actY exch 1 sub 40 mod 3 sqrt unit mul topOfPageY exch sub def
  dup 2 mod 0 eq {
    /actY actY 3 sqrt 2 div unit sub def    % displace column if HexX is even
  } if
  /actX exch 1 sub 32 mod 1.5 unit mul topOfPageX add def
} def

/getCoords {                   % - >> x y
  actX actY
} def

/liqPlnt {
  gsave%%%%
    newpath
gsave
1 setgray%%%%%
getCoords .65 unit 0 360 arc fill
grestore
0 setgray
    getCoords .15 unit 0 360 arc fill
  grestore%%%%
} def

/desPlnt {
  gsave
    newpath
gsave
1 setgray%%%%%
getCoords .65 unit 0 360 arc fill
grestore
0 setgray
    getCoords .15 unit 0 360 arc
    gsave
      1 setgray fill
    grestore
    .5 setlinewidth stroke
    grestore
} def

/asteroids {
  gsave%%%%
    newpath
gsave
1 setgray%%%%%
getCoords .65 unit 0 360 arc fill
grestore
0 setgray
    getCoords .1 unit add .04 unit 0 360 arc fill
    getCoords exch .15 unit add exch .02 unit 0 360 arc fill
    getCoords .15 unit sub exch .1 unit add exch .03 unit 0 360 arc fill
    getCoords .04 unit sub exch .15 unit sub exch .05 unit 0 360 arc fill
    getCoords .05 unit sub .02 unit 0 360 arc fill
  grestore%%%%
} def

/name {                   %  name >> -
  getCoords moveto
  nameFont setfont
  gsave
    0 -.65 unit rmoveto
    dup stringwidth pop
    dup dup nameWidthLimit gt
      {nameWidthLimit exch div 1 scale}
      {pop}
    ifelse
    neg 2 div 0 rmoveto
    gsave
      0 nameFontSize -6 div rmoveto
      dup stringwidth pop 0 rlineto
      0 nameFontSize rlineto
      dup stringwidth pop neg 0 rlineto
      closepath
      1 setgray fill
    grestore
    show
  grestore
} def

/starPort {                % code >> -
  getCoords moveto
  portFont setfont
  dup stringwidth pop 2 div 0 exch sub
    .2 unit rmoveto
  show
} def

/navalBase {               % - >> -
  gsave
  getCoords moveto
  -.5 unit .3 unit rmoveto
  currentpoint translate
  4 {
    .2 unit 0 lineto
    currentpoint translate
    -144 rotate
  } repeat
  closepath
  fill
  grestore
} def

/scoutBase {
  gsave
  newpath
  getCoords moveto
  -.5 unit -.125 unit rmoveto
  currentpoint translate
  60 rotate
  .15 unit 0 lineto
  currentpoint translate
  -120 rotate
  .15 unit 0 lineto
  closepath
  fill
  grestore
} def

/gasGiant {
  gsave
  newpath
  getCoords moveto
  .4 unit .3 unit rmoveto
  currentpoint translate
  gsave
  1 setgray
  0 0 .1 unit 0 360 arc fill
  grestore
  0 0 .05 unit 0 360 arc fill
  grestore
} def

/redZone {
  gsave
  newpath
  .8 setlinewidth
  0 setgray
  getCoords 2 3 div unit 130 220 arc stroke
  getCoords 2 3 div unit -40 50 arc stroke
  0 setgray
  grestore
} def

/amberZone {
  gsave
  newpath
  .2 setlinewidth
  0 setgray
  getCoords 2 3 div unit 130 220 arc stroke
  getCoords 2 3 div unit -40 50 arc stroke
  0 setgray
  grestore
} def

/hexNumber {                 % (XX YY) >> -
  getCoords moveto
  numberFont setfont
  dup stringwidth pop 2 div 0 exch sub
    .5 unit rmoveto
  show
} def


/SectorTitle {
gsave
0 setgray
/Times-Roman findfont
32 scalefont
setfont
590 36 moveto
90 rotate
currentpoint translate
show
grestore
} def

