Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 6 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 900



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Tech advancement
Re: Transponders
Re: GURPS and Munchkins
Re: Running GURPS:Traveller 
Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)
Re: Re GT
Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)
Re: "Dogs" in traveller
Re: Tech advancement
Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
Re: Re Transponders
Re: Transponder's true nature
re: Transponders
Re: Tech advancement
re: Transponders
Re: Tech advancement
Re: Transonders and computers

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 16:10:06 +0100 (BST)
From: Ewan Quibell <E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

>The whole point is, right now, it is far harder to break encryption
>schemes than to create new ones. Since this has been true for as long as
>we have records, it is rerasonable to assume this will be the state long
>into the future. TL-16 encryption will be extremely hard to defeat,
>probably impossible to do so in a real-time manner, precicely because the
>increase in computing power necessary to break these systems is readily
>turned around to make stronger encryption.

I agree. Real time dycryption would be vertialy imposible, but with
communications lags of a week between systems, if the information is going
out system, you have that time to break the encryption. You may even
arrive in system before the original, and be able to act on the
information gained, if you jumped at the same time.

	Ewan Quibell
	Data Communications Technician        The Game's afoot:
	Computer Centre                       Follow your spirit, and apon
	University of Brighton                  this charge
                                              Cry 'God for Harry, England,
	E.D.Quibell@brighton.ac.uk              and Saint George !'

                                                    Henry V 3:1
	#include<stddisclamer.h>                    W. Shakespeare

	My spelling is entierly due to dyslexia, typoes and poetic license

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:22:34 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Transponders

Steven Hudson writes:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>...
>>It;s not the civilian data I was worried about there.  The recorders record
>>ALL ships met including military.  That data could be very usefull to the
>enemy.
> 
>   Understood. I disagree with the concept of them passing along that data
>with their squirts.

And as Gary has recently stated several times, the Deyo transponders don't
do that. I don't know who brought up that particular idea in the first
place, but he didn't know what he was talking about.
 
Steven also wrote:

>Walter Smith<SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>...
>>What's really going on: Corsair _Hunting Horror_ stole or otherwise
>>acquired a couple dozen unused transponders. They put each one
>>in a VR network, convinced them that they had just been installed
>>on a bunch of ships undergoing refit at a legitimate starport. 
>>The chips talk to each other, seeing each other as traffic at this
>>simulated starport and traffic pattern.
> ...
> 
>This is one of the best schemes I've heard yet, but getting _dozens_
>of strategic warfare devices is going to be _really_ tough:

_Starship Operator's Manual_ describes a setup where a transponder is hooked
up into a single virual reality system and switched back and forth between
that and the real world. To make that even remotely fit the description of
the Deyo transponder, said system must be able to fool the transponder into
accepting the fake messages as genuine. My suggestion would be that the VR
system is built around one of those canonical military transponders that can
put out any ID and have it accepted by the civilian transponders.

>  Quite possible, but only if INI or whoever won the war for implementation
>is fairly incompetent; any normal power-hungry bureaucracy will turn this
>into their own feudal preserve even before any hyper-patriotic (and paranoid)
>spooks get involved.

We game universe builders have a serious problem here. We want our game
universe to be plausible, but we don't want it so realistic that it isn't
any fun to play with. Sometimes that balance is difficult to achieve.
  
>There's absolutely no need (unless you want to make security more porous)
>for these units to be un-imprinted anywhere but in transit, at Naval
>facilities, and at major ports - with pre-arranged registration a fully
>imprinted box could arrive ready for hook-up at a smaller A port (why the
>heck they would need to be stored at ports that can't build starships
>escapes me).

They don't. The fact remains that thousands if not millions of these babies
are floating round the Imperium and I do not find it difficult to believe
that some of them could get diverted on the way. I don't really care to go
into details lest I convince myself otherwise ;-). 
 
>  The above speech, although eloquent, may not be at all relevant to the
>official mind of the Third Imperium. Neither the secrecy nor privacy of its'
>inhabitants lives is an inherently good thing for the 3I, and may in fact be
>a provably bad thing, from their POV.

Yes, but the freedom of my players to do some things without having the
authorities looking over their shoulders is important to me (Mind you, I
want a balance; I don't want them to be able to nuke worlds with impunity,
for example).


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 11:29:53 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: GURPS and Munchkins

>Chris "Cap'n Sparky" Seamans ( semo@pil.net )
 writes:
>>I haven't posted in a very long time since I've been pretty busy. I just
>>couldn't resist this one though. Here's what I'm wondering: how could bad
>>RPGers drive out good ones?
>
[snip]
>
>>Is there some sort of role-playing "clique" involved that I don't know
>>about? For example, recently my group decided that they'd rather play
>AD&D
>>instead of Traveller, so going with the desires of the group I decided it
>>was best to go with them. They stated their cases eloquently for the most
>>part, and it was all good.
>
>>Now, despite the fact that munchkin gamers exist (and will exist under
>any
>>system, in the past I've seen a couple of people on this list that could
>be
>>described as such in the past, I haven't been keeping up on the list
>>recently though), and AD&D is universally reviled as a munchkin system,
>>there was no munchkinning to be seen for miles.
>
>>I really do want to know how munchkins drive out good players. This is a
>>legitimate question. Are people afraid of being ridiculed by their peers
>if
>>they say "I'm running an AD&D/GURPS"? Is there some warped sense of
>"cool"
>>among role-players that I'm not privy to?

Your idea of the "clique" is probably closest. If a new gamer sees that,
at his local games shop, all the GURPS players are reasonably normal
people who play to have fun, while all the Traveller players are
middle-aged adolescents who whine, argue about rules, and gloat whenever
they trick someone, which game is he more likely to start playing?

Experienced gamers, such as ourselves, understand that the GROUP matters
more than the GAME SYSTEM.  We can move betwen game systems when necessary
(although we probably have preferences). However, even we are unlikely to
invest in a game system when we dislike the local group who uses it
(unless we already have a group who is willing to switch).

For example, I do not play Warhammer. I was considering it at one time,
because we had a nice student teacher who played it with her friends, and
I figured that even if I wasn't fond of the system they were nice folks
who played friendly games. (They didn't worry about using 'official'
figures, etc.) But she moved on, and the only other groups I've seen
locally are people I would rather not deal with. (One got all food banned
from Sci-F World's gaming area because they started a food fight, for
example - and some of these people are supposedly adults!)  So, from my
perspective, the local Warhammer munchkins have driven me into rejecting
the game system.

I suspect that I would enjoy playing Traveller with most of you. I suspect
I would enjoy playing most games with most of you. Hell, I like gaming
enough that I'll play even with people who I find personally
objectionable, as long as they play the game well (and aren't _too_
obnoxious: as a high school teacher I have a high tolerance for
obnoxious). But given my lomited gaming time and money, I'll play the
systems that the best local groups play, rather than the best systems that
there are if that means I have to play with munchkins.

Another example; I am not fond of CCGs. I dislike the idea of spending
lots of money on the _chance_ of improving a deck, I dislike the way
people with more expensive decks have a beter chance of winning, and I
dislike the rules-lawyering that I see most of my kids using. I _do_ play
the Babylon 5 CCG, but only because some good friends of mine showed me
that it was fun. If I'd relied on the 30-year-old greasy-fingered dweebs
at the local games shop, endlessly ranting about whether Superman could
defeat the Enterprise and complaining about their parents wanting rent for
the basement - well, I'd have decided not to play, because I wouldn't have
liked the available groups. 

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 08:20:13 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Running GURPS:Traveller 

At 07:43 PM 10/5/98 -0400, you wrote:

>Two.  No star system or planetary generation; that's GURPS: Space.  Three:
no vehicle generation system; that's GURPS: Vehicles.

I'm still wondering where the vehicle design sequence is found in my LBBs..

>My point has always been, the LBB's were stand alone.  Somebody could buy a 
>set off the shelf in '77 and hack up a game.  A brand new cherry GM,
starting today with GURPS, has to buy up a *pile* of supplements to get
started if they *DON'T* have any other Traveller material around.  That to
me is the *gist* of the problem.  Not 'this system sucks cause it's brand x
and not brand y.'  For somebody to decide 'Dammit, I wanna run a role
playing game' today, with no backround, he's gonna have to spend some
serious money.  Period.  That is the fact, and it cannot be denied.

One last time:

The folks down a Steve Jackson Games produce product called GURPS.  This is
the RULES set, and a fairly complete one at that.  With the information in
that book, you could design a couple of worlds to early Traveller standards.

GURPS: Traveller is what those wacky Austinites call a *worldbook*.  It
isn't supposed to be a stand alone game.  It's supposed to provide
information on playing GURPS in a specific setting.  None of the worldbooks
in my possession have enough rules to play as a stand alone game.  All of
them require GURPS *at a minimum* to play well.  several are greatly
enhanced by ownership of additional GURPS rules and genre books.

GURPS: Traveller provides the bare bones to allow a game similar to classic
Traveller, in the well-known Third Imperium setting.  If you are happy with
the bare bones, you don't need a "pile of supplements" to play.  Hell, you
don't really need to buy the GURPS rules set, with GURPS lite avalible for
free.

I have run G:T sucessfully.  Without using anything other than the GURPS
rulebook (a system I'm not very good with) and G:Traveller.
- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 08:05:21 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)

At 09:03 PM 10/5/98 -0400, you wrote:

>Hm, I see a way out of the problem of dyslexic one-handed 14-year-old
>streetkids with loads of skills.

In GURPS, that 14 year old can spend a maximum of 28 points on skills.  The
rule is 2x age.

- --

+-------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry    | 
+-------------------------------------+
| "I created the universe; give ME    |
|  the gift certificate!!"            |
|        - Lisa Simpson, Overachiever |
+-------------------------------------+

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 08:01:59 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Re GT

At 11:01 AM 10/6/98 +1300, you wrote:
>At 08:30 5/10/98 -0700, Douglas E. Berry wrote:
>>At 12:41 AM 10/5/98 GMT, you wrote:
>
>>>>There is an easy solution for the rules-rapist who takes "one-hand" as a
>>>>disad then wants points for each finger; you say "not in my game."
>>>
>>>Or, even better, you simply say, "fine ... yes, a one armed, crippled, one
>>>eyed ex-marine with the entire universe hunting him on a 9- is OK ... but
>>>there're no points in it". See how many you get.
>>
>>Why do that?  Just role-play the situation.  Put the guy in a situation
>>where his physical problems prevent an escape just as all those enemies
>>show up loaded for bear...
>
>IME the problem here is that the rest of the party sticks around out of a
>sense of loyalty (often even if they haven't bought Sense of Duty) and get
>wasted along with him. Even if this is because of their SoD they have just
>gotten killed for 5pts, whereas the one who got them killed gets how many
>more?

After a few bouts of getting characters slagged, the others will turn on
the points-munchkin and tell him to lay off, and build a workable
character.  Trust me, I've seen it happen.

In my current CORPS game my wife has the Ministry of Justice as a Level 2
Enemy.  She's just very careful about "Imoperial Entanglements"

>This is a general problem with hunteds, IMO. There is a real chance that
>the whole party will become embroiled in the feud/hunt, but only one
>character actually gets points for it.

It's perfectly acceptable to lay down the law: no hunteds.  Or to impose a
group hunted on the party (The Archbishop of Snerd is after all of you!)
- --

+---------------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net |
|        http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/       |
+---------------------------------------------+
| "Strategy is the art of making use of time  |
|  and space.  I am less concerned about the  |
|  latter than the former.  Space we can      |
|  recover, lost time never."                 |
|         -Napoleon Bonaparte, French soldier |
+---------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 08:44:44 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)
...
>You really do not understand logistics.  The US military would colapse in a
>matter of weeks and in some cases days without private contracters and
>civilian transport and supplies.  There are numerous studies and military
>excercise bases on this information.  As for your 'handguns' vs MBTs WRONG.
>US citicens have a lot more than handguns like dynamite and the production
>equipment to make much more powerfull devices plus all the military hardware
>in national gaurd staions the cost gaurd and the civilian contraters
>warehouses that hold LAW rocket, tanks unter construction, and of course the
>power generating system are in private hands.

  As a somewhat more advanced lesson in logistics we can consider the stocks
of food and fuel needed to keep a population center functioning, and how 
little they have stored on site. Even without getting into the destruction
of said stockpiles, a properly equipped military (if it somehow, quite
strangely, felt the unifrom need) could bring at least the major population
(and thus, typically production as well) centers back under control in a
matter of days or a week or so.

  Tank farms, airports, roads, bridges, airliners, rail -lines, -yards,
barges, freighters, pipelines, and trains are all fairly easily neutralized
without effective opposition. Warehouses also have notoriously poor evasive
qualities.

  For real fun, though, there's _oil refineries_ :>

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:51:18 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: "Dogs" in traveller

At 08:35 PM 10/5/98 -0400, you wrote:
>At 11:31 PM 10/5/1998 +0000, you wrote:
>
>>Does anybody have ideas about what 'companion' animals 
>>would be like in the Traveller universe?  
>
>Any number of critters from various worlds.
>Focaline tree rats were pretty common in my campaigns.
>
>>What 'Biological' inhancemant would good old shep go
>>through to become the pet of tomarrow?  
>
>In one MT "interview," the subject travelled with
>a geneered dog, which among other things was 
>more intelligent than regular breeds. This let it
>follow more complicated commands, but it wasn't
>sophont-level intelligence.
>
>>How do the aventures deal the the 'gaurd beast' protecting 
>>the warehouse where their confiscated cargo is stored?
>
>When they were on the ball, they planned for that 
>contingency. When they weren't .... anything from
>geese honking (loudly) to Ravenous Bug-Bladder Beasts
>of Traal welcomed them.
>

Ravenous Bug-Bladder Beasts of Traal, why did it HAVE to be Ravenous
Bug-Bladder Beasts of Traal!  (Grin)  Have you got your trusty towel?  Loved
The Hitchhickers Guide and Indiana Jones for that matter.

Charles

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:51:46 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

>Actually the 15" Dalghrens could penetrate 5" iron with 2' oak backing, when
>loaded with solid shot. The Tennessee was riddled at Mobile Bay (there were
>penetrations, and massive casualties from non penetrating hits causing bolts
>to pop off and from wood splinters). This TERRIFIED the British and French, as
>their ironclads were armored about the same way. They RAPIDLY developed
>thicker armor, and then bigger guns. Nothing is inpenetrable or
>unsinkable....:-)
>

All to true.  There is always an arms (and amor) race going on even when we
do not want to admit it.

Charles

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:51:51 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside

At 10:44 AM 10/6/98 +0800, you wrote:
>>
>>  As for being "underguned due to the weight of their armour", both Gloire
>and
>>Warrior were purpose built from the ground up and their armament load-out was
>>intentional (although trade-offs always occur, and armour was now the primary
>>competitor). If these vessels _couldn't_ be adequately armed due to their
>>defensive armour requirements, then the case against your original thesis is
>>proved.
>>
>Warrior is fully preserved and open to the public at Portsmouth.  She is
>indeed a fine ship.
>We would not want to confuse ironclads with monitors...
>
>

I did not mean monitors as a ship class.  I ment the ironclad called
Monitor.  One of the first two ironclads along with the Merrimack.  The
battle between them was inconclusive.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:51:32 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Re Transponders

At 01:28 AM 10/6/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Re Transponders
>...
>  Internally, the Imperium really only wants to keep an eye on very
>influential political incorrigibles, and starships. They don't need to worry
>about checking
>the phone company records, grocery bills, and bank balances of their average
>drone "citizen", _so long as they keep their eyes on the balls that matter_.
>
>  OTOH, if the 3I really is dumb as rocks then we can only assume that the
>Templars or Cthulhu Itself are keeping them safe from the nefarious claws
>of Sol-Sec. :>
>
>

SO the transponders and an Iluminati plot.  Now THAT makes sence!  The
reason they can be broke is they used the orbital mind control lasers to
make use believe they could not be broken.  That explains why some people
can't see reason.  Oh well I guess I'll have to get my fellow Gnomes of
Zurick to knock those laser our with ASAT so we can take over the Empires'
econoy for our own profit.  A Gnomes work is never done...sigh...