/subsectorbox {% xmin ymin xmax ymax
gsave
.9 setgray
5 setlinewidth
/ymin exch def
/xmin exch def
/ymax exch def
/xmax exch def
newpath
xmin ymin mapCoords
getCoords moveto
xmin ymax mapCoords
getCoords lineto
xmax ymax mapCoords
getCoords lineto
xmax ymin mapCoords
getCoords lineto
xmin ymin mapCoords
getCoords lineto
closepath
stroke
grestore
} def

%-----Main-----
% Other system specs  (start with zones)
(Test Sector) SectorTitle

 1  1  1  2 xboat

 1  2  1  3 xboat

 1  3  1  4 xboat

 1  3  3  4 xboat

 3  4  5  3 xboat

 9  6 20 14 xboat

20 14 29 26 xboat

hexGrid

1 1 mapCoords
desPlnt
(0101) hexNumber
(Zeycude) name
(C) starPort
gasGiant

1 2 mapCoords
desPlnt
(0102) hexNumber
(Reno) name
(C) starPort
gasGiant

1 3 mapCoords
liqPlnt
(0103) hexNumber
(ERRERE) name
(B) starPort
navalBase

1 4 mapCoords
liqPlnt
(0104) hexNumber
(Cantrel) name
(C) starPort

1 8 mapCoords
liqPlnt
(0108) hexNumber
(Gyomar) name
(D) starPort
gasGiant

2 2 mapCoords
liqPlnt
(0202) hexNumber
(Thengo) name
(C) starPort
gasGiant

3 1 mapCoords
liqPlnt
(0301) hexNumber
(Rio) name
(C) starPort
gasGiant

3 4 mapCoords
liqPlnt
(0304) hexNumber
(Cantrel) name
(C) starPort

5 2 mapCoords
desPlnt
(0502) hexNumber
(Reno) name
(C) starPort
gasGiant

5 3 mapCoords
liqPlnt
(0503) hexNumber
(Errere) name
(B) starPort
navalBase

6 1 mapCoords
desPlnt
(0601) hexNumber
(Zeycude) name
(C) starPort
gasGiant

8 5 mapCoords
liqPlnt
redZone
(0805) hexNumber
(Narval) name
(D) starPort
scoutBase
gasGiant

8 8 mapCoords
liqPlnt
amberZone
(0808) hexNumber
() name
(B) starPort
navalBase
gasGiant

8 10 mapCoords
asteroids
(0810) hexNumber
(Frond) name
(E) starPort

showpage
%---- cut here ----- cut here ----- cut here ----- cut here -----

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

Bundle: 420
Archive-Message-Number: 4953
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 22:52:59 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Missiles, Deckplans, and Misc Stuff

"Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au> writes:
> Would you really use ship-to-ship nuke missiles against ground targets?
> I would have thought you'd need specialist missiles for atmospheric
> re-entry and atmospheric operation.

Why not?  Presumably, the Imperial Navy uses specialized ordinance for
planetary attack, but there will be occasions when an ordinary ship needs to
attack a planet.  Ordinary missiles (conventional or nuclear) can probably
be pressed into service.  "Ortillery" well-established in the Traveller
universe; in a pinch I'm sure that the player characters will improvise
something that will work.

> Should be cleaner and less stopable to simply use a streamlined
> kinetic weapon than a nuke.
> Has anyone done some design work on what a kinetic missile should look
> like, costs, size, damage etc?

I haven't, but the subject has been kicked around both on TML and in the
Science-Fiction field for a while.  One proposal was a bundle of steel rods,
each rod with a guidance unit and control surfaces.  The bundle would be
"parked" in orbit, and provided with a rocket motor to de-orbit the bundle
on command.  During re-entry, each rod seeks its target, and should impact
with enough energy to punch a hole through just about anything (tanks,
ships, runways, etc).


Martyn J. Wheeler <sasmjw@unx.sas.com> writes:
> I'd love a status window that
> tells me how many "squares" of computer room or gunnery controls I
> need to add, for example, or how much mess room space I have left.

Presumably something like AutoCAD would be up to it; not that I own a copy
of AutoCAD.  I don't know what's available in PD/ShareWare CAD packages, but
perhaps one of them would also do the trick.

When the TNE ship design system comes out, I will probably create another
ship design spreadsheet, and I will almost certainly create a page that
shows the major components in terms of deckplan "squares" (or whatever TNE
will use; I would like to see the 0.5"=1.5m scale continue).  A possibility
would be to key this data into a programmable calculator (my trusty HP41C
comes to mind) so that the calculator can keep track of it; perhaps using a
set of keys to request "squares remaining" and another set to subtract
"squares drawn" from a set of categories.

> With the advent of laser printers (not that *I* have one), your
> concerns about the quality of hardcopy output are probably less
> significant these days.

The paper size is a little small, though.  Most laser printers still only
handle 8.5x11" paper.  While I drew some plans this small (small craft and
100-tonners) most were on 11x17" paper (about the same size as those
provided with Azhanti High Lightning) and some were 17x22".  I also do the
original drawings in color (red for drives and heavy equipment, green for
controls and electronics, black for hull, bulkheads, partititions and
detals, and sometimes blue to mark fuel spaces).  These colors all xerox
well; and many copy shops can reduce from the larger sizes to 8.5x11"; it is
much easier to create a crisp drawing in a large scale and reduce it than it
is to try to add detail to a small drawing.

A plotter that will do 11x17 will cost from $400(used) to $1600, while one
that can do 17x22 will cost over $1000 even if I can get one used (does
anyone have a plotter they are going to throw away?).  In both cases, this
is much more than I can justify for deck plans; a laser printer is easier to
justify (I can use it for more things) but it is still out of my price
range.  So I will continue to do them by hand.

> What are the effects of orbital bombardment on un-hardened ground
> targets?  What are the range of effects of a single-ship nuclear or
> conventional missile attack on a target such as a troop encampment, a
> starport, or a government building?

Some information from Striker may be useful in some recent TML discussions.
Striker Rule 75: Naval Vessels, says (in part):

"75.C Weapons: ... When conducting direct fire on the battlefield, ship
weapons have the same capabilities and fire control limits as other direct
fire weapons.  When firing from orbit, a forward observer is necessary. ..."

"75.C.3 Missiles: Turret-mounted missiles have warheads equivalent to 15cm
CPR gun rounds; bay-mounted misssiles have warheads equivalent to 25cm CPR
gun rounds.  There are 25 launchers in a 50-ton bay, and 50 launchers in a
100-ton bay.  Ship missiles have the same guidance system types as tac
missiles: they may be target designated, homing, or drone. ..."

"75.C.7 Forward Observers: ... However, ships high overhead (such as those
in orbit), and ships with missiles and meson guns in any positions, may be
guided in their fire by a forward observer.  The observer must have a map
box and a battle computer, and must be in communication with the ship. ..."

The MegaTraveller rule book thoughtfully neglects to provide data for odd
sizes of CPR gun rounds, so you'll have to interpolate.  You should probably
use the howitzer table (Striker used only one table, with modifiers for the
type of gun; if I remember correctly, howitzers used no modifiers).  I
would presume that the warhead would be HEAP for anti-ship missiles, but
ground-attack missiles probably offer all types of warheads.

It is not clear what type of guidance system standard anti-ship missiles
have.  I would presume some type of passive homing guidance; however,
"semi-active" (ie: target designated) homing would be a popular option.
High tech missiles may even be have both, with the guidance system selected
at launch time.

>     I would basically like to know the capabilities of a battery-round
> from a single missile turret (standard 3-missile rack), and from a
> 100t missile bay, using conventional and nuclear anti-ship munitions
> as might be found on an average merchant ship. :-)

I don't know about your campaign, but in mine, any ship which had nuclear
anti-ship munitions on board is hardly an "average merchant ship".  The best
designation they could hope for would be "privateer", with "pirate",
"corsair", and even "terrorist" and "criminal" being strong possibilities.


kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
> I had some trouble concearning wilderness refueling at my last MT session.
> I think a typical Far Trader oder a Subsidized Merchant using a
> Maneuver=1 drive needs 18 hours from the jump exit (100 diameters) to a
> small GG.  Even worse, if they approach a large GG.

Yep.  Someone here on TML worked out that it was much cheaper (in terms of
lost time; those extra couple of days result is many lost trips per year) to
buy fuel at the starport than to use wilderness refuelling.  Therefore, most
merchant starships will only use wilderness refuelling where *NO* source of
local fuel is available (Naval and Scout forces will, of course, refuell
from local gas giants whenever it suits their missions).