Charles (Grinning!) 

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:52:00 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

At 12:38 AM 10/6/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature
>...
>>>  The possibility exists that it is only possible at TL 15-16 with the use
>>>of the original Cymbeline chip stock; the IN's behaviour in Signal GK is
>>>consistent with this theory, and _someone_ nuked Cymbeline during the 
>>>Rebellion, likely for this same reason.
>>>
>>>  If this does comprise a needed component to compromise the canonical
>>>SDG's at normal Trav techs, then attempts to do so are otherwise going
>>>to fail.
>>
>>With teleportaion and matter creation technology you could make all the
>>copies you wanted.  Use teleporter to scan it and matter creater to
>>reproduce it.  If the chips evolved to begin with they could be
>>cloned/remanufactured or whatever you want to call it.  The fact is SOMEBODY
>>develope that transponder and that person could reproduce it and someone
>>else as bright could rediscover the process.
>
>  <giggle> Wrong universe :)  There are no matter teleporter/replicators in
>the OTU, nor simple "poof it's replicated" machines either, except perhaps
>as Ancient artifacts (what does TL 45 do is perhaps less relevant than what
>_doesn't_ it do).
>
>

The Ancients were what I was talking about. In one of the adventures it
talks about matter replicaters used by the Ancients.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:52:03 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Transponders

At 06:09 PM 10/5/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: re: Transponders
>...
>>That is not what I meant.  The pirate robs with the heavily armed ship with
>>NO transponder then transfers his booty to a SECOND ship with a legal
>>transponder.  If the pirate ship is damaged the legal ship buys the parts
>>for it legally and then takes it to the pirate ship.  The legal ship never
>>has to be in the system where the piracy takes place.
>
>  What happens if the practice drone (err, pirate) with NO transponder meets
>a patrol? (hint: target practice off the port bow, sir!). The desired effect
>can be much more easily achieved using a ship's boat or armed pinnace,
>especially
>as non-starships (or at least small craft) may very well not be required to
>use SDG transponders.
>

They would fight.  Pirates do not want to meet a patrol ship except maybe yo
ambush it.  Also what happen when a 400 ton patrol ship meet a 4000 ton
pirate?  Whos target drone then?

>  In any case, where is the legal ship, what is it doing, who is paying for
>its' operations, and why the heck don't the anomalies indicated by these
>questions get it flagged for some serious investigation? 
>

Doing it's nornal business.  The pirate meet the legal ship at prearrange
deep space points as discribed in the traveller adventure.  No anomolies.
The legal ship makes deep space jumps regularly and sometimes it meet the
pirate.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:51:42 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

At 06:09 PM 10/5/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Re: Tech advancement
>...
>>the weapon we can put against it.  It's a question of scale.  The guns
>>mounted on the iron clads were intended to defeat wooden ships not iron
>>clads and the inclads were so overweighted that they sank in a moderate storm!
>
>  The USS Monitor was a particularly bad design in that respect. Only a few
>years later at the battle of Lissa two fleets largely comprised of armourclads
>went at it - and they were all seaworthy designs.
>
>...
>>That was never tested.  Neither iron clad sank of was sunk by a wooden ship.
>>At least that is as I recall it from high school history.  A very long time
>ago.
>
>  At Lissa, the groups of unarmoured ships of both the Austro-Hungarian and 
>Italian fleets avoided inappropriate exposure to fire (which they weren't
>equipped to survive) even though in some cases they were the better armed
>ships. One Italian armourclad was eventually destroyed by a fire started
>by sstrikes from an unarmoured Imperial frigate (which were deployed more
>aggressively than their Italian counterparts).
>
>  OTOH, the generally acknowledged supremacy of armour over guns of this
>period did pass before long.
>
>        Steven Hudson
>

Thank you for the information.  The period you discribe is not one I have
studied.  I am a history buff, as many gamers are.  My prefered period is
WW2.  My father and uncles served in the pacific so it's also a little
family history as well.  One of my uncles was in the Enola Gay group as a
A&E mechanic.  I guess I'm a born and bread 'gear' head.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:52:06 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Transponders

At 07:54 PM 10/5/98 -0600, you wrote:
>At 11:32 pm 10/5/98 +0000, you wrote:
>>That is not what I meant.  The pirate robs with the heavily armed
>ship with
>>NO transponder then transfers his booty to a SECOND ship with a
>legal
>>transponder.  If the pirate ship is damaged the legal ship buys the
>parts
>>for it legally and then takes it to the pirate ship.  The legal ship
>never
>>has to be in the system where the piracy takes place.
>
>	That works ... but the no transponder ship STILL stands out like a
>sore thumb any time he enters any system with traffic control.
>

How is that.  There is nothing in cannon that says a jumping ship is
detectable apone arrival execpt by normall sensor scan.  Space is real big
and active searches like radar and lidar have limited range. The pirate is
not sending any siganl so how would the system know about it's presents.
Again canon sugests this is posible in many adventure books like 'Rock and a
Hard Place" with the asteroid ship Rock and the shuttle Pebble.

>>To a curtain limit, yes.  I said that the transponders were
>DIFFICULT to
>>forge but not imposible as NOTHING that can be made can not be
>beaten.  Ths
>>cost could be prohibative.  If the reasearch need to beat the
>transponder
>>cost 1000mc and a years work by 10 Electronics-6 techs plus 10mc per
>fake
>>how could a ships captain use this to abscond with a free trader
>that he can
>>not make the payment on?  What pirate could GET 10 Electronics-6
>techs?
>>This would be consistant with the traveller adventure.  It can be
>beaten but
>>its REAL tough and expensive.  The corp. in the adventure could
>field this
>>type of effort but even the corp rep. said its was expensive.  What
>is
>>'expensive' to a corporation with a few hundred 6000ton merchant
>ships plus
>>more of other hull types?
>
>	Then it sounds like we're really in agreement, no?
>

Correct, I was only trying to point out that no system is perfect and
unbeatable.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:51:49 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

>  Your original thesis was that (IIRC) these situations don't occur; you
>are, IMO, largely correct overall, although in the details there are quite
>substantial temporary anomalies. Neither "theory" addresses the fact that
>solutions need to be in the same ballpark of technological capability to be
>practical.
>
>        Steven Hudson
>  

Again your knowledge of this era is far beter than mine.  Also your above
coralary is also correct.  There is the complication of a non limear aproach
to such problems.  Midevil fortifications could not be breached directly but
were easily defeated by blockade and sapping.  Tactic beating Technology.
The Majinoe Line (or however it's spelled) of the french was bypassed and
left to 'wither on the vine'.  The same was true for the Japanese fortress
islands.  We took what we needed and starved the others out.

In war some truely bizar solutions appear like the banglador torpedo
(shudder) and the flame thrower.  What sane person would want to use either
of these systems under fire?  But at the time they were the current state of
the art in siege craft evolution.  War is a desperate undertaking.  A
desperate men will often come up with desperate solutions to problems.
Solutions that no sane person under other situations would use but when you
are going to die if you don't do something then even a suicidal act that
give a small chance to live is better than just waiting to die and sometimes
you come up with entirely new workable solutions in that desperate moment.
Many of the WWII air combat tactics were born out of a moments desperation.  

The entire battle of Iron Bottom Sound was an act of desperation and was won
by another desperate act.  What sane person would send destroyers into
direct short range combat against battle ships and cruisers?  But it WORKED.
The escort carriers got away (except two) and the Japanese lost all there
capital ships that night except one and that one was sunk the next morning.
Tatics defeats firepower and surprise that night but the cost was brutal.
Desperate men in desperate time doing what HAD to be done.  Never
underestimate the power of desperate men.  They can and have done the
'imposible' many times.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:51:57 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Transonders and computers

At 08:00 PM 10/5/98 -0600, you wrote:
>At 11:32 pm 10/5/98 +0000, you wrote:
>>>	Nope. You can take a plaintext and cryptotext message, and it
>gives
>>>you almost no insight into the public/private keypair. At MOST you
>>>might figure out the session key--which is discarded and generated
>>>anew for each message.
>>
>>I'm sorry but the PGP that I have read about does NOT use session
>keys.  At
>>least it was not in the read me files or the other technical stuff
>that I've
>>read about it.  It uses a public and private key generated by the
>originater
>>(the public key's owner).  None of those keys change unless done so
>by the
>>operater.  Check out any of the PGP pages on the internet.
>
>	I can't give you a reference off the top of my head but PGP *does*
>use session keys. The public key crypto is extremely slow, so
>encrypting the entire message would take forever. I believe the docs
>I saw (PGP 2.6 docs, IIRC) also said IDEA was actually considered
>more secure than RSA--just had the usual disadvantages of secret key
>crupto. PGP generates a secret session key (2.6.3 and previous used
>IDEA encryption, newer versions allow CAST, TripleDES or IDEA). The
>session key is then encrypted using public key crypto, while the
>message itself is encrypted with the session key. At the other end
>the recipient decrypts the session key, then grabs the message. Two
>advantages: the process is much faster, and the amount of data
>encrypted with RSA (and hence vulnerable to cryptanalysis) is *very*
>small.
>

This is a new developement to me.  I'll have to look into it.  It sounds
quite reasonable.  If the public key is longer than the session key the the
message would have to be decoded using the brute force method as the session
key could not be reliably decoded directly.  This would indeed increase
security by an order of magitude.

>	If you really want a reference, I can dig it up for you.
>-- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
>    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***
>
>   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
>   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
>      -- Thomas Jefferson
>

So would I.

Charles.

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #900
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 6 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 901



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)
Re: Re Transponders
Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)
re: Transponders
Re: Missile defense question
Re: Dogs, but not Vargr
Re: T5 Wants
Re: Running GURPS:Traveller 
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #887 
Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: A thought on Game Design
Re: Transponder's true nature  (long response)

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:51:36 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)

At 09:03 PM 10/5/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net> writes:
>>One of the things that I like about GURPS is the Advantages &
>>Disadvantages.  I think that they are an excellent hook for role
>>playing.  Good role players will give their charecters personalities
>>whether or not they get points for doing so.  Many role players need a
>>bit of encouragement to give their charecters personality.  
>[snip]
>>  Yes you can play
>>a charecter with "disadvantages" even if the system does not have
>>disadvantages but I know of precious few GM"S who let players give their
>>charecters advantages.  To use a trivial real world example I do not get
>>hangovers but if I tried to say that a charecter I was playing did not
>>get hangovers most GM's would not allow it.  In GURPS I would just buy
>>the charecter the advantage No Hangover (5 points).
>
>Hm, I see a way out of the problem of dyslexic one-handed 14-year-old
>streetkids with loads of skills.
>
>Allow the base points for a character to be used in the normal way (skills
>and attributes). Then allow 'customization' as matching
>advantages/disadvantages. Thus, you could chose "No Hangover" (5 points)
>but would have to take a 5-point disadvantage to compensate. Disadvantage
>points can't buy skills, just compensatory innate abilities.
>
>Thus, if my character is Blind, I might well develop Acute Hearing and
>Acute Smell, but wouldn't get Nuclear Engineering. (Making these up, as my
>GURPS book is packed away in the "don't need it" book box.)
>
>

That is not necessary.  There is already a skill cap based on age.  A 14
year old can only have 28 points in skills and being dyslexic they would
have to be skills that could be aquired without reading.  (I disagree with
this because dyslexia should be a level based disadvantage as you can have a
mild case that can be mitigated with training.)  So that problem has already
been delt with.  It kid could have an ammazing DEX and be a world class
scateboarder though.  I've run kid's campains before that were a lot of fun
and laughs AKA the Goonies.  The skill cap makes it real interesting.  I
have also run a fantacy street kids campain.  REAL gritty and down and out.
Finding dinner and avoiding the orphin patrol (and worse) were daily activities.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:51:28 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Re Transponders

At 06:47 PM 10/5/98 -0800, you wrote:

.big snip.

>
>As for getting the info: you must fool a sapient being, while using a
>non-human language, requireing acess to databases and metahuman
>mathematics, and then be able to know the verifications for the sequences
>requested. In general, they data is only available to the ImpGov WHEN THEY
>SIEZE your ship... altho a txpdr might rat you out. Yes, it is a spy. Yes,
>it will tattle.
>
><mt task>
>To fool a transponder into giving you milspec data:
>	Formidable, Computer, Pursuasion, Fateful. On a mishap, it will
>scream constantly until a liscenced tech tells it to shut up, and give all
>the data it can on the perp.
></mt task>
>

Thank you, a task role is all I wanted.  It says that it can be done but not
easily.  That's all I was trying to say.

>It is more likely for the Zhodani or Solomani to get the info than an
>imperial corporation. IMTU, the IISS-IntelOff and the ImpNavSecur agegency
>handle transponder data. Transponder programmers are all on the "Never
>Retire" list... they may go to a retirement center, where they are treated
>as little better than foreign spies, or may be voluntarily brain-wiped, but
>they do not ever get out of the service alive with their knowedge intact.
>Standiong orders are Prevent their capture; if captured, exterminate them
>before they can spill the beans.
>
>IMTU, the imperium IS ruthless. No gentle trade association, it fosters
>free trade so as to foster a stable tax base from which to perpetuate its
>self. It protects Sapient rights only so that sapients will be ablke to
>work and pay taxes, and maintain order. Truth be told, the imperium
>couldn't care less about Jack being killed by Jill, save that it defines
>Murder as a crime so that members will join. All the benefits are merely
>there to get members to stay members, so that the Imperium gets its taxes.
>
>Still IMTU, the Imperium actually likes small local warfare, as war does
>stimulate economies. In certain areas, the ImpNav will infiltrate and START
>a local wwar to foster economic and technological development, and to force
>local tensions to come ouit into the open.
>
>The imperium really doesn't even care about piracy, either... they stop
>major rings, because major rings can take on tax convoys and naval
>units.... One or two shiup bands are nuisances who may be ignored while not
>being too blatant, and conscripted (and paid) when needed for BadWar.
>Likewise, large bands provide good practice for real war....
>

If I was a play character in the your Empire, I'd point my free trader tward
the human states near the great rift and not stop untill I was Jump 100 +
away from the Empire.  It's not a place I would like living in but a good
place to be a rebel.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:51:24 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)

At 11:32 PM 10/5/98 EDT, you wrote:
>> >I'll take the Imperial Navy against the MM.  Any day of the week (well
>maybe
>> >not on Tuesday<g>).
>> >
>> 
>> You really do not understand logistics.  The US military would colapse in a
>
>lol.  And you do?  Stick w/ electronics, EE guy, and leave the military stuff
>alone.
>
>> A MBT crew would not last long in urban combat in the US.  I'd love to see
>> them TRY am refuel under sniper fire or maintain supply in a hostile US.  NO
>
>You're getting into areas in which YOU have ZERO practical knowledge.  Dont'

True, and not true also.  Most of my gaming group are or were military.
Including SF, Rangers, Airforce, Support services, and one Navy.  All of
them agreed that IF it came to US vs ARMY the ARMY would loose.  I should
note that none of them were tankers but some were Vetnam combat vets and
about a third of my last gaming group went to Desert Shield/Storm.  One of
them was in ground suport helos. and just took his 30 year retirement.  He
said the military could not win in a fight vs. the people.  I'm paraphasing
the arguments of 6 different carier military people that had this discussion
in our group.  It's their 'pratical knowledge' but it aggrees with and
supports my own ideas of the dynamics of such a situation.

As for myself, I was not physically able to join the military when I was 18
nor would they take me now even in an emergency (except maybe as non combat
suport staff if they were desperate for the technical help).  My father was
a WWII vet, so were most of my uncles.  If it came to the US vs a military
dictater I know which side I'd fight for.

One good thing is that insergences are not so picky about health problems.
I dought I would last long in open combat.  I'm not physically up to it but
I could build things that would give the dictater's soldiers fits.