Fuel purification systems may be economical for merchants, especially as
tech level increases.  You have to trade off the decreased cargo revenue
(from the volume that the purifier requires) agains the increased cost of
refined fuel.  In some cases, where the anticipated runs will not have
refined fuel available, the purifier is required for safe operation.

>    If I remember the ideas of refueling by asteroid ice, discussed in this
> list earlier, I think mining an ice asteroid could take much less time for
> a small ship.

I don't think so; it all depends on the relative location of the mainworld,
gas giant, and ice asteroids (if any), as well as the time it takes to mine,
melt, and purify a load of fuel.  How long will it take you to mine, carry,
and melt over 20 metric tons of ice, even working in microgravity?.


Mark Watson <100022.3361@CompuServe.COM> writes:
> Given the appropriate choice of characteristics (and I'm not sure that
> the WD set is the right one) this is a very effective way of managing NPCs
> in game terms, and of differentiating between them (note also that aliens
> will get mods on their initial throws).

I like what I have heard so far.  Perhaps here on TML we can come up with
some better "personality characteristics" for a revised version of the
system; how about some suggestions?  I think the "Morality" statistic should
be replaced with something better - maybe even a couple of somethings.
Perhaps "Compassion", "Conscience" and "Legalism" statistics?

> The 5 alien supplements, esp the minor race one.

Yes!  It seems that as soon as good, detailed information about aliens
starts to be published, its time to re-arrange the game universe and the
aliens get put on the back burner again.  A Science-Fiction roleplaying game
should have aliens in it; please make this a priority.

> starship operators manual, vols 1 AND 2 - I got the impression that this
> would lead into a set of sourcebooks for particular types of ship

That was the scuttlebutt I heard; however, I'm not sure how successful these
would be.  Although I thought that volume 1 was nice, I've heard far more
negative comments than positive.

> combined scenario / sector sourcebooks, like the Flaming Eye, like the
> planned Black Duke, etc.

Or at least matched pairs; a sector sourcebook and a matching campaign
sourcebook.  This way more information could be put into each one, and
people who don't intend to use the campaign material won't have to pay for
it.

> World Builder's Handbook, and the planned Grand Explorations book (how I
> was looking forward to that one).

Didn't hear about Grand Explorations ... but I thought that the World
Builder's Handbook was a neccesity.  Since TNE is supposed to stress
exploration and recontact, I should think that an exploration sourcebook
would be a high priority (if not, perhaps it should be; after all, this is
one of the few major area of Science-Fiction literature that both Classic
Traveller and MegaTraveller were weak on).

> Finally on this point, I'd like to see the DGP equipment charts and task
> libraries (assuming there is still some form of task system) continue
> in some form, rather than have the dreary and less useful equipment lists
> I can see in other games (including the original MT rules).

I like the DGP equipment sheet and task library format very much.  While I
don't consider it as high a priority as other parts of the TNE system, I
would certainly pay money for a suppliment composed of nothing but different
pieces of equipment detailed and illustrated on these sheets.

In my opinion, the best way to produce these would be as unbound sheets for
inserting into a looseleaf binder.  This way, each referee can use a blank
sheet to create his or her own equipment sheets and place them in the binder
too (put the blank sheet in the back of the design rules suppliment).  Pages
from a loose-leaf binder can be conviently removed and xeroxed for players to
use.  This approach should also lower production costs, and allow the sheets
to be sold at a reasonable price.

> 3) Related point - sort out your licensing! Get some licensees to replace
> the lost ones ... they add to the vitality of the game.

Agreed.  And the more freedom each licensee has to be creative and unique,
the better the game will be.  The original idea of granting separate areas
to each company was a good one, as it allowed each to have relatively free
reign withought having to worry that GDW or another company would come along
and contradict a plotline in progress.

> I'd also like to see some of the old licensed material, in particular
> the Paranoia stuff, rehabilitated and reprinted if possible.

I'd like to see all of Classic Traveller collected, re-edited, and
re-printed.  Heck, I'd even do it myself, if I could get permission from all
those involved (hint! hint!).  I have some experience through my job with
book-on-demand publishing; and this sort of reprint work seems like a
perfect application.  Using book-on-demand, I believe that I could manage to
pay a reasonable royalty, make a small profit, and keep the final cost under
control.  The only drawback would be that book-on-demand is not compatible
with the way that most book and game distributors work; such reprints would
probably be available only as mail-order.  This may be a feature, not a bug;
it would prevent the reprints from competing directly with TNE.