>watch so many movies, Chuck.  I am a current (and damned good, if I say so

It's Charles, thank you and I generally do not watch movies, I read.

>myself) M1A1 US Marine tank crewman.  And we've been trained plenty in MOUT
>operations.  Its done in conjuction w/ grunts and aviation (especially attack
>helos).  Manueverability is limited, but your sniper better damned well stay
>out of sight and mind of 1) all the tanks in teh vicinity (typically a tank
>element is attached to an infantry platoon.  Tank element = 2 tanks, wingman-
>leader concept) and 2) all the grunts and 3) the best protection against
>snipers IS snipers (especially of USMC Scout/Sniper variety).  Overlapping
>fields of observation and responsibility are a reality for tank platoons and
>companies.  Sniper gets discovered, he (and the building he's in) is either
>gonna be eating a 120mm HEAT round, white or red phosphorus, .50 cal, 7.62,
>and/or anything the grunts want to throw his way (5.56, 40mm grenades, 7.62,
>etc etc)... most likely a combo of all of the above. if we don't simply to
>decide to thoroughly wreck (arty/air) a dangererou area to begin with.
>

I am aware of the odds of ONE sniper.  Are you aware of how many people in a
town of 50,000 have guns in the US?  Are you aware of the population of the
US?  Are you aware of the size of the US military?  Can you say outnubered
10000 to one!?  And exactly where do YOU think your supplies come from?
What happens when a tank gun shell detonates IN in tank's gun?  The Germans
learned the hard way it's not a good idea to use ammo made by those that
disagree with you.

>If we're just rolling through, recon will make sure the path is clear of major
>obstructions and we just roll through buttoned up.
>

Your recon team would be outnumbered 100 to one on the emenies home ground.
No recon, sorry dead.  Are you willing to bomb and destroy the assets you
need?  That is the only way you'd clear a path and then you're going to turn
those 'brown shirts' into white shirts with guns pointed your way.  Kill a
man's familly and you got someone with ONLY revenge to live for.  THAT is
one VERY dangerious man.

>> trucks, no safe loider areas.  Insergency.  For a good example of your 'big
>> stick' think of Vetnam on steriods.  At least with Vetnam the military had
>> secure traning and supply areas.  In a war between the population an the
>> military the military will always loose IF the people want to win because
>> the military is part of the population and some will turn.  What happens
>> when the military is ordered to attack the town where their families live?
>
>LOL.  Get real.  Not so black and white there, you.  Like the entire
>population is somehow going to be completely and totally at odds w/ the govt
>and military.  Not in the US of today, anyways.  There'd be at least a
>fraction of "brown shirts," if not active endorsement and support by certain
>significant segments of teh general population.  
>

Yep, this is the USA of course their would be but if you tried to turn it
into a military dictatership you would loose.  Too many people would get it
that their precious ox was going to get gored and that they would NOT be one
of the ones in power.

Also a lot of good men in the military would turn because they believe in
the american way of life and are men of contience.  They took a oath to
defend the CONSTITUTION against all enemies forien and domestic.  Which side
would YOU take?  Would you help install any of your generals as King for
Life over the USA?  Where would your loyalties lie?

>> As long as resitry information is all that is sent then that is fine and
>> there would be no reason for rebellion but in many other posts the BBs
>> remember everything any tell all to all other BBs.  This would be beyond all
>> reason and tollerence any anything that resembled a free sociaty which
>
>I know of noone on this list advocating that sort of BB.  You and Hans both
>had that interpretation pop up, so i'm accepting it as more than a strawman,
>but I never supported that.  Just the one mentioned in Survival Margin (which
>most certainly is NOT the one u're arguing against).
>

I have no idea who gave the BBs the Big brother idea.  It was a topic when I
joined this group two weeks ago when I learned it existed.  All I have been
saying was that the BBs could not be that intrusive because the TU sociaty
does not show the marks of such tight fisted control and that an unbeatable
BB was not posible.  Those were my only two points that I wanted to make.

>> would warp the TU to the point of unrecognisablility and I like the TU just
>
>I like the *Official* TU very much.  : )
>

So do I.  It's the feel of the background that make me think that the Big
Brother version of the black box is not posible.  That and CT canon any way.
I never said that the boxes could do that level of survelence.  I said that
it was NOT in the nature of the TU for them to work like that.

>> like it is thank you very much.  Good old gorrila capitalism with a little
>> light larceny and chacainery added for some spice.
>
>The Imperium is not about capitalism but controlling its territory and
>protecting its hegemony.  Free trade is just a slogan.  Even so, I always
>thought of Cleon as someone w/ great vision and charisma, not of the Bill
>Gates stripe presented in M:0.  The Pacification Campaigns and Solomani Rim
>both come to mind.
>

In the end it is the purpose of all government to maintain the status quo
and to gain as much power as is required to do so.  The wise ones also leave
enough 'loop holes' so people can breath and keep themselves amused with
power and money grubing.  A people with no social or economic mobility
become restless and hard to control but it they are all busy trying to 'get
theirs' they are not out causing the government to many problems.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 12:25:49 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Transponders

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>There's absolutely no need (unless you want to make security more porous)
>for these units to be un-imprinted anywhere but in transit, at Naval
>facilities, and at major ports - with pre-arranged registration a fully
>imprinted box could arrive ready for hook-up at a smaller A port (why the
>heck they would need to be stored at ports that can't build starships
>escapes me).

They don't. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
IMO, any A, B, or C port needs to have a stock of transponders on
hand for replacement and repair - maybe not a big stock, but these
boxes are technology, and technology fails. Ditto any Scout, Navy
or Merchant Base that does starship (or even spaceship) repair.

Question, though: how long does it take to (legally) replace a
transponder?

A ship comes out of jump at a medium pop B-starport system
a little off the X-boat routes. It manuevers, but has no transponder
or commo. A fighter flight intercepts, gets close and hears the
captain transmitting through a short-range jury-rigged commo
link. He's an honest merchant captain, a power surge as they
entered jumpspace wrecked their commo array - about a week's
work in a B-class port. The transponder read the surge as a
tamper attempt and fried itself. _Lady Jane_ gets boarded by
customs police, then flies formation with the patrol craft to the repair yards.

_Lady Jane_ spends about 50% of her time visiting small, low-tech
worlds (D & E class starports), many of which have incomplete, missing
or late shipping reports. She spends another 20% or more of her time
visiting independent worlds past the Imperial frontier - Imperial Navy
craft may have seen her on some of her visits, but the governments of
these worlds don't regularly report their ship traffic to the Imperium.
Her last port-of-call was at the E-class starport a parsec away,
and the couple hundred belters there (the only population) are
notorious for keeping incomplete shipping records.
Her papers appear in order, though the home port is a couple
sectors away - like the Jameison Factors ship in DGP's SOM, 
_Lady Jane_ hasn't seen her home port of record for more than a decade.
_Lady Jane_ is still under bank mortgage, the captain makes a payment
when she comes into port. He's been here before, though only a few
times - he's in the records, and there are people on planet who have
done business with him before. 

(Just to be nasty: One of the people he's done business with before
considers him a cheat, though he isn't, due to a soured business deal)

Question: How long will it take for _Lady Jane_ to get a new transponder?

She can't go anywhere without one, and a delay as little as two months
would cause serious (perhaps ship-threatening) financial hardship
for her owner.


IMTU, _Lady Jane_ gets her new transponder from replacement stocks
at the starport while the ship is being repaired. A harbormaster looks
over her papers, checks whatever information he has on hand and
makes a judgement call as to whether something fishy is going on.
Is this the fourth ship to jump in from next door with a failed transponder
this month? Does the Captain's story match the damage on the ship?
(for ethically-challenged harbormasters) Is the bribe big enough?
If the harbormaster clears it, _Lady Jane_ can go on her way - with
records of her new transponder code going out on the next courier.
Otherwise, the Captain gets to hear those fatal words:

"We'll need to get confirmation on this..."


Walt Smith

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:44:49 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Missile defense question

Jim Clem wrote:

>The USN's newer 5 inch guns are autoloaded, and capable of a relatively 
>high ROF, and rigged to fire controllers that allow them to be used for 
>surface or air targets, supposedly including missiles.  Anyone out there 
>know more about this??

While a modern 5" mount might try to hit a missile, it's unlikely that
it would - a sea-skimming missile that travels at Mach 2 covers the
distance from the radar horizon to impact in *seconds*. Even a gun-based
CIWS (the Phalanx 20mm or Goalkeeper 30mm mounts) have problems with the
modern sea skimmers - the current favoured solution are point-defence
missile systems (Sea Wolf, RAM).

ObTraveller: Anti-missile missiles? Is this even possible?

Aetherem Vincere
Matt.
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk  | To Err is Human
My employers and I have a deal - They don't | To forgive is not Air Force Policy
speak for me, and I don't speak for them.   |   -- Anon, ETPS

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 10:31:46 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Dogs, but not Vargr

     Remember Jordan has his wolves as telepaths in the Eye of the World
series.

Leo

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 13:56:49 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: T5 Wants

"William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net> writes:
>Everyone else seems to be posting their two bits on the subject, so I'll
>join the crusade:
>
>JOT: Keep it. It is part of the feel of traveller for me.

I liked the MT version. JoT gave you 'free' retries without penalty,
reflecting resourcefullness.

>
>Tasks: I lvoe the MT task system. OK, maybe a 3d variant would work
>better... But I love the fact that players ALWAYS roll the same number of
>dice, and know how to figure the chances quickly. And, the player's guide
>to tasks was only 1 page, which I always copied and handed to my players.

An added bonus to always the same number of dice is that the referee can
_conceal_ the true task difficulty, leaving it up to the players to notice
that they should have failed, but didn't, therefore... (OK, I'm evil. But
I have alert players who _like_ figuring out clues.)

>
>CGen- The T4 system did fairly well, but I felt that more careers than the
>10 were needed. I'd like to see all the ones from MT/(CT)supp4 as well as
>the new one from T4. I like the one skill roll per year. If anything, I'd
>DROP getting skills from promotions or commissions, but keep them for
>special duty's. I'd like to see an "advanced system" ala
>Merc/HD/Scouts/MP/MT in a supplement, possibly with more careers yet, as
>well as several new types of schooling.

Sounds good, as long as 'advanced' characters don't wind up with more
skills than regular ones.

>
>Economica: Fix some of the broken bits. Take more space and give better
>tables. But keep the feel (even if the details change)


Yup. 'Course, I'd like to see my trade system used, but then that's me.

>
>Ship Construction GT has this about right. Simple, fast, and no power
>constraints. A more detailed system should be available. Personally, I
>like
>the detail of MT, but anyhting more is annoyign to me. I DETEST FF&S2...
>too pickayune, and poorly worded.

I love FF&S, assuming that the explanations are a bit better. But then I'm
an engineer. T5 also needs a simple plug-n-play system for non-gearheads
that is _compatible_ with the more complicated one.

A problem with a purely simple system (at least for me) is that my
Traveller group is very technical, and tends to notice things like
starships that are inexplicably slow (or fast), robots that double as room
heaters, and other technical mixups.

>
>Art: Good quality B&W line or grayscale art. The best part of T4, IMNSHO,
>is the B&W pencils... they really gave a "Look" to the TU.

Yup. Bring back Rob Caswell and the Keiths.

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:23:46 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Running GURPS:Traveller 

> >>   People ran RPG's off of SJG's "Man to Man", from which GURPS:Lite is a 
> >> _huge_ advance. Im all seriousness, when I run I'll probably leave the
> >> guns & ammo supplements at home (UT 1/2, Vehicles - _if_ I use it) and use
> >> GURPS Basic, G:T, and my LBB's :)
> >
> >What if you *DIDN'T* have your LBBs?  That's the question.  If you have *NO* 
> >LBB's or other Traveller materials to work with, you're screwed if you think 
> >you can run anything on GURPS Basic & G:T.
> 
>   Ignoring net stuff, I'm sure I could get by with G:T, BTC, and either Lite
> or (preferably) Basic. If I wanted to I'd fly with G:T and Lite only - what's
> the costing on G:T, anyway?
> 
>   As for newbies? Most GURPS players already have most of the items they want
> except for G:T itself - and we have to acknowledge that SJG at least wants to
> sell (good, or great if possible) product. Anyone new to GURPS is facing the
> same problem with _most_ systems out there (AD&D, Cthulhu, that goth stuff...).

That's not the segment of the market I was talking about.  I was refering to 
people who've never played an RPG before, and thus wouldn't *have* any GURPS 
stuff laying around at all.

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:29:05 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #887 

> >The LBB set of 3 was sold as *ONE* package.  To play G:T, you need at 
> >*LEAST* 
> >2 purchases: Gurps core rules *and* G:T.  You need the core rules for 
> >*everything*, G:T is just a background supplement, from what I've heard.  
> >And 
> >to do anything that's not in BTC, you'll need G:Space of course, the 
> >G:Vehicles thingie, and a couple more to round things out.  You're looking 
> >at 
> >no less than 40 bucks minimum, maybe as much as 2-300 all tricked out.  
> >G:T is 
> >*NOT* playable by itself.  The LBB's *were*.
> 
> 
> Let's see, the little black books didn't have any background at all.  So 
> you obviously couldn't run something in the Traveller background without 
> adding a bunch of stuff:

And what did people do before GDW came out with all the supplements?  We 
*homebrewed* it.  At least we had all the rules we *needed* to homebrew it.

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 11:46:54 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
...
>I did not mean monitors as a ship class.  I ment the ironclad called
>Monitor.  One of the first two ironclads along with the Merrimack.  The
>battle between them was inconclusive.

  Because neither, although adequately armed themselves (Virginia had
just finished off a Union flotilla as a nice, light snack) was capable
of penetrating the others armour even with SOTA armaments?

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 11:46:56 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

>Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature
...
>The Ancients were what I was talking about. In one of the adventures it
>talks about matter replicaters used by the Ancients.

  In that case, I'd be quite surprised if TL 25-35 _couldn't_ defeat the
described capabilities of the SDG; it's likely of limited applicability
except as a deus ex to remove those units on some basis, though.

  The further implications of said unit would be troubling, especially
as its' first use by most players would be to copy itself...

  (hmm, there was a novel, "A for Anything"...)

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:38:28 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: A thought on Game Design

At 06:35 AM 10/6/98 PDT, you wrote:
>
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 00:25:03 -0500
>From: Andrew Akins <igor@ames.net>
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>Subject: Re: A thought on Game Design
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>
>Thomas Vickers wrote:
>
>> Subject: Re: A thought on Game Design
><snip> 
>> That is the whole reason I ordered GT.
>> Not because I want Gurps, but because I lost all my CT in a flood and 
>want a
>> copy of the background again (I miss the LBB)
>> 
>> TV
>
>SOB! I understand _exactly_ how you feel, my COMPLETE collection
>(Everything of GDWs, most of DGP, some Judge's Guild, some Gamelords,
>some FASA) of CT and MT were destroyed in a flood.
>
>Over the years I have spent _tons_ of money trying to rebuild my
>collection. I'm nearly finished...all I have left are the hard to find
>rare items (Early JTAS, Early Trav Digests, Atlas of the Imperium, Grand
>Survey, World builders Handbook, 101 Robots, FASA stuff...).
>
>I wish you the best of luck rebuilding your own collection. I know how
>hard it is.
>
>=============
>
>Yep, I lost most of my old CT, along with a LARGE collection of 
>wargames, and a nearly complete set of SFB (and you SFB players out 
>there know, thats no small pile of stuff) in a fire.  It'll never be 
>again I fear.
>
>
>

Ouch, a full set of SFB?  That did hurt.  Get replacement will not be easy.
I wish they'd get off there butts and get back into production.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:38:39 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature  (long response)

At 11:32 PM 10/5/98 EDT, you wrote:
>> Unacceptable.  If you do not know how they work in general you can not let
>> the interact with your players.  You can not know what will and will not
>> work when they try it.  What level of forgery and electronics does it take
>> to forge the BB?  What is the difficulty rating?  What is the task time?
>> These MUST be known and do not say 'it can not be done'.  Everything can be
>


>If the players don't have full TL-15 facilities at their disposal and the
>basic knowledge of the principals of the black box, it is *impossible.*  If
>they do have all those things, they can try.  *My* players are unlikely to get
>full TL-15 facilities being in the TL12 Reformation Coalition for transponders
>that aren't used anymore.
>
>It would've been a hierarchy of difficulties.  Only by getting by *all* of

What are they?  Define the problem as you see it.  Remember there maybe a
nonlinear solution to the situation.