> I've often thought that the period
> after Alexander provides a good model for the post-Rebellion era - a number
> of strong and stable rump states (for Egypt and the Seleucid Empire read
> Deneb, Vland and Antares), a few which fall pretty quickly (Gushemege,
> Illelish for the Greek and Indian possessions) and the gradual infringement
> of newer and more vital empires at the periphery (for Rome and Parthia,
> provide the alien empires of your choice).

I think that the Imperium was more like Rome, and will agree with Cynthia
that it will take a good long time to fall (after all, Rome wasn't sacked
in a day).  This is why I picked Charlemagne as an example (and yes, I am
aware that he was centuries after the fall of Rome, not decades).

The "Virus" seems to me to be the factor that speeds up the fragmentation
and fall of the empire.  This may also hinder the formation of states to
fill the power vacuums created by the fall of the Imperium.

In your "Alexanderian" model, how about the Solomani for Rome?


wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                         in the Far Future


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

Bundle: 420
Archive-Message-Number: 4954
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 14:24:47 -0600
From: "Cynthia Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: CHANGE OF ADDRESS

Our e-mail address is changing to:
p00206@psilink.com

 ...and when we get all our correspondence moved over here, the CompuServe
address goes away.  See ya!
 -- Cynthia

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

Bundle: 420
Archive-Message-Number: 4955
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 10:28:19 -0800
From: Corran J. Webster <cwebster@math.ucla.edu>
Subject: TNE...

Hi there,
        This is my first attempt at a posting to TML, so please bear with me.
IUve been spectating for a couple of weeks and IUd like to add my say on the
New Era.
    Firstly, by way of introduction, I'm a grad student at UCLA, recently
arrived from Australia and a member of HIWG Australia. I must also state my
preference for Hard Science Fiction - I prefer the 2300AD universe (minus
cyberpunk) to the Imperium, but as 2300AD is currently in the doldrums, I am
mucking about with Traveller. Virtually all my Traveller and 2300AD stuff is
currently sitting in my parent's attic in Australia, so some of what I write
here is from memory. Apologies for any mistakes. Right ho, on with the fun...
8-)

TNE:
    I'm using what I've read on this mailing list, plus AAB Proceedings 19 and
Challenge 64 as my sources. If the this could also be passed on the folks at
GDW by Loren Wiseman, it would be appreciated (if I'm having my say, I may as
well be heard 8-).
    Seeing as this has turned into such a long posting, I will summarise my
points here:

Modularity: Make TNE a core rules system + Imperial sourcebook. Allow for
        other universes in the system.
Stutterwarp: Why does stutterwarp have to be FTL? Don't retrofit it.
World Generation: The current system needs tweaking. A few suggestions.
Trade: Something new needed.
The Virus: My $0.02. The virus should be beaten by the time TNE is set.
Thought for the Day: A neat idea which justifies the stutterwarp and defeats
        the Virus in one fell swoop.
The Short Nap: Longer please (the Imperium's had a hard day)
The Hivers: Some idle speculation on what the little so-and-so's were up to.

Modularity
    Having a core rules system with add-ons to cover various universes (eg.
the Imperium, the 2300AD universe, etc.) is a _good_idea_ IMHO. It would make
sense then to keep the core rules as general as possible (ie. have rules for
character creation, combat, trade, vehicle construction, system generation,
etc.) and include generic equipment which would be common to all Sci-Fi
settings (eg. standard laser weapons, slug throwers, etc.), but not things
such as starships beyond a few examples - they should be kept for the various
universe expansion books.
    Also, the expansion books should contain rules and data, as well as
background information. One of the worst things done with MegaTraveller was
including all the information about the various alien races in the Ref's
Companion and then not including any rules ("Hey, these Aslan sound great! 8-)
How do I create an Aslan NPC? 8-( "). If something is going to be done, it
should be done fully - taking the above example, a couple of pages detailing
Aslan character generation would have been really useful, even at the expense
of a couple of pages of description of the Aslan psychology (or whatever). Of
course Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium went to the other extreme and
had equal problems. Even a paragraph of written information about each ship
would have made the book useable. I must say that DGP MegaTraveller products
were in general much more useful than the GDW products, and I think that the
reason was that they got the mix of rules, data and background waffle about
right.
    I like the idea of having supplements dealing with other periods in
Imperial history - Rebellion era, First Imperium, Rule of Man, classic Third
Imperium, the Civil Wars would all make good subjects, as well as alternate
histories (the "We Have Always Been As We Are" suggestion of Martyn Wheeler of
a non-rebellion Imperium, or a non-virus version).

Stutterwarp in the Imperium
    Why not? But if it is going to be introduced into the Imperium without
making massive changes to the flavour of the universe it should not out-
perform the jump drive.

    Indeed, why does it need to be FTL?

    Why not have it merely as a superior form of m-drive? This would solve the
problem that was mentioned of trying to get the 2300AD starship combat system
without the massive effect on the imperial universe. Perhaps one of the
fundamental constants of a universe could well be the relative effectivenesses
of the various FTL travel means (ie. the MegaTraveller system would be jump-6,
stutterwarp-0, stargate-0; for 2300AD it might be jump-0, stutterwarp-7.7,
stargate-0; maybe TNE might have jump-6, stutterwarp-0.0001, stargate-0).
    Perhaps a UUP (Universal Universe Profile) might be in order!
    Stutterwarp should _not_ be retrofitted to Traveller, if it's used then it
should be a _new_ development since the hard times (maybe the Hivers or Deneb
came up with something). See below for a neat thought.

World/System Generation
    By far the most useful way of presenting data about worlds (from a game
point of view) was the 1-page format in Knightfall and the various DGP
products, although the system maps were wasteful of space. However, these are
obviously impractical for large-scale universes like the Imperium (the 2300AD
universe could concievably list every colonised system in such a format in a
reasonable space). So keeping the old Traveller system, or something like it,
does seem to make sense.
    However there are some problems with this system, the most notable being
atmospheres: A size 1 world (half the diameter of the moon) can have an
atmosphere of 6 (as dense as the earths. Given that there is a rough
correllation between gravity and atmospheric pressure (from the 2300AD
generation system tables, which are, I think, scientifically accurate for all
worlds bar gas giants), the world would need to have a mass one 64th of the
Earth, and hence a density of 8 times the Earth! Even if it were made of solid
lead or iridium it would not be this dense (from memory the Earth's density is
approx. 5 gm/cc, lead's is about 13 gm/cc, this planet would need 40 gm/cc).
(Please don't flame me if my calculations are wrong. Correct me, sure, but I
am a mathematician, not a physicist! 8-) It is things like this which cause
problems when you try to improve the data on a world you want to use. The
2300AD system was good, but too long-winded for a "simple" system.
    So how could the current traveller UPP system be improved, without
invalidating all the UPP's already generated throughout the Imperium?
(allowing for the fact that the Hard Times/Short Nap have totally stuffed a
lot already) Well, you could simply legislate out of existence ridiculous
examples like the one above (I know from AAB Procedings 19 that things are
being changed so that Agricultural worlds are being forced to have reasonably
bright stars).
    Another posibility would be to change that UPP digit to a "Composition"
digit which gives both the density (planetary composition) and atmosphere
(atmospheric composition) somehow. How about something like:

UPP Digit     Planetary Composition
  0,1,2        Icy Body (excepting asteroid belts)
  3,4,5        Rocky Body
  6,7,A        Molten Core
  8,9,B        Heavy Core

              Atmospheric Composition
 1,5,6,8       Standard Oxygen/Nitrogen atmosphere
 2,4,7,9       Tainted Atmosphere
 0,3,A,B       Exotic, vacuum or otherwise unusual atmosphere

    This should mesh fairly well with existing data and rules systems, but
would provide a better means to then use a World Builders'-type system to
generate more detail. However, it is a bit of a mess (mainly from trying to
make it fit the previous system), and I don't know where to put the existing
atmosphere types C to F. Any suggestions? Anything else anyone objects to in
the current UPP system?
    Oh yes, either the number of gas giants should be reduced, or the
number of available orbits increased - it seems too many systems have gas
giants in the habital zones.