>them, would it be at all *possible* (though still unlikely).  First they would
>need to know whats in the black box.  Unknown to the general populace.  Next,
>they need to be able to "forge" the BB (the chips inside actually).  Cloning a
>chip will mean it hasn't evolved/mutated over the time since the originals'
>creation, but just since it's been cloned, and will produce a false squawk.
>"The chips were not bred for full independant intelligence, but rather to
>respond in a sophisticed fashion in a few prescribed areas.  These areas were
>the ability to communicate with each other, to exchange and update
>information, and, most importantly, to recognize other sibling chips as
>authentic unaltered, untampered members of their specific strain.  By
>additionally limiting the chips to only receiving new information from other
>authenticated sibling chips, the information loop could be sealed to exclude
>counterfeit data."  SM pg 69
>

The 'loop' is not sealed if it includes transmiting the data through space.

>> done that does not inherently break the laws of the universe and even those
>> thing can be done by work arround or if need be leaving the universe as in
>> 'jump drive'.  Sayinf to your player 'you can't do that' is wrong.  Saying
>
>What if it's something he can't do?  Like fly, use psionics when he doesn't
>have them, tries to fiddle w/ something he must role play to get to.  If
>certain state-of-the-art and top secret items and knowledge are not at the
>disposal of the players, then certain acts will always be impossible.
>

If they require this information/items.  That may not be so.  The egnigma
box of WWII fame was beaten without a working copy.  The cracker took an
entirely different course.  Nonlinear solutions.  Cut the Gordian Knot,
don't untie it.

>> that the attemp failed is ok but you must know how it could be done or you
>> are not playing fair with your player and are cheating them.  It is the job
>> and the duty of the GM to make the rule consistant and play by them.
>
>And I do that quite well. : )
>

Then explain the traveller adventure.  It takes plave after your grace
period.  They were faking your unfakeable chip.  Were is your consistancy?
The Marches are part of the Empire.  By your own posts all transponders were
replaced.  What about the entrees in Citisen of the Empireem?

>On tech advancing:
>
>> In a short answer NO!  What ever enablong technology could or would be
>> developed could and would allow the system it made posible to be beaten.
>> The hammer that drives the nail can pull the nail also.  That is the point!
>
>So technology gets stagnant?  lol.  Hmm... have you ever seen the nails w/o

No, you have to build the tools to build the tools...and once the tools are
built they can be used to fake the produce of those tools.

>the head?  Like to see you use a hammer to get one of those out.
>

I do just that quite often.  What make you think a headless nail can't be
pulled?  Where in the world di that come from?  Ever watched a good
carpenter?  Who need a head on a nail?  There are even 'nail pullers' if you
are not able to use a hammer do to space limits.

>> The tech. that makes a system posible can override that system.  It has to
>> be able to do so or it could not build it.  That the chips were bread is not
>> relavent.  ANY siganl can be falsified with enough examples.  The EM
>> spectrum is limited in the type of data it can past.  The power of computer
>> expands by and order of magnitude every 18 months or so.  In 18 month the
>
>That speed will not continue.  It is "canon" that tech slows down big time and
>that we're in an unusual advancement curve.  In fact, tech advancement slows
>to a snails pace.
>

Pardon?  What canon?  Where does it say that?

>> >What about pings that go very very fast w/ a miniature fibre-optic system?
>Or
>> >better yet, a miniature meson system of "pinging."  Nah... probably way
>below
>> >the minimum size, but u get my drift.  Yeah, maybe you can duplicate the
>ping
>> >itself, but how do you interrupt the flow w/o alerting the tamper circuit?
>> >Even one missed or most miniscule error in the ping could well cause the
>> >tamper circuit to fire...  Maybe you'll set it to 100 or whatever
>(depending
>> >on the ROP-rate of Pinging<g>).   Hows bout any of those?  Set it around
>> >neutrinos, positrons, whatever... lol.  There will be something that should
>be
>> >uncrackable within the period from 1086 to 1130...  Eventually a flaw will
>be
>> >found/exploited and the system will be upgraded. In fact, it was...  that
>> >exploitation was Virus, but alas was uncontrollable.
>> 
>> 
>> And as ever flaw is plug a new one is found or created and exploited.  The
>
>As has been pointed out by other people, in other posts, encryption is ahead
>of decryption right now and it's more than plausible that it can be that way a
>few thousand years in the future.  How could a miniature fb system be spoofed?

What is FB?

>If a ping is missed (because the physical line connecting the black box w/ the
>commo and/or main comp is broken and a set number of pings aren't received,
>that fires the anti-tamper circuit.  How is false info fed into that sort of
>system?  Now, extrapolate for a meson or neutrino pinging system of some
>sort...
>

Media is not relavent.  Partical type is not relavent.  If the transmiter
exists a seamless tap can be made.  Empedance matching or the equevalent.

>> >No I don't.  I'll tell you a secret...  I don't really care, actually.
>It's
>> >quite in the license of science-fiction believability that a transponder
>chip
>> >can tell the difference between an authenticated message and one forged.
>You
>> >make up the reason if you don't like the one in Survival Margin...
>>
>> 
>> It work because I say so is not exceptable in an interactive game.  You must
>> allow the player their own free will.  If you 'make up a reason' then I can,
>> using basic logic deduce, a work arround.  Your defining it sets in in stone
>> and I chissle that stone into what I want it to be.  I would take a
>
>lol.  I'm just using the book, man!  What am I chiseling in stone? Noone uses
>those systems anymore and haven't for at least 50 years by 1202.
>
>> system in time.  With comutational power doubling every 18 months and all
>> new transponders having to be backward compatable (a must for logistics
>> reasons) it would not take long (20 months tops) to fine the key to forging
>> the signal.
>
>Again, computational power will not continue to double every 18 months (or
>even every 18 years) according to how tech advancement canonically flattens
>out.  Even if the key can be forged, which is debatable, how is it inputed
>into a physically connected system (fb in this case)?
>

What is fb?  Fiber optic?  If so them make before break taps and splices
have been arround for more than 5 years.  They are the standarnd to monitor
and/or reroute without breaking a busy connection.  Look then up in any
telecom. supplier catalog.

>> >Ok.  So?  So what can the techs of the 57th century do?  What about 57th
>> >century "copy protection?"
>> >
>> 
>> 57th century copy protect will be defeated by 57th century hack just like
>> today.  Also most companies have learned that copy protect ticks off the
>
>Ahem... TL16-17 copy protection vs TL15 hack.  lol
>

Kids with an old apple broke into 'secure' government computers as a prank.

>> >The Deyo chips are not just ordinary Cymbeline chips. They're the product
>of
>> >decades of geneering on said Cymbeline chips.
>> >
>> 
>> Not relavant.  They are still limited to the EM spetrum and the EM spectrum
>> is itself limited.
>
>What does that have to do w/ anything?  I'm sure a silicone based life-form
>could probably perceive whole craploads more in the EM spectrum than we can.
>That it can "feel" what a comp system "feels" like.  And that sort of fine-
>tuned spoofing will be very difficult for carbon-based humans to impose
>convincingly on such a creature.
>

The EM spectrum is LIMITED.  Your chip lifeforms can only percieve what
their sensors can recieve.  Bandwith is limited.  Type of modulation is
limited and all of this is monitorable and spoofable.  This type of
fingerprinting is used today and is fakeable today.  The military call this
SIGINT.

>> >What signals?  You talking about the anti-tamper/system disconnect?  Or
>about
>> >the transponder chatter?  Or both?
>> >
>> 
>> Either or both in this case.
>
>lol.  Your thought processes jump around a bit, don't they? ; )
>
>> >You can always forge a transponder chatter.  The Transponder probably
>> >understands it fine too.  It still gives you a false squawk because it nows
>> >what it should hear but isn't.
>> >
>> 
>> You falsify everything, that's the point.  A message that is out of
>> tollerence would cause a false squak but one inside the tolerence band would
>> be seen as corrent and legitimate.
>
>Tollerance?  lol.  It's the *Thought processes" of the chip that convince
>other chips of authenticity, not the specifics of what's in the chatter, but
>the way the chatter is formed.  Think more of random synapse firing, etc
>rather than predictable and stable 
>

First you say they are simisentiant and not they are smarter than sentiant
life?  Please make up your mind.  If the firing were 'random' them it would
not be recognizable.  That is what random means!  You can not design at or
near the uncurtainty limit.  If the chips can recognise a predictable drift
in signal patern then human who are far smarter can instament a forgery.  A
human with the proper equipment can moniter the entire EM spectrum.  There
are no secret places in the EM spectrum.

>> You are again saying it's unforagable BECAUSE it's unforgable.  Circlular
>> logic.  I refuse to allow you your premiss that a perfect system can be
>> built.  You mush provide me with the proof of your premiss.  How can a copy
>
>The burden to disprove is on you.  I don't have to prove anything.  The Deyo
>transponders are *Official* whether you like it or not.  The operations and
>theory behind them are described in some detail, but the tech behind them is
>unexplored (in reality because the writers weren't from the 57th century).
>How can you disprove something that isn't detailed?  You can't.  The "tamper
>circuit" is presented as a given factor.
>

Given to you.  I do not except one citation that disagrees with so much
other canon.

>> of a signal that is a duplicate of the signal that should be sent be told
>> from the 'real' signal.  I have already shown how the signal could be forged
>> within tolerence.  You must now show how your system can tell the
>> difference.  How can two effectively identical signal be distinguish apart?
>
>No you most certainly haven't!  Repost it then!
>

Yes I have.  Reread my posts or read the paragraph I wrote above.  I am
geting tired of repeated myself.  You egnore half my comments because you
can not justify your position in regard to them.

>> I don't like them because they are internally inconsitant and totally
>> imposible.  Your suposition that something will be invented to make them
>> posible is not in itself logical as that invention would provide the method
>> to again make the unbeatable system beatable.
>
>As I said, I think the canon storyline should be justified.  You're prefer to
>stick your head in the sand and pretend TNE never happened.    
>

I have never seen any TNE material.  I have no oppinion on TNE.  I played
CT.  I have not read or played TNE or T2300.  I'm saying that your data
conflic with CT canon in the time line you specified.

>> >I just say they're no more improbable than starship laser weapons w/ useful
>> >range (much less jump drives, Aslan, Droyne, and meson weapons/screens).
>> >
>> 
>> Not true.
>
>Really?  Tell me about mesons and how decay really works, my friend.  You can
>make a fortune if you can figure it out (much less jump drives).
>

Their is neither time nor bandwith for me to educate you.  You would argue
that what I was saying was opinion if I said the sun was HOT!  As for the
races in the above they are simply different animals and very plausable.
Laser work and they have useable range.  Range is limited in the atmosphere.
The Nova project has a 'spinal mount' size laser for fusion research.  It
has been operational for 15 years.  It could blow a 4 inch hole through a
concrete block wall in a fration of a second.

>> >You've removed my meaning from the context it was presented in.  What I
>> >admitted was that The Traveller Adventure is just as easily moved to 1086
>IMTU
>> >as it is in the 1100 era, and that the transponders of TTA are the pre-Deyo
>> >transponders (adopted in 1088 w/ a 12 year retrofit period).  Hmm... 12
>years
>> >makes 1100... what's the date of TTA?  I'm assuming 1105 or so.  Being in
>the
>> >Spinward Marches (I presume) and thus a backwater, maybe one can justify 
>> > TTAs transponders being the old style even in 1105. Ya think?  ; )
>> 
>> 
>> Then we throw out the TA.  Your system still is not posible based on the
>> hard data in Signal GK.  
>
>According to how *you* interpret it.  But of course, being a (20th century)
>EE, you know what's going to be possible in electronics in 3600 years, don't
>you?  Right.  : )  Nanee nah nee nah nah!  Any other EEs on the list?  It is
>*official* (Survival Margin) whether you like it or not.   I'd prefer to
>justify everything that makes up the OTU instead of discrading things.
>

No, not how I interpret it.  The way it is!  The processes discribed in GK
are how chips are forged TODAY.  That means the GK chips are TODAYS process.
REREAD IT!  It classic and some of the best SF I have ever read.  The
process discribed define exactly how these chip creatures work.  There is no
mistery to anyone who know the process.  There capabilities can easily be
extrapolated from this data.  Form and function are enexerably linked.

>> Signal GK also makes the Virus an imposibility
>> bases on the discription of the lifeforms reproductive processes.  They
>
>lol.  They're two seperate things.  Virus is the electronic meta-identity that
>inhabits the chips.  But it is *not* just the chip.  Virus is a whole 'nuther
>program (A TL16-17 to be precise, which matches canon: true AI being TL16-17).
>
>> could not occure inside a working computer and a simple system flush and
>> reload form backups would get rid of that virus.
>
>It would depend on how computers work in the 57th century.  TL13+ computer
>cores 
>have organic cores and synaptic processing?  There may well not be an iotia of
>current computer componets and elements in there.  How does that work?  lol.

No organic.  Nerual networks.  I have never seen any canon that said
organic!  The chips in GK are not ORGANIC.  They are silicon based.  Organic
means carbon based.

>In truth, noone knows.  Its *SCIENCE FICTION* man!  When you get your degree
>in 57th century computer engineering come back and tell me Virus can't work.  
>

Then by this definition YOU CAN NOT STATE THAT YOUR INTERPRTATION IS VALID
BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT FROM THE 57TH CENTURY.  Invalid argument.  Try taking a
debating class.  There are rules.  You've exceeded your premise here.  We
were discussing the continuity and logic of TU canon and the differences in
our interpretations as to what IS canon.

>> I don't believe in the black coppers either.  They do not need them.  There
>> are much more effient ways already in place.
>
>Actually I don't believe in "they."  Even if they believe in me...  ; )  That
>kind of paranoia is not a Good Thing.
>

A little paranoia is a good thing and you are not paranoid if they really
are after you. (Grin)

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #901
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 6 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 902



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Tech advancement
Re: Fuzzy logic (Was: Transponders)
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: Minor Race: Addaxur
Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)
A Proposition
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #887 
Pets of the future
Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
Re: Transponder's true nature  (long response)
Re: If you thought Traveller/Illuminati was silly......
Re: Running GURPS:Traveller 
re transponders

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:38:47 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

At 07:31 AM 10/6/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte wrote:
>
>> Again not true.  The NSA can break any currently available software PGP
>> scheme in less that 30 days.  The NSA claimed this in a report serveral
>> months ago.
>
>Yes they can break _a_ key. What happens when they're intercepting thousands
>of message streams with thousands of keys and no way to know what is what...
>

They have to prioritise and YOUR message maybe missed.  That's one good
reason to always us encryption.

>> Parrallel processing with successive aproximation between each attempt
>> greatly reduces the time required.  One PC might take 2 years, 2-1 year, 4-6
>> months, 8-3 months, 16-1.5 month 32-.75 months.  There are systems being
>> produced today espicially for the NSA for this purpose with over 1000
>> process system linked through a high speed bus.  Just using the brute force
>> method these systems can defeat long key PGP in hundreds of hours as opposed
>> to 10000+ hours.  The company making them is intending to offer them for
>> scientic use when they have fullfilled their current contract to supply
the NSA.
>
>So, in theory, can a 1000 node Beowulf system, costing about a tenth or less,
>but that is beside the point. The system that the NSA needs a gazillion dollar
>system to break PGP in 'hundreds of hours' pales beside the $100 or less
>required to buy a system to efficiently encrypt messages using that long key
>PGP cipher.
>

True the system above cost a few megs.  I don't remember exactly but it was
less than 3 mil.