Trade
    I don't really like either of the trade systems: the one in classic
traveller was too limited in scope, the one in MegaTraveller was better, but
was a pain to use and unrealistic (all cargoes on a given world cost the
same/ton, whether it was diamonds or grain or hi-tech weaponry you were
trading). Also on low-population worlds, a single starship's cargo could have
major effect on trade ("You've got 100 tons of gizmos. Sorry, we got a
shipment last week which should last us for a year..."). Things also started
to break down if the ships got too big: there is virtually no way that a 10000
trading vessel could fill its holds - a population A world could expect to
have approx 200 tons of cargo and another 200 of freight at any given time -
yet there were huge trading megacorporations which managed to make a living
(yes, I know that the trade tables are supposed to reflect what would be
available to the average Free Trader, and that most people would choose to
send their freight by Tukera lines than Bob's Free Trader. Nevertheless one
would expect a planet with a population in the billions to have thousands of
times more trade goods available than a planet with a population in the
millions or thousands...)
    This starts to touch on other things discussed elsewhere on TML, on
whether interstellar trade is just in "luxuries" or is wide-ranging and all-
pervasive. The consensus seems to be that the latter is the state of affairs
in the Third Imperium (and hence probably in Deneb in TNE), but my suspicion
is that it will be more likely that the Star Vikings will only trade in
luxuries. I s'pose that what it boils down to is the _cost_ of interstellar
travel. The higher the cost, the higher the value of the goods must be to make
the profits worthwhile. Somehow, the trade system needs to be able to cope
with both extremes.
    Certainly fixed passenger fares and freight costs have to go: consider
a free trader landing on a world in Deneb, where there is strong interstellar
trade: a berth on such a ship would perhaps cost something like what it does
in the current system. However the same free trader landing on an otherwise
identical planet somewhere out in the old heartlands of the imperium can ask
whatever it likes as the fare, as there will almost certainly be many people
who want out - whether it is to a nicer nearby world, a local capital or all
the way to Deneb... The difference here is that where the costs are high (the
dangers of trading in the old heartlands, the fact that repair etc. is almost
impossible), the price of transport is also high.
    I'm almost feeling motivated enough about this to write an improved
trade system myself, if university work doesn't intervene...

The Virus
    The idea of having a "race" of predatory computer chips destroy the
Interstellar economy is a fairly good one, although I am not 100% sure about
it: there are problems. The foremost of these IMHO is the idea of silicon
chips still being used in the hi-tech Imperium - I was of the impression that
the higher tech computers used various other means ("synaptic processors"
certainly form a significant part of TL15 ship computers, and my vision of
these is not of some special form of silicon chip... that could just be me,
though 8-) I s'pose that my vision of what a TL 15 computer's CPU would look
like is more like Orac from Blake's 7 - transparent or translucent
crystalline/plastic boxes (without flashing lights though). However, the idea
of having semi-intelligent chips in ship's transponders does get around this
problem to some extent. There are properties of the Cymbeline chips which
would suit them to this purpose. However, to be really effective, the Virus
would have to include aspects much more like a traditional computer virus.
    It would be fittingly ironic if the killer chips were manufactured as part
of Lucan's Black War effort to produce a doomsday weapon.
    The Virus is going to make technological advance extremely difficult in
affected areas, however, so that recovery may well be not possible - every
time that a civilisation gets to TL 7 or so, it will almost surely start using
silicon chips, and sooner or later the remnants of the Virus are going to
discover this little treasure trove of silicon, and take over. Thus, the Virus
should have been wiped out or be extremely limited in its range in TNE (How?
Maybe Deneb managed to produce an anti-virus? Silicon chips are extremely
susceptible to hard radiation (nuke-em)? Perhaps sufficient numbers mutated
into a "good" form that fought the Virus and virtually wiped it out) If there
are still Virus "eggs" lying about, or if there are still large numbers of
Virus chips active and there is no effective means of destruction or
pacification, then TNE will _not_ be the dawn of a new age, but merely a dark
struggle, and I think that everyone (including GDW) doesn't want that.