>The other side to the PGP equation is not only use encryption, but use it
>widely. If there are millions of encrypted messages in the stream, how do you
>decide which to spend the hundreds of hours breaking? 
>

Also true.  I am a believer in public access to strong encryption.

>
>> There are no unbeatable systems.  To say there are is to say that perfection
>> exists.  
>
>AKAIK, NO one has said that PGP (or any system) is perfect...just hard to
>break on a routine basis. Any lock can be picked, any alarm can be
>circumvented, any ecryption scheme can be broken. The whole point is: can it
>be done in time to provide timely intel...rushing into the smoking hulk of
>your headquarters clutching a sheet of paper yelling "I got it! Their message
>said they are going to bomb us, uhhh...yesterday!" does little good.
>
>The whole point is, right now, it is far harder to break encryption schemes
>than to create new ones. Since this has been true for as long as we have
>records, it is rerasonable to assume this will be the state long into the
>future. TL-16 encryption will be extremely hard to defeat, probably impossible
>to do so in a real-time manner, precicely because the increase in computing
>power necessary to break these systems is readily turned around to make
>stronger encryption.
>
>So, no it is not a matter of belief or 'not listening to reason'
>

I said several times it would be diffult and expensive.  Others have said
'not posible' and as you just said that is not true.  So you and I are in
agreement.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:38:51 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Fuzzy logic (Was: Transponders)

>>Me and Hans have discussed matters in this province before. He doesn't like
>>TNE and i'm not losing sleep about it.
>
>You must get most of your excersise from jumping to conclusions. I've never

He does.  Or by intentionally egnoring the contradiction to his position.

>said that I don't like TNE. I spent a lot of effort on the Pocket Empire
>mailing list working on a TNE campaign background (and had a lot of fun
>doing it). What I don't like are inconsistencies. And I'm not too fond of
>people who introduce new elements that are inconsistent with previously
>published material and then insist that the NEW stuff should be considered
>superior to the old one merely because it is new. My attitude to new stuff
>is that it is the obligation of the author of such to make sure that it is
>"backward compatible" (Unless the old stuff was flawed to begin with, of
>course).
>
>>You've removed my meaning from the context it was presented in.  What I
>>admitted was that The Traveller Adventure is just as easily moved to 1086
>>IMTU as it is in the 1100 era, and that the transponders of TTA are the
>>pre-Deyo transponders (adopted in 1088 w/ a 12 year retrofit period).
>
>You can do that IYTU bacause it is yours and no one disputes your right to
>do anything you damn well please in your own personal TU. That's not in
>dispute. What we are discussing (well... what I am discussing, anyway) is
>what we, each of us personally, think that future authors of official
>Traveller material _ought_ to regard as canon.
>

That's true.

>>Hmm... 12 years makes 1100... what's the date of TTA? I'm assuming 1105 or
>>so.
>
>Starts in 1105, runs over two years or so. The trade war is close to the end
>of the campaign. 1107ish.
>

Thanks.  My copy is 150 miles away.

>>Being in the Spinward Marches (I presume) and thus a backwater, maybe one
>>can justify TTAs transponders being the old style even in 1105. Ya think? ; )
>
>Can you? That would involve regarding one of the statements in _Survival
>Margin_ as untrue, and the moment you do that, you lose whatever moral
>advantage you may have from insisting that _Survival Margin_ is the gospel
>truth. If you are willing to change one statement in SM, what justification
>do you have for requiring the rest of us to accept the rest of it
>unconditionally? Do you have different standards of the arguments you
require of us
>and of the arguments you allow yourself to use?
>
>
>
>      Hans Rancke
>University of Copenhagen
>     rancke@diku.dk


That's logical.  Unfortunately logic is not something that our oposition in
this discussion is willing to recognize.  The only way I see to convence him
would be to get the original writer of TNE to send a noterised affadavid to
him my registered mail.  (Grin)  It's reached the point of faith to him.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:39:51 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

At 05:00 PM 10/6/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Gary (TravelrTNE@aol.com) writes:
>>>>The point is that if it's proven to be unforgable (and the Imperials have
>>>>no back door in there), it's as effective for the foreign polities to use
>>>>it as is it for the Imperials.
>>> 
>>>Gary, it is impossible to prove a negative. The only way the foreign

A basic premise of logic.

>>>governments could be sure that the Imperials didn't have a back door would
>>>be if they had the complete specifications. And even then they couldn't be
>>



>>Give them complete specs.  I've acquiesed to this... hell... even let them
>>in RS Omicron (under extremely heavy supervision and internal security, of
>>course).
>
>I love the way you reply to the bits you (think you) have the answers to and
>ignore the rest. Thank heaven for cut and paste. 
>

He's been going this to me from the start of this thread.

>"...even then they couldn't be sure that the Imperials didn't have a
>different one tucked away that did have a back door. And how would they know
>which type was in any given transponder? That would require that they had
>unlimited access to inspect them.
>
>And even if the Imperial could prove all of this, human nature is such that
>the professional paranoiacs of those foreign governments would be quite sure
>that the Imperials had pulled a fast one. At the very least I can't see any
>of them being willing to run the risk."
>                                     ---- me in my previous post
>
>>>Finally, you ignored the point that the foreign governments would not be
>>>thrilled to have the TRUTH of their ship movements freely available to the
>>>Imperials.
>>
>>This doesn't happen.  All the transponders record is registry information,
>>etc.
>
>Ah! I'm sorry, I was under the impression that you had claimed that one
>reason why transponders couldn't be forged was that they exchanged "past
>history" notes about their earlier travels and encounters that was so
>detailed that it was an impossible task to simulate them. That must have
>been someone else, then. I really do have to start keeping back files of
>current discussions.
>

Someone did but when the effects where explained that person dropped it.
(Thank god!)

>Anyway, just what is the information the Deyo chips exchange and how do they
>recognize a perfectly genuine transponder that has been fed false info?
>

I'd guess they compare passwords.  One enquires for a responce to code
1234567 and get a responce to compare to it's data base then the other
repetes the process untill some level of confidence in each others identity
is reached.  The questions and answers probably vary based on a time
standard and each units ident codes to form a session code.

>>>OK. It's obviously useless to try to convince you that the Deyo transponders
>>>can be forged.
>>
>>lol.  How can they be forged?  If you've given a method for forging them,
>>please repost (or give me the date/time of that message).  You have alot of
>>misconceptions about the operations of the chips. 
>
>Well, it's lucky for me that I have such a knowledgable expert as you to set
>me straigth.
>
>Now pay attention: 1) You steal a blank transponder. One of those millions of
>transponders that are made at the Central Repository of All Deyo Chips and
>shipped all over the Imperium. 2) You bribe someone with the required
>knowledge and equipment to install genuine transponders to install it.
>
>Hey presto! You now have a false transponder indistinguishable from a genuine
>one.
>

Works for me.  You could even bribe an official for one of those
transponders.  After all soldiers sell LAW rocket to good old boys.

>>>Apparently you don't mind that this specifically is contrary to various
>>>previously published material and by inference invalidates quite a few other
>>>CT and MT adventures (those where such a transponder would make the action
>>>either impossible or suicidal).
>>
>>I addressed this in a post to Charles.  What year is TTA set in?  The
>>transponders were required in 1088 w/ a 12 grace period according to
>>Survival Margin. That makes 1100.
>
>Right so far.
>
>>Seeing how the Spinward Marches is a backwater, it's more than acceptable
>>a ship or hundred fell through the cracks...
>
>It surprises me not at all that it is acceptable to you. But it is not what
>Survival Margin states: "...over the course of a 12-year phase-in period,
>were retrofitted to all existing vessels..." (SM, p. 71). All existing
>vessels, it says. The 12 year grace period is what it takes to get all the
>way out into the uttermost edges of the Imperium. Including the Spinward
>Marches.
>
>Then there are:
>
>_Citizens of the Imperium_, p. 15: "The ship's transponders can be altered to
>identify the vessel as having any of a variety of missions and identities."
>
>_76 Patrons_, p. 7: "The registration transponder of the vessel will then be
>changed, new papers forged, and the ship will be turned over to the
>adventurers as payment."
>
>_76 Patrons_, p. 12: "...the ship's papers are forged..."
>
>_76P_, p. 13: An adventure involving a scout using his ship to attack a yacht.
>Another adventure where the PCs are hired to use their ship in an attack on a
>SuSAG facility.
>
>_76 P, p. 37: "The patron does not own the free trader, but has stolen it."
>
>_Knightfall_, p. 45: "[The ship has had] its transponder replaced with a
>military grade transponder (one that allows changing IDs from a panel dialog
>on the bridge)."
>

Thank you for the quote.  My CT stuff is at home.

>There's a whole slew of information in _Starship Operator's Manual_ about
>civilian and military transponders that runs counter to the info in SM, but
>I know you regard DGP publications as non-canonical, so I won't bother to
>enumerate it.
>
>I'm confident that there are other instances in _Traveller's Digest_ and
>_Magatraveller Journal_, but given your attitude to DGP I haven't bothered
>to go through them.
>
>>the cracks should all be fixed by 1116.
>
>_Knightfall_ is by GDW and is set circa 1120. I can't imagine what reason you
>will cook up for why that somehow dosen't count, but I'm confident that you
>will think of something.
>

I want to hear this one too.

>>>...if the pirate ship "Predator" has had an extra transponder installed and
>>>that transponder has been told that it has been installed in the "Completely
>>>Harmless", then it will say so.
>>
>>Off hand, I'd say a cymbeline chip would know another one was nearby... have
>>part of the breeding programming be to fire the tamper circuit if one is is
>>within a certain distance (like on the same ship).  For starters, anyways.
>
>SOM describes just such a setup. But I was forgetting, DGP products don't
>count, do they?
>

But how do they know that other chip is ther and the distance to it?  Do the
BBs have universal postioning systems!?!?!

>>>Does anyone else besides Gary have trouble understanding why the Imperial
>>>Navy would like to be able to conceal their ship movements and even put out
>>>misinformation?
>>
>>One more time... Only registry information.
>
>But even without being incessantly logged by every passing merchant, naval
>ships will want to be able to broadcast fake IDs on occasion. Anyway, it is
>no longer a matter of conjecture on my part; _Knightfall_ states that
>military transponders do have that capability.
>

I had not thought of that.  Very good idea and point.  Throws a wrench into
the spy network.

>>>>Traveller "canon" did not end w/ original Traveller. Can you live w/ that?
>>> 
>>>As long as the new material is both self-consistent and consistent with
>>>previously published material, then I welcome it.
>>
>>You just added two qualifiers.
>
>So I did. What's your point?
>
>>Of course, you have yet to prove that the material is not *self-consistent.*
>>The TTA, for example, is easily explained (and most of the area behind the
>>claw can go for the same expanation). Backwater, not yet in line w/ Imperial
>>regulations.
>
>"...over the course of a 12-year phase-in period, were retrofitted to all
>existing vessels..." (SM, p. 71). ALL existing vessels, it says.
>

Logic strikes again.

>>>That seems to be the difference between us. You see _any_ development,
>>>however silly, as an improvement. I only see the improvements as
>>>improvements.
>>
>>"In the interest of moving this discussion along I'll refrain from the
>>obvious rejoinder."  ; )
>
>It's encouraging to see that you are not incapable of learning. Give yourself
>a pat on the back from me.
>
>>The real questions are: Do you think the Traveller universe as described in
>>the rest of the material we have  --  everything EXCEPT _Survival Margin_,
>>more or less  --  really do describe a universe where transponders are
>>tamperproof and provide perfect (after the fact) information about all ship
>>movement? And would you like to run your adventures in such a universe?
>
>>I see nothing in MT (outside of DGP and that is limited to the SOM)
>
>Until Marc Miller declares the DGP material uncanonical it is just as much
>part of the Traveller background as anything else. And I do not concede that
>you are entitled to ignore the vast amount of CT material either. Though it
>is a very simple way of resolving canon conflict, I give you that: Just cut
>the amount of canonical material down to a small fraction of all that has
>been published. Simple and effective. But not a solution I accept.
>

Marc, if you are reading this thread could you help us with this?

>>...which invalidates that Deyo transponders are part of everyday use. The
>>only inconsistencies would be TTA, adventures etc.
>
>In short, pretty much everything except _Survival Margin_.
>
>>All in the Spinward Marches area (and explainable by "backwater").
>
>"...over the course of a 12-year phase-in period, were retrofitted to all
>existing vessels..." (SM, p. 71).
>
>Incidentally, _Knightfall_ takes place in Massila, a core sector, in 1120.
>

What traveller is Knightfall under CT, TNE, T2300?

>>Only registry information is recorded by the transponder.  And in any case,
>>the transponders aren't used in the New Era.   They're history, man. : )
>
>This appears to me to be completely and utterly irrelevant to the discussion
>at hand. What point are you trying to make?
>
>

I do not understands it either.  I plan on planing GT.  The transponders in
one strip or another will be there.  I'd like to solve this with either
logic and canon or a ruling from traveller creater.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 14:46:54 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Minor Race: Addaxur

In a message dated 10/6/98 8:22:08 AM Central Daylight Time, dlpulver@kos.net
writes:

<< The aliens lizards the Drak Ne' Vha,  >>

Is this any relation to the lizard in Drakne Station (from Judges Guild?).

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:55:38 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)

At 08:44 AM 10/6/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)
>...
>>You really do not understand logistics.  The US military would colapse in a
>>matter of weeks and in some cases days without private contracters and
>>civilian transport and supplies.  There are numerous studies and military
>>excercise bases on this information.  As for your 'handguns' vs MBTs WRONG.
>>US citicens have a lot more than handguns like dynamite and the production
>>equipment to make much more powerfull devices plus all the military hardware
>>in national gaurd staions the cost gaurd and the civilian contraters
>>warehouses that hold LAW rocket, tanks unter construction, and of course the
>>power generating system are in private hands.
>
>  As a somewhat more advanced lesson in logistics we can consider the stocks
>of food and fuel needed to keep a population center functioning, and how 
>little they have stored on site. Even without getting into the destruction
>of said stockpiles, a properly equipped military (if it somehow, quite
>strangely, felt the unifrom need) could bring at least the major population
>(and thus, typically production as well) centers back under control in a
>matter of days or a week or so.
>
>  Tank farms, airports, roads, bridges, airliners, rail -lines, -yards,
>barges, freighters, pipelines, and trains are all fairly easily neutralized
>without effective opposition. Warehouses also have notoriously poor evasive
>qualities.
>
>  For real fun, though, there's _oil refineries_ :>
>
>

The same aplies to military supply dumps.  A low flying group of civilian
planes, some TNT...   There are a lot more civilian planes than military.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 14:08:48 -0600
From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com>
Subject: A Proposition

Gentlebeings:

We had someone try to post some general discussion to the TNS mailing list,
and naturally it bounced, but it brings up the question: Where should we
(SJ Games) send people who want to talk about GURPS Traveller. I think a
GURPS Traveller specific board might be a good idea as a single place to
talk specific rules mechanics and the like, however...

I also feel, like many on this list, that Traveller has grown beyond a
single set of rules mechanics, and that the TML is diverse enough to
support GURPS Traveller in addition to all the others. I'm going to propose
that SJ Games set up a discussion board as part of their regular bulletin
board sstem, but I'd also like to post information on the Web site so
people can sign up to the TML. I'm not sure how much it would increase the
traffic. Frankly, I think that most of the real Traveller fanatics (GURPS
or others) ALREADY subscribe to the TML. I think a civilized, open
discussion of all backgrounds is a good thing (we can leave the "my rules
are better than your rules" arguments for e-mail -- I also propose that we
cancel the semi-annual
pirates-dropping-big-rocks-on-virus-infested-robots-discussing-economics
discussion...: )

Can someone save me a lot of effort and shoot me the "how to subscribe"
instructions? I'll wait a day or two, and if there is a huge groundswell of
public opinion on here against it, I'll reconsider. Consider this your
opportunity to wean GURPS players over to the "One True Way(tm)" whatever
you feel that is...