Thought for the Day
    What if the stutterwarp drive were the thing that turned the tables on the
Virus. Assuming some way to protect the electronics of a stutterwarp ship from
attack (and the stuttering may well be enough), a stutterwarp powered ship
would utterly abuse any of the non-stutterwarp imperial ships which the Virus
had taken over (in the 2300AD starship combat rules, any non-stutterwarp
driven ship _cannot_ move during combat). If you add something like the slow
build up of hard radiation from the stutterwarp drive being enough to fry any
Cymbeline chip which got aboard, the organic lifeforms have a permanent
military advantage over the Cymbeline chips. Thus the stutterwarp makes the
Virus much less of a threat.
    It also makes the stutterwarp an integral part of the TNE plotline, rather
than a convenient addition to the rules.
    I _like_ this idea 8-) The stroyline might go something like:

    About the same time as the Virus first breaks out (or maybe a bit before),
researchers at the Jumpspace Institute discover a means of inducing micro-
jumps, which although short in distance, only take milliseconds (or less) to
traverse, as opposed to the normal week in jumpspace. It is found that making
rapid, repeated jumps allows for performace far exceeding normal m-drives, but
there appears to be no way of getting the drive to produce FTL speeds. In
addition in gravity wells, performance drops off considerably as smaller jumps
have to be taken to allow for the gravitational field effects, but the time
taken for the jumps does not noticeably change. Hence the ships slow down.
Finally, there is a problem with buildup of radiation (or each jump generates
a electro-magnetic pulse), which although not dangerous to humans, fries many
traditional ship electronic components, such as transponders.
    Realising the military potential of this discovery for the Domain of
Deneb, the development of stutterwarp drive ships are fast-tracked and the
problems with the electronics surmounted by new (and incidentally Virus-proof)
technologies. By the time the Domain of Deneb is threatened by the Virus a
small squadron of fighting ships is ready. This handful of ships then defeats
a Virus Armada coming through corridor. As more ships are produced, similar
actions stop the spread of the virus in the Vargr extents (or maybe the Vargr
extents, left to their own devices, remain a haven for the virus), the Aslan
Heirate (in exchange for the Ihatei to stop their attacks), the Hiver worlds
(or maybe they developed stutterwarp independently), and perhaps some
remaining pockets in the Imperial heartlands. The Virus is no longer a threat
to most of humaniti, but the combination of the rebellion and the Virus has
left virtually the entire Imperial and Solomani empires a mass of devestation.
Once the Virus is under control, Deneb is forced to retreat to repair the
damage it has sustained before it can even think of helping the rest of the
Imperium, the same with most of the other interstellar states.
    It is only now, n years later, that once again Deneb is probing beyond
its borders into the remains of the Imperium, and that Hiver-backed Star
Vikings are starting to trade with former Solomani and Imperial space.
    The new frontier is the Imperial heartland, and it _is_ the dawn of a
new era...

The Short Nap
    I have to agree that 70 years or so is not really long enough for a new
dawn to be underway after such a fundamental collapse. I object on
dramatic/storyline grounds more than historical reasons. It just doesn't seem
right that a huge 1100 year old empire comes to a crashing fall, but in less
than 100 years things are starting to get back to normal...
    I s'pose I should ask if GDW have any plans for Imperial history after
TNE? (with the Rebellion era, it was pretty clear that things were heading for
a total collapse, if not in quite the way it finally happened) Are things
heading towards a 4th Imperium? Or something new? Imperial space divided
amongst Deneb, the Hivers, the Vargr, the Aslan and a few pocket empires?
Presumably a new dawn implies some sort of stable situation appearing on the
horizon.

The Hivers
    Although I doubt the Hivers were responsible for the Virus, I have always
had a nagging suspicion that the Rebellion may have been a Hiver manipulation
on a massive scale (indeed I once vaguely laid out the plans for a campaign
which followed such a plot line - nothing ever became of it). Part of my
reasons for thinking this way is that they kept out of the rebellion, not even
aiding any one particular faction with trade (and a Hiver keeping out of
anything that important seems unusual - mind you, there was a lot of violence
going on). And note that they've come out in what is by far the best position
after the dust has settled. Not that the Hivers are likely to let humans know
the truth about it until they've well and truly finished...
    Just an idle speculation 8-)

Final Comment
    I hope GDW don't go off half-cocked on TNE. Even if the release date is
put back or whatever, they should make sure they get it _right_. I wish them
luck, however. The new scenario has potential.

    There, I've probably said enough here to get me flamed to a crisp, but
thanks for bearing with such a long posting (2500 words - and exams are only 3
weeks away!).

See ya 'round
  Corran Webster


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