Loren Wiseman
     Traveller Line Editor
     Traveller Guru-in-Residence
     SJ Games
     LKW@IO.COM
     (512) 447-7866 VOX
     (512) 447-1144 FAX

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 12:21:51 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #887 

At 02:29 PM 10/6/98 -0400, you wrote:

>> Let's see, the little black books didn't have any background at all.  So 
>> you obviously couldn't run something in the Traveller background without 
>> adding a bunch of stuff:
>
>And what did people do before GDW came out with all the supplements?  We 
>*homebrewed* it.  At least we had all the rules we *needed* to homebrew it.

And if you want to do *that* you buy GURPS Space instead of GURPS
Traveller, which makes no bones whatsoever about being a method of porting
Traveller's setting into the GURPS rule mechanic.

Space is set of generic rules for science fiction role playing, much like
what you got in Books 2 and 3 of the LBB set.
- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 12:37:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Pets of the future

While not strictly something you would need (or possibly even want) for a
pet.  In DG's adventure in MT Journal #3 they features a pair of animals
which had been wired.  With a hand computer you could see and hear what
they were seeing and hearing and give them commands via radio.  Combine
that with monkey-level intelligence and you've got loads of fun. 

Then again, what about the Zhodani.  If they use specially bred animals
combined with telepathic trainer/handlers they could even do w/o the
radios. A Zhodani (Droyne Sport, or even Darrian) telepath + animal
commando team could be leads of fun (and yes, this is ripped directly off
from Andre Norton's novel Beast Master [which is *nothing* like the
*wretched* movie of the same name]). 

Any other ideas?


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:44:21 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside

At 11:46 AM 10/6/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
>...
>>I did not mean monitors as a ship class.  I ment the ironclad called
>>Monitor.  One of the first two ironclads along with the Merrimack.  The
>>battle between them was inconclusive.
>
>  Because neither, although adequately armed themselves (Virginia had
>just finished off a Union flotilla as a nice, light snack) was capable
>of penetrating the others armour even with SOTA armaments?
>

Virginia?  Is that a ship?  Or the state?  As far as I know there were only
two ironclads in the cival war.  The ones mentioned above and as far as I
know neither ever sank any other ship.

They were both badly under guned due to weight of armor.  They were also not
very good designs.  One sank in a mild storm.  Later designs worked better.

Charles.

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 12:44:47 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature  (long response)

Charles Prevatte wrote:
>
> If they require this information/items.  That may not be so.  The egnigma
> box of WWII fame was beaten without a working copy.  The cracker took an
> entirely different course.  Nonlinear solutions.  Cut the Gordian Knot,
> don't untie it.
>

Uhhh...they _did_ have working Enigmas. One was recovered from Poland in
1939, the Enigma had been a _commercial_ product in the 30's.

They also got a number of sets of enigma code pads, were routinely able
to learn the wheel order, and got an enormous amount of the information
they needed to break the Enigma codes by decrypting identical texts
transmitted in a far inferior code used by the German Naval Weather
service.

See:

AUTHOR       Kahn, David, 1930-
 TITLE        Seizing the enigma: the race to break the German U-boat
codes,
                1939-1943 / David Kahn.
 PUBLISHER    Boston : Houghton Mifflin Co., 1991.
 DESCRIPTION  xii, 336 p., [16] p. of plates : ill., maps ; 24 cm.
 NOTES        "A Thomas Congdon book"--T.p. verso.
              Includes bibliographical references (p. [311]-326) and
index.
 SUBJECTS     World War, 1939-1945 -- Cryptography.
              World War, 1939-1945 -- Naval operations, German.

for an informative look at how the Enigma was broken.

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 12:44:29 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: If you thought Traveller/Illuminati was silly......

In mail you write:

> Kurt Feltenberger wrote:
>>
>> At 10:34 PM 10/2/98 +0100, you wrote:
>>> Imagine your players coming across a strange world, deep in space.
>>> Their first thought on seeing the sensors readings was it must be
>>> the work of the Ancients - who else could have created it. Their
>>> second thought was nobody - not even the Ancients, would have _any_
>>> reason to create it.

>>> If you haven't already guessed the world in question is a disc,
>>> rotating on the back of four elephants which in turn stand on the
>>> back of a giant turtle (sex unknown).

>>> Afterall given that the last GURPS product released before GURPS
>>> Traveller was GURPS Discworld this combination is logical ;0

> Nah, not silly.  I'm currently running a Traveller/Morrow Project
> crossover...

> You could always go with a "Bunnies & Burrows"/Vargr crossover....  Yum!

No, use Albedo instead. That gives you the warlike "bunnies", but also
other "animals". And the history up thru the last issue I read (several
years back) *would* fit some weirdness on Grandfather's part.

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


      Could you tell me where I could find a copy of Albedo?  I have always
      wanted to own it but can't find it at my FLGS's in the area.



Leo

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 15:46:25 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Running GURPS:Traveller 

> >Simple.  Every previous incarnation of Traveller included starship & star 
> >system generation rules as well as all the rules you need to have a standalone 
> >game.  GURPS doesn't do this.
> the only thing miss is the star system generation.  not really all that
> neccecary....besides the one in book 3 was replaced what a year later? with
> a better one.

Scouts (LBB 6) came out in 1983.  The errata came out a month or so later.

> >The supplements to CT and MT (having practically *zero* experience with TNE 
> >and *absolutely* none with T4) were nice to have, but were not *necessary* for 
> TNE was *not* stand alone, you couldn't even make ships.  for that mater the
> LBBs 1-3 were not stand alone...no background to speak of, no vehicle
> construction rules. chargen and ship design and systemgeneration that were
> replaced/suplemented as fast as GDW could publish...no way is the CT boxed
> set stand alone compared to GT and lite.

You could homebrew your own stuff with the LBBs.  Mercenary (LBB 4) came out 
in '78 with an expanded chargen for military characters as well as the 
beginnings of the Striker combat system.  High Guard cane out originally in 
'79, with the 2nd Edition (the most common one) in '80.  Striker came out in 
'81.  Scouts as mentioned in '83.  So you're telling me people had to wait 5 
years for a playable system?  I don't think so.  I was playing it in '78.

The LBB's mentioned generic vehicles like air rafts, ACV's & ATV's.  It gave 
prices & capabilities (as in, weighs XX tons, travels at YY kph, etc).  It 
also had a basic ship design sequence for ships under 1000 tons displacement, 
ships that characters would concievably have access to.  Basic stuff, but 
useable.
 
> > G:T is *NOT* standalone.  What is so difficult to understand here?
> 
> all you need is Lite to go with it and it is a better product than the basic
> books 1-3. 
> 
> What is so difficult to understand here?

I don't see this.  Still no star system generation, still no starship design.  We'll shelve vehicle design for now, even though the LBBs didn't *design* them, they at least told you the *capabilities*.

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 11:44:07 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: re transponders

>How is that.  There is nothing in cannon that says a jumping ship is
>detectable apone arrival execpt by normall sensor scan.  Space is real big
>and active searches like radar and lidar have limited range. The pirate is
>not sending any siganl so how would the system know about it's presents.
>Again canon sugests this is posible in many adventure books like 'Rock and a
>Hard Place" with the asteroid ship Rock and the shuttle Pebble.

there are several cannon sources that indicate a "Jump Transition
Phenomena" of over a minute of duration, with intense visual and possibly
other (non-EM) radiative effects.

just a brief list: High Guard, DGP's SSoM, TNE Regency Sourcebook, MTJ, at
least one old JTAS article.

Broad area monitoring is apparent from the rules of 5fw and High Guard.
Also, keep in mind that a heplar flare has a higher energy density than
neighbor stars (in terms of photons to reciever) if you are looking at the
right end. There are multiple ways to find a ship, and most aren't really
that high tech, just infrastructurally intensive.

Two patrol cruisers have more extra-atmospheric sensor capability outward
than Earth has now. Hubble is able to detect (and image) jovian worlds at 8
LY. 30 hubbles designed for in-system rather than deep field, with
sufficient computational back-up could detect a jump sig, and then doo a
narrower higher resolution scan of the area.

Based upon 5fw, Invasion Earth, Imperium, Dark Nebula, and High Guard,
jumping to the inner system has always been detectable.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #902
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 6 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 903



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re Ironclads
OFF TOPIC: SFB
Re: Pets of the future
Re: Minor Race: Addaxur
Re: Pets of the future 
Re: Cats in Traveller
re: transponders
Re: Missile defense question
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)
Re: Stand alone Traveller version
Re: Ship Registration processes (was re: Transponders)
Re: Pets of the future
Re: JoT
Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
Re: A thought on Game Design
re: Jot
Re: A Proposition
Re:Ironclads, the facts...long.
Re: GURPS and Munchkins
Re: re transponders

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 11:34:10 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Ironclads

>I did not mean monitors as a ship class.  I ment the ironclad called
>Monitor.  One of the first two ironclads along with the Merrimack.  The
>battle between them was inconclusive.
>
>Charles.

Effectively, both monitor and merrrimack are monitors. Neither was intended
for blue water.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 11:53:02 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: OFF TOPIC: SFB

>>
>>Yep, I lost most of my old CT, along with a LARGE collection of
>>wargames, and a nearly complete set of SFB (and you SFB players out
>>there know, thats no small pile of stuff) in a fire.  It'll never be
>>again I fear.
>
>Ouch, a full set of SFB?  That did hurt.  Get replacement will not be easy.
>I wish they'd get off there butts and get back into production.
>
>Charles.

Since, until the tiff between ADB and TFG is resolved, there is no
production of SFB... don't hold your breath.
ADB writes and owns the copyrights.
TFG publishes under exclusive liscence and sells to distributers.
TFG has failed to pay ADB for over a year on products already sold.
ADB won't make more til they get paid or TFG gives up the exclusive
printing/distribution rights.
TFG won't pay til they get more product.

mexican standoff going to court. (based upon materials posted by various
SFB staffers to newsgroups and on the SFB Web page).

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 16:02:52 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Pets of the future

John R. Snead wrote:

> Then again, what about the Zhodani.  If they use specially bred animals
> combined with telepathic trainer/handlers they could even do w/o the
> radios. A Zhodani (Droyne Sport, or even Darrian) telepath + animal
> commando team could be leads of fun (and yes, this is ripped directly off
> from Andre Norton's novel Beast Master [which is *nothing* like the
> *wretched* movie of the same name]).
>
> Any other ideas?

In Peter Hamilton's Reality Dysfunction books,  there are "affinity-links"
that bond a human master with a pet.  In the book, a local sheriff-type
on a colony planet is linked to a dog that he uses for tracking, fighting,
etc.  He could receive the dogs senses and command the dog as well.

I think a small a "Pets & Pests" or "101 Critters" might be a great
resource.  Everything from Cats to Rats, Dogs to Parrots, and . . .
(cue shark music from Jaws) . . . the dreaded . . . the feared . . .
. . .
. . .

Space Hamster!

Bloo

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 13:02:48 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Minor Race: Addaxur

In a message dated 10/5/98 12:51:26 AM Central Daylight Time,
shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca writes:

<<   Are the Addaxur (AM:4 - Zhodani) covered in detail anywhere?  >>

No. But I have a minor race creation system in draft form. Want to start
talking about them?

Marc Miller




      A minor race template, or creation system would be invaluable.  The
      minor races where never given enough attention in previous edditions.
      The main books had infered that there were many different minor human
      races all decended from the people the ancients took from earth, but
      never did more than a few write-ups.  It would add alot of color to
      the game if one of the PC's was a member of a minor race.



Leo

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 16:05:50 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Pets of the future 

> Then again, what about the Zhodani.  If they use specially bred animals
> combined with telepathic trainer/handlers they could even do w/o the
> radios. A Zhodani (Droyne Sport, or even Darrian) telepath + animal
> commando team could be leads of fun (and yes, this is ripped directly off
> from Andre Norton's novel Beast Master [which is *nothing* like the
> *wretched* movie of the same name]). 

Actually, I thought that movie was cute.  The guy started out with a pair of 
ferrets & ended up with Tanya Roberts.  <grin>

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:08:07 -0500
From: "Linda & Craig Baxter" <baxter@midusa.net>
Subject: Re: Cats in Traveller

> From: William F. Hostman <aramis@gci.net>
> Subject: Cats in Traveller
> 

First, I really enjoyed your write up about the cat.  It was
great.  :-)

Second, I can remember that Andre Norton used cats
on board her trading vessels.  They were commonly used
to keep pests off ship.  

Good gaming!

baxter@midusa.net

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 16:10:39 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: transponders

William F. Hostman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Again canon sugests this is posible in many adventure books like 'Rock and a
>Hard Place" with the asteroid ship Rock and the shuttle Pebble.

<<snip>>

Two patrol cruisers have more extra-atmospheric sensor capability outward
than Earth has now. Hubble is able to detect (and image) jovian worlds at 8
LY. 30 hubbles designed for in-system rather than deep field, with
sufficient computational back-up could detect a jump sig, and then doo a
narrower higher resolution scan of the area.

Based upon 5fw, Invasion Earth, Imperium, Dark Nebula, and High Guard,
jumping to the inner system has always been detectable.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
In the case of the LBB adventure _Expedition to Zhodane_, the
asteroid-hulled ship _Rock_ was a special case. It was pretty low
displacement (200dtns, IIRC), and looked like an asteroid.

_Rock_ jumps in system, creating a jump-transition signal. The
scanners in-system detect the signal - or, more likely, detect a
"possible signal". They point their high-res stuff in that direction,
and see nothing - or maybe notice an asteroid drifting in open space,
an asteroid that may be small enough to have escaped notice.

The crew of _Rock_ sits quiet for a while, until those who own the
system get bored and look elsewhere.

I'd say that a ship bigger than _Rock_ would make a bigger signature
on jump exit - go from "possible" signal to "probable" (or even "definite")
signal, get more than passing attention when it comes in. So _Rock_'s
special case only applies to tiny, rock-hulled starships.

fwiw, I don't use a massive jump-transition signature IMTU...I like to make
sneaky ship movements easier to do, it gives all those fightercraft
and patrol cruisers something to do. If you can patrol an entire star
system from a couple big satellites around the main world,
where's the fun in that?

Walt Smith

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 15:23:38 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Missile defense question

Jim Clem wrote:

>The USN's newer 5 inch guns are autoloaded, and capable of a relatively

>high ROF, and rigged to fire controllers that allow them to be used for

>surface or air targets, supposedly including missiles.  Anyone out
there
>know more about this??

as of '83 they could shoot down low speed (subsonic) aircraft with 3
shots HE (personal experiance, we were to take 10 shots at a ariel towed
target, it was destroyed with 3 shots)

Charles

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 15:23:54 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

Paul Bendall wrote:

<snip>
>>  6. The rules should include equipment running the gamut from Mileau
0 to
>>  the TNE era.
>>
>> Yes. Based on Equipment Cards and Weapon Cards, each of which carries
the
>data
>> necessary for use.
>
>Nice. Kind of like Emporer's Arsenal / Vehicles? Those books redeemed
T4 in my
>eyes.
>Nice clear info with nice art.

Nice clear INACCURATE info.   I.e. aircraft and helocopters that can
work WITHOUT atmospheres (helocopters WILL NOT work in very thin
atmospheres, most will not work in thin atmospheres), watercraft that
will work with no atmosphere (without atmosphere the only water found
will be frozen), many vehicles (all types) that can operate without
atmosphere that do not have life support/sealed environment.

Charles

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

Date: Tue,  6 Oct 98 16:22:25 EDT
From: carioca@stratos.net (Aerron Winsor)
Subject: Re: Stand alone Traveller version

At 11:32 PM 10/5/98 EDT, TravelrTNE@aol.com
>TNE is stand alone in *ONE* book. 
ducts.  There's even two adventures.
>Add Fire, Fusion and Steel and the sky's the limit.  
like I said it is not complete..no starship generation rules...note not my
definition, but someone elses.  he wae objecting to Gt not having world gen
rules (he also thought it had no ship design rules, but it does) for
compleatness...TNE might have a bit more, but it has 3x the pages. 
 
>
>Even support for non "Imperial Space" campaigns is supported through Fire,
>Fusion, and Steel (the Original) w/ it's Alternate technology.  Especially
>2300 and Babylon 5 type games.  No other Traveller version can say that. GT
can :)
**-----------------------------------------------------------**
"People think that professional soldiers think a lot about fighting,
but SERIOUS professional soldiers think a lot more about food and a
warm place to sleep, because these are two things that are generally
hard to get, whereas fighting tends to turn up all the time."
                 -T.Pratchett, SMALL GODS

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

Date: Tue,  6 Oct 98 16:22:23 EDT
From: carioca@stratos.net (Aerron Winsor)
Subject: Re: Ship Registration processes (was re: Transponders)

Here is one for you...what if some jerkwater independant planet mounts an
trading expidition with a new ship. what about its transponder??

**-----------------------------------------------------------**
"People think that professional soldiers think a lot about fighting,
but SERIOUS professional soldiers think a lot more about food and a
warm place to sleep, because these are two things that are generally
hard to get, whereas fighting tends to turn up all the time."
                 -T.Pratchett, SMALL GODS

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 16:35:46 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Pets of the future

At 12:37 PM 10/6/98 -0700, you wrote:
>While not strictly something you would need (or possibly even want) for a
>pet.  In DG's adventure in MT Journal #3 they features a pair of animals
>which had been wired.  With a hand computer you could see and hear what
>they were seeing and hearing and give them commands via radio.  Combine
>that with monkey-level intelligence and you've got loads of fun. 
>
>Then again, what about the Zhodani.  If they use specially bred animals
>combined with telepathic trainer/handlers they could even do w/o the
>radios. A Zhodani (Droyne Sport, or even Darrian) telepath + animal
>commando team could be leads of fun (and yes, this is ripped directly off
>from Andre Norton's novel Beast Master [which is *nothing* like the
>*wretched* movie of the same name]). 
>
>Any other ideas?

Kind of reminds me of Sten's girfriend Bet, who had two trained tigers, IIRC.

Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:36:07 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Re: JoT

>>>>
I agree with JOT, it doesn't seem to work anymore (I've deleted it
from MTU).
<snip>
Another change was to replace first aid and medical with surgery
and medicine - I don't like having two skills one of which is a
subset
of another (eg a character with Medical 1 and First Aid 1 has only 1
skill).
>>>>
I think that JoT is a useful skill to have remain in the Traveller
universe (I have kept it in MTU through all rules iterations). 
However, I don't allow it to be used as a "universal skill" but rather
as a "skill enabler."  I have always thought of it as having a broad
experience base, and a knack for learning how things work _while_ 
working on them, and a quick study of the basic information on a
system or skill.  I have a brother-in-law who I consider to have some
level of JoT, because he seems to be able to pick up any activity by
reading a couple of books and playing around with it some.  He doesn't
become an expert, but can do enough to make things work for a while.
Something more along the lines of having worked on the engine in your
own car, and then being able to look under the cover of a gas
generator and say "Yep, that must be the spark plug.  See, it doesn't
have any wire on it and I remember the spark plugs always needed wires
in my car.  Maybe I need to connect this wire to it to make it work." 
Or perhaps something like "I have Windows 95 on my machine at home,
but this is not '95.  However, there are some similar ideas here, and
there is a menu bar.  Perhaps the Edit menu in this MacWrite program
has some of the same functions as the Word program that I am used to."
 Or perhaps "The gunnery seargent on the ship I was on during my term
with the IN liked me, and showed me around the turrets and let me play
on the missile weapons simulator for an hour.  This sand-caster turret
seems to have some similar controls, maybe I will fiddle a few minutes
and see what they do."  Or perhaps "I've flown helicopters for three
years, but this is my first time in a 747 cockpit.  Unfortunately the
pilot and co- are dead, so I guess I'm the most qualified here.  The
radio looks familiar, so I will call the tower and have them walk me
through the things I don't catch onto."
- - Joseph

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 16:55:47 -0400
From: Joe Pettit <jpettit@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside

Charles Prevatte wrote:

> At 11:46 AM 10/6/98 -0700, you wrote:
> >>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
> >>Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
> >...
> >>I did not mean monitors as a ship class.  I ment the ironclad called
> >>Monitor.  One of the first two ironclads along with the Merrimack.  The
> >>battle between them was inconclusive.
> >
> >  Because neither, although adequately armed themselves (Virginia had
> >just finished off a Union flotilla as a nice, light snack) was capable
> >of penetrating the others armour even with SOTA armaments?
> >
>
> Virginia?  Is that a ship?  Or the state?  As far as I know there were only
> two ironclads in the cival war.

I believe the Merrimac was also called the Virginia.

> The ones mentioned above and as far as I
> know neither ever sank any other ship.

I think the Monitor was specifically designed to defeat the Merrimac which was
destroying all the Union ships.

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 15:58:02 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: A thought on Game Design

>>Yep, I lost most of my old CT, along with a LARGE collection of
>>wargames, and a nearly complete set of SFB (and you SFB players out
>>there know, thats no small pile of stuff) in a fire.  It'll never be
>>again I fear.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Ouch, a full set of SFB?  That did hurt.  Get replacement will not be
easy.
>I wish they'd get off there butts and get back into production.

I know where there is a large set of SFB for sale, don't know how
complete or prices.  E-mail me if you want more info.

Charles

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 16:52:04 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Jot

Joseph Kimball wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think that JoT is a useful skill to have remain in the Traveller
universe (I have kept it in MTU through all rules iterations). 
However, I don't allow it to be used as a "universal skill" but rather
as a "skill enabler."  
<<snip some examples>>
Or perhaps "I've flown helicopters for three
years, but this is my first time in a 747 cockpit.  Unfortunately the
pilot and co- are dead, so I guess I'm the most qualified here.  The
radio looks familiar, so I will call the tower and have them walk me
through the things I don't catch onto."
- - Joseph
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I've wanted to run a scenario from White Dwarf magazine for a while,
called "Tower Trouble" - it involves a hijacking attempt taking place
on Terra's Beanstalk.
One of the pregenerated characters included had one skill, and one
skill only: Jack-of-all-Trades at level 3. 

With the "skill enabler" concept, how would such a character be
run? Would you have to give her some default skills to base her
actions off of - say handgun-0, vacc-0, grav-0 and computer-0?

Let's say someone rolls up an Imperial Scout, he serves one
term - gets his default Pilot-1, then rolls JoT-2. With the skill
enabler idea, it sounds like all this guy can try to do is fly things.
Starships pretty well, ship's boats at level zero, and anything with
a control panel he can fake it...but he's useless when he isn't
sitting in a pilot station. That may, of course, be the idea.

All skills in CT are not created equal. Liaison-2 is as good as
Admin-1, and as good as Streetwise-1, and twice as good as
either in specific Liaison situations. JoT-3 does not need to be
as useful as Pilot-3, but should give the character something
for his three skill rolls.


Walt Smith

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:10:34 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: A Proposition

Loren Wiseman wrote:

> I also feel, like many on this list, that Traveller has grown beyond a
> single set of rules mechanics, and that the TML is diverse enough to
> support GURPS Traveller in addition to all the others. I'm going to propose
> that SJ Games set up a discussion board as part of their regular bulletin
> board sstem, but I'd also like to post information on the Web site so
> people can sign up to the TML. I'm not sure how much it would increase the
> traffic. Frankly, I think that most of the real Traveller fanatics (GURPS
> or others) ALREADY subscribe to the TML. I think a civilized, open
> discussion of all backgrounds is a good thing (we can leave the "my rules
> are better than your rules" arguments for e-mail -- I also propose that we
> cancel the semi-annual
> pirates-dropping-big-rocks-on-virus-infested-robots-discussing-economics
> discussion...: )

I agree. I hate the "my rules are better than your rules" arguments. I find this
list valuable because

a) it gives me ideas for adventures to run my players in
b) it gives me "tweaks" I can apply to my rules, which resemble canon less and
less each day
c) it provides me with a forum to ask questions, usually ones that my players
have asked me and to which I've responded "uuuhhh ... I'll get back to you"

I welcome any G:T submissions to this list. If someone finds rules in G:T that
work better than in another system, and describes them in a rational way, I'll
read it and may end up changing my rules accordingly.

So, bring 'em on!
Erwin

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:19:55 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re:Ironclads, the facts...long.

Charles Prevatte wrote:
> 
> Virginia?  Is that a ship?  Or the state?  As far as I know there were only
> two ironclads in the cival war.  The ones mentioned above and as far as I
> know neither ever sank any other ship.

The 'Virginia' is the actual name of the vessel, not the "Merrimack".

The Merrimack was name of the Union frigate salvaged from the Norfolk
Naval Yard, refitted with armor and christened the "Virginia" The
Virginia first attacked and sank 2 Union blockade ships before the
memorable, if inconclusive battle with the Monitor.

The Monitor sank in a _gale_ off the atlantic coast., and if I recall
correctly it was due to a hatch either breaking off or being left open
accidentally. There was an article in the National Geographic in the
last couple of years about it, as they found the wreck and raised parts
of it.

This from the Encyclopedia Britannica on the subject of ironclads:

"The use of larger guns with more penetrating power and explosive
shells made armour plating imperative. Among early experiments were
floating armoured batteries built for the Crimean War. Heavy
wrought-iron plates over a thick wooden backing gave these
flat-bottomed vessels outstanding protection as they carried
large-shell guns close inshore. (see also Index: armour plate) 

"Other developments followed swiftly. The British soon built the first
iron-hulled floating batteries. The French followed with the Gloire, the
first seagoing armoured warship, protected throughout her entire
length by a wrought-iron belt of 4.3- to 4.7-inch armour backed by 26
inches of wood. Displacing 5,617 tons, she mounted 36 large shell
guns and could steam at 13.5 knots; a three-masted sailing rig
supplemented the engines. Gloire was the first of a series of ironclads
laid down by Napoleon III; 13 similar ships soon followed, then
two-decker armoured rams. Great Britain countered with the Warrior,
the first iron-hulled, seagoing, armoured man-of-war. Much larger
than the Gloire, she displaced 9,210 tons, mounted 28 seven-inch
shell guns, had slightly lighter armour, carried sails, and was one knot
faster. 

"These first ironclads were commissioned on the eve of the American
Civil War, in which ironclads were destined to take a decisive part.
The war itself produced several spectacular developments, including
pioneer submarines, the first aircraft carriers (to handle balloons for
observation), and the torpedo boat, one of several means the
Confederates explored in trying to break the blockade. These little
craft
had weak steam engines and mounted a torpedo lashed to a spar
projecting from the bow. Called Davids, they were weak but definite
forerunners of the torpedo boat and the versatile destroyer. 

"Ironclad warships were crucial, perhaps decisive, in the North's
victory
over the South. Partial ironclads appeared early on the western rivers
and spearheaded Union general Ulysses Grant's victories in 1862.
River and coastal ironclads (ultimately, mostly monitors) dominated
the war against the South in attacks from the sea and in decisive
support of land operations from the Mississippi system to the
Chesapeake Bay and James River. 

"Most memorable of the combats was
the duel between the Monitor and Virginia (better known as the
Merrimack). When the Federal forces lost Norfolk Naval Shipyard in
Portsmouth, Va., in April 1861, they burned several warships,
including the heavy steam frigate Merrimack. The Confederates raised
the Merrimack, installed a ram and slanting casemates made from
railroad track over thick wooden backing, as had been done in the
Gloire, and renamed it Virginia. Mounting 10 guns, including four
rifled ones, the Virginia, with yard workmen still on board finishing
up, sailed on March 8, 1862, for its trial run. Defying concentrated
fire
of ship and shore batteries, it sank two ships of the Union's wooden
blockading fleet before retiring with the ebbing tide. In this dramatic
moment John Ericsson's Monitor arrived from New York during the
middle of the night. Displacing fewer than 1,000 tons, less than
one-third of the Virginia, the Monitor had a boxlike iron hull
supporting an iron-plated wooden raft on which revolved the turret.
The 172-foot-long vessel had little freeboard except for the thickly
armoured rotating turret within which were mounted two 11-inch
smoothbores. (see also Index: Monitor and Merrimack, Battle of) 

"The Monitor had many deficiencies. Not really a seagoing warship, it
had nearly sunk on its voyage down from New York and did sink on its
next sea voyage. Yet it proved the equal of its rival in their duel on
March 9. The battle ended in a draw with neither ship seriously
injured, but the repercussions of this first duel between completely
ironclad warships swept the world. 

"On April 4, scarcely more time than required for a ship to cross the
Atlantic, Great Britain ordered the 131-gun ship of the line, the Royal
Sovereign, to be cut down, armoured, and fitted with turrets. Only
three and a half weeks later Great Britain laid down the Prince Albert,
the Royal Navy's first iron-hulled turret ship, mounting four turrets. 

"The Union Navy ordered 66 coastal and river monitors; these were
low freeboard ships that were unsuitable for high-seas action and
rarely suitable for long voyages. Many were not completed in time for
war service. Besides the Virginia, the Confederates began a number of
other ironclads. Several of these rendered valuable service and
probably lengthened the war, but most had to be destroyed before
completion. Out of a combination of characteristics of the Monitor and
Virginia types evolved the battleship, which was next to rule the sea."


- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:19:16 -0400
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS and Munchkins

>Your idea of the "clique" is probably closest. If a new gamer sees that,
>at his local games shop, all the GURPS players are reasonably normal
>people who play to have fun, while all the Traveller players are
>middle-aged adolescents who whine, argue about rules, and gloat whenever
>they trick someone, which game is he more likely to start playing?


Okay, I must just live in a boring RPG town, and I don't go to conventions
so I see none of this. I tend to buy stuff based on how it looks and reads
rather than the people who play it (there's not many opportunities to see
people playing most games around here).

>Experienced gamers, such as ourselves, understand that the GROUP matters
>more than the GAME SYSTEM.  We can move betwen game systems when necessary
>(although we probably have preferences). However, even we are unlikely to
>invest in a game system when we dislike the local group who uses it
>(unless we already have a group who is willing to switch).


Again, since I tend to play with my friends, and I don't really hop around
from group to group, I guess I see none of this.

>For example, I do not play Warhammer. I was considering it at one time,
>because we had a nice student teacher who played it with her friends, and
>I figured that even if I wasn't fond of the system they were nice folks
>who played friendly games. (They didn't worry about using 'official'
>figures, etc.) But she moved on, and the only other groups I've seen
>locally are people I would rather not deal with. (One got all food banned
>from Sci-F World's gaming area because they started a food fight, for
>example - and some of these people are supposedly adults!)  So, from my
>perspective, the local Warhammer munchkins have driven me into rejecting
>the game system.


The worse the Warhammer folks do around here is yelp with glee or cheer
raucously. On occasion, they block my path when I want to check out
Traveller stuff or GURPS stuff. :-)

>I suspect that I would enjoy playing Traveller with most of you. I suspect
>I would enjoy playing most games with most of you. Hell, I like gaming
>enough that I'll play even with people who I find personally
>objectionable, as long as they play the game well (and aren't _too_
>obnoxious: as a high school teacher I have a high tolerance for
>obnoxious). But given my lomited gaming time and money, I'll play the
>systems that the best local groups play, rather than the best systems that
>there are if that means I have to play with munchkins.


Question (not a hassle) are the people you play with so set in their ways
that they won't try something new?

>Another example; I am not fond of CCGs. I dislike the idea of spending
>lots of money on the _chance_ of improving a deck, I dislike the way
>people with more expensive decks have a beter chance of winning, and I
>dislike the rules-lawyering that I see most of my kids using. I _do_ play
>the Babylon 5 CCG, but only because some good friends of mine showed me
>that it was fun. If I'd relied on the 30-year-old greasy-fingered dweebs
>at the local games shop, endlessly ranting about whether Superman could
>defeat the Enterprise and complaining about their parents wanting rent for
>the basement - well, I'd have decided not to play, because I wouldn't have
>liked the available groups.


I think that's what it boils down to: the friend factor, which is why I
don't see much of this stuff. I don't solicit alot of advice from my local
hobby shop people (most of them don't have a clue anyway, which is good
because they don't tend to order based on sales trends [which is why T4 was
actually available]).

I dunno. I always find it very interesting when two different people have
such different experiences with the same things.

Chris "Cap'n Sparky" Seamans ( semo@pil.net )

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 21:21:52 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: re transponders

At 11:44 AM 10/6/98 -0800, you wrote:
>>How is that.  There is nothing in cannon that says a jumping ship is
>>detectable apone arrival execpt by normall sensor scan.  Space is real big
>>and active searches like radar and lidar have limited range. The pirate is
>>not sending any siganl so how would the system know about it's presents.
>>Again canon sugests this is posible in many adventure books like 'Rock and a
>>Hard Place" with the asteroid ship Rock and the shuttle Pebble.
>
>there are several cannon sources that indicate a "Jump Transition
>Phenomena" of over a minute of duration, with intense visual and possibly
>other (non-EM) radiative effects.
>
>just a brief list: High Guard, DGP's SSoM, TNE Regency Sourcebook, MTJ, at
>least one old JTAS article.
>
>Broad area monitoring is apparent from the rules of 5fw and High Guard.
>Also, keep in mind that a heplar flare has a higher energy density than
>neighbor stars (in terms of photons to reciever) if you are looking at the
>right end. There are multiple ways to find a ship, and most aren't really
>that high tech, just infrastructurally intensive.
>
>Two patrol cruisers have more extra-atmospheric sensor capability outward
>than Earth has now. Hubble is able to detect (and image) jovian worlds at 8
>LY. 30 hubbles designed for in-system rather than deep field, with
>sufficient computational back-up could detect a jump sig, and then doo a
>narrower higher resolution scan of the area.
>
>Based upon 5fw, Invasion Earth, Imperium, Dark Nebula, and High Guard,
>jumping to the inner system has always been detectable.
>

Then how do you explain the posibility of clandestine recon.?  Like the
'Rock and a Hard Place' and several others?  Is it necessary to jump in at
say the orbit of pluto to be undetected?  Regardless of the number of
sensors with enough distance you get below the resolvable angle for light
for an object of ship size.

Is this ANOTHER question to refer to Marc?

As for heplar I have never used them.  I'm a CT player myself.

Charles.

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #903
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 6 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 904



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Running GURPS:Traveller
Re: Missile defense question
Re: Transponders
Re: Running GURPS:Traveller 
EMS Sensors
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)
No starship design in GURPS Traveller??
re: Definitive sensor rules
Re: A Proposition
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)
RE: A proposition
RE: Dogs, but not Vargr
Re: A Proposition
Re: Running GURPS:Traveller
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #887
Re: FF&S Errata
Re: Biannual TML flame war (was: G:T)

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 22:49:22 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: Running GURPS:Traveller

Rupert Boleyn wrote:

> Just to throw some fat on the fire I'd like to point out that Deluxe TNE
> had everything including the complete construction system in it, including
> a couple of subsectors, and a sector map.

If memory serves it was about £30 in the UK, which I considered to be pretty OK.
I am a bit biaised towards boxed sets though.

Paul Bendall

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 23:08:04 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: Missile defense question

Matt Clonfero wrote:

> ObTraveller: Anti-missile missiles? Is this even possible?

I see no reason why this shouldn't be possible. OK you'd have to be picking them up
at a reasonable range so your missiles had time to react.

Paul Bendall

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 22:02:39
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Transponders

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)
>
>You really do not understand logistics.  The US military would colapse in a
>matter of weeks and in some cases days without private contracters and
>civilian transport and supplies.  There are numerous studies and military
>excercise bases on this information.  As for your 'handguns' vs MBTs WRONG.
>US citicens have a lot more than handguns like dynamite and the production
>equipment to make much more powerfull devices plus all the military hardware
>in national gaurd staions the cost gaurd and the civilian contraters
>warehouses that hold LAW rocket, tanks unter construction, and of course the
>power generating system are in private hands.  
>

As long as an armed rabble can understand small unit doctrine, avoid
informants, avoid situations where the government forces can use their
greatly superior firepower, maintain their morale under conditions of poor
supply and medical care and have a secure base in which to train recruits
and so on, they'll be fine.

Having a government opposing you which does not have a political
understanding of counter-insurgency helps a lot too.

Look up a decent history on what happened to Che, the Black Panthers, the
Malaya campaign and the Red Brigades. All of them had substantial support.
All of them lost.


>A MBT crew would not last long in urban combat in the US.  I'd love to see
>them TRY am refuel under sniper fire or maintain supply in a hostile US.  NO
>trucks, no safe loider areas.  Insergency.  For a good example of your 'big
>stick' think of Vetnam on steriods.  At least with Vetnam the military had
>secure traning and supply areas.  In a war between the population an the
>military the military will always loose IF the people want to win because
>the military is part of the population and some will turn.  What happens
>when the military is ordered to attack the town where their families live?  

Check out the number of Free Frech that bombed France as part of the RAF in
WW2.

And dont build straw men. It's demeaning.

>
>Who is going to supply the fuel an ammmo?  Truck it to forward bases through
>hostile teritory?  If you think the military could 'grab' the material they
>would need you are sadly mistaken.  It take SKILLED people to maintain
>todays military.  This support is mostly civilian contracters who would
>become the enemy in a pop. vs mil. war.  In a population of another country
>war vs the US military you are very right but not when every mans hand is
>turn against the military.  Remember the the military makes up only a
>fraction of one percent of the population.  For every soldier there are
>hundreds of civilians.

Depends how militarised the society is. Check out, say, the American Civil
War, or (even better) France in WW1.

>As long as resitry information is all that is sent then that is fine and
>there would be no reason for rebellion but in many other posts the BBs
>remember everything any tell all to all other BBs.  This would be beyond all
>reason and tollerence any anything that resembled a free sociaty which
>traveler is basicly.  I was not saying the 'licence plate' BBs were a
>problem.  I was trying to explain to those who said the BBs retained all
>this other data that such a system would mean the lost of freedom and thus
>the end of any reasonable 'adventuring' enviroment.  (Except for a rebelion
>of course.)  I'm sorry if you missunderstood me.  My responces were directed
>at those that discribed the transponders as basicely perfect unforgable 'big
>brother' boxes that recorded and reported nearly everything.  Those BBs
>would warp the TU to the point of unrecognisablility and I like the TU just
>like it is thank you very much.  Good old gorrila capitalism with a little
>light larceny and chacainery added for some spice.

Transponder boxes dont need to be some unbreakable black box.

Thats what ships papers are for. See, if you are a multi-million credit
merchant ship with a multi-million credit turnover, you leave paperwork
lying around. Registry dockets. Bank payments. Annual maintainence bills.
Bills of lading. Stevedoring contracts. Customs clearance paperwork. Bar
tabs. Restaurant tabs. Hotel bills. Brokerage fees.

You also leave memories, and you often leave ex-crewmen.

If something doesnt check out - a wrong pattern, a cargo route that is on
the face of it non-viable, a ship that buys or sells cargo but not both, a
ship that has a route that indicates it might be trying to outrun the
X-boats - some faceless bureaucrat will drop your name on a 'watch list'.

If you are on a watch list and you show up somewhere, then they have an
idea you might be a problem, so your records, and perhaps you, get checked
a little more thoroughly.

Every month, three months, or even when the IISS detatched duty courier
drops by, watch lists get exchanged (1). If you are on a watch list and
either something turns up or you dont turn up *anywhere*, then you go onto
an alert list.

If you are on an alert list, then there are a bunch of things that could be
done if you turn up and things dont fit. The most obvious is to have you
offered a routine but moderatly lucrative contract, just to keep you in the
area (2).

Oh, and I'm not proposing the State does this. See, the *real* victims of
piracy are the banks and insurance companies, as most shippers will insure
cargos, and most owners insure their ships.

It is relativly simple for them to set up a data clearinghouse between all
the various financial bodies to keep an 'ugly mugs' list. The repair yards
and so on will presumably assist - at least if they want financing for
their new equipment.

Did I mention that people who deal exclusivly in cash, and demand no
receipts, make alert lists automatically ? And that ships who suddenly turn
up from far away, especially with logs that indicate they might be trying
to outrun the X-boats, get checked out as well ?

Finally, the nobility have traditionally had a close and wonderful
relationship with financiers. And ask yourself - if you are the Imperium,
and you need a couple of teracredits for the Frontier War, is it easier to
raise it yourself, or write a note to Hortalez et Cie ?

Now, none of this stops ethically-challenged civilians trying to stretch
the system. There are loopholes, and records can be made to disappear. But,
please, give the System some credit.

Ian Whitchurch

(1) This is very close to what I do at work - fraud prevention for
outsourced contracts in an Australian government department. We deal with
1400 seperate contracts worth about $2.1 billion split between about 300
contractors dealing with about 1.1 million clients for about two million
payable events per year. We have 4 people in our section, plus a
theoretical one dedicated staffer in each of six State Offices. I really,
really think that any world would have the capability to track the ships
that trade on it, provided it is willing to collect basic records.

(2) This is where the IN using civilian merchant ships helps a lot. Hire
them to 'assist with Fleet Maneuvers' ... they will stay out of trouble
until their records show up. And if not, well you can always remind them
that 'The IN Gnasher has a meson gun whose firing port is bigger than your
ship'.

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

Date: Tue,  6 Oct 98 17:32:45 EDT
From: carioca@stratos.net (Aerron Winsor)
Subject: Re: Running GURPS:Traveller 

At 03:46 PM 10/6/98 -0400, traveller@MPGN.COM wrote:


>
>You could homebrew your own stuff with the LBBs. 
But you also had to hombrew it, you didnt have an option.


 Mercenary (LBB 4) came out 
>in '78 with an expanded chargen for military characters as well as the 
>beginnings of the Striker combat system.  High Guard cane out originally in 
>'79, with the 2nd Edition (the most common one) in '80.  Striker came out in 
>'81.  Scouts as mentioned in '83.  So you're telling me people had to wait 5 
>years for a playable system?  I don't think so.  I was playing it in '78.
but you diodnt have nearly as much background...not compleat at all.  you
had to homebrew it by your own admission.

>
>The LBB's mentioned generic vehicles like air rafts, ACV's & ATV's.  It gave 

so does GT

>prices & capabilities (as in, weighs XX tons, travels at YY kph, etc).  It 

So does GT

>also had a basic ship design sequence for ships under 1000 tons displacement, 
>ships that characters would concievably have access to.  Basic stuff, but 
>useable.
GT goes up to 100,000 Dt



>
>I don't see this.  Still no star system generation, still no starship
design.  We'll shelve vehicle design for now, even though the LBBs didn't
*design* them, they at least told you the *capabilities*.
>
GT has ship design and several sample vehicles with much more detail than
the first 3 LBBs(IIRC it even has more vehicles and equipment than originaly
available in books 1-3).  The only thing missing is the System
generation(replaced by background material so you dont *need* to
homebrew)...bets on wether it will be in GT scouts (in production now)?
**-----------------------------------------------------------**
"People think that professional soldiers think a lot about fighting,
but SERIOUS professional soldiers think a lot more about food and a
warm place to sleep, because these are two things that are generally
hard to get, whereas fighting tends to turn up all the time."
                 -T.Pratchett, SMALL GODS

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 23:38:31 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: EMS Sensors

Is it just me or does it seem strange that Active EMS can 'see' further
than Passive? Personally I think it should be the other way around.
Modern sensors such as RWR and passive sonar tend to have longer ranges
than do their active variants........or am I missing something?

Paul Bendall

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 23:44:36 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

Charles R Hensley wrote:

> Nice clear INACCURATE info.   I.e. aircraft and helocopters that can

OK so I've only flicked through Vehicles and not read it closely :-) But I
very nearly bought it as it looked up to the same standard as Arsenal. There
were a few typos in that too but I still consider it a good book.

Paul

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:42:23 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: No starship design in GURPS Traveller??

> I don't see this.  Still no star system generation, still no starship
design.  We'll shelve vehicle design for now, even though the LBBs didn't
*design* them, they at least told you the *capabilities*.

No starship design?? This must come as quite a shock to those of us who
have been suffering under the mass delusion that Appendix B, "Modular
Starship Design" is located on pages 149-162 of GURPS Traveller! Must
rather shock David Pulver as well, since he wrote it. Oh, and look..another
hallucination! Vehicle designs for a tracked ATV, an Air/Raft, a Ground Car
and a wheeled ATV, on pages 147-148. Boy, I must really need to get my eyes
checked.
	Keven, you have made your point. You have proven conclusively that you're
commenting on something that you are ill-informed about. You have also made
it abundantly clear that you don't like GURPS. I can handle a matter of
taste. I don't like bold pronouncements like "This is not Traveller"
(saying "This is not Traveller TO ME" would be more accurate). You are
entitled to your opinion, as long as it is labelled as such.


Allen 

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 14:57:22 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: Definitive sensor rules

>Was the promised sub tech level 8 sensordesign sequences for FF&S2 ever
>released?

No, unfortunately. (Usual excuses - I don't get paid for this, don't
have infinite time, etc. - combined with other Traveller interests (like
working on my Military (Space) Combat System). I was never sure who was
going to use TL6-7 spacecraft sensors, anyway...(For aircraft passive
sensors one could use the portable/vehicular sensors listed; for
TL6-7 radar, I'm afraid I lack the technical p[background to make the
sizes come ou tright.) 

I suspect a TL6 passive scanner woul dhave to involve an eyeball and 
atelescope anyway...

Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:59:44 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: A Proposition

Date sent:      	Tue, 6 Oct 1998 14:08:48 -0600
From:           	Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com>

>Gentlebeings:

>We had someone try to post some general discussion to the TNS mailing list,
>and naturally it bounced, but it brings up the question: Where should we
>(SJ Games) send people who want to talk about GURPS Traveller. I think a
>GURPS Traveller specific board might be a good idea as a single place to
>talk specific rules mechanics and the like, however...

I'm assuming you mean a pyramid board. I think a board to discuss specific 
G:T would be a good idea as its likely to give the game more exposure. 
However I also think (given the plethora of Trav mailing lists) its not really 
neccessary. I think in a week or so the "grumpy old men" (myself included) will 
get over G:T's supposed shortcomings and get back to the subject at hand and 
maybe even propose some "solutions" to the "problems".

>I also feel, like many on this list, that Traveller has grown beyond a
>single set of rules mechanics, and that the TML is diverse enough to
>support GURPS Traveller in addition to all the others. I'm going to propose
>that SJ Games set up a discussion board as part of their regular bulletin
>board sstem, but I'd also like to post information on the Web site so
>people can sign up to the TML. I'm not sure how much it would increase the
>traffic. Frankly, I think that most of the real Traveller fanatics (GURPS
>or others) ALREADY subscribe to the TML. I think a civilized, open
>discussion of all backgrounds is a good thing (we can leave the "my rules
>are better than your rules" arguments for e-mail -- I also propose that we
>cancel the semi-annual
>pirates-dropping-big-rocks-on-virus-infested-robots-discussing-economics
>discussion...: )

You missed the lesbian Aslan rewriting your DNA to that of a hamster to pay 
their lifesupport bills.

>Can someone save me a lot of effort and shoot me the "how to subscribe"
>instructions? I'll wait a day or two, and if there is a huge groundswell of
>public opinion on here against it, I'll reconsider. Consider this your
>opportunity to wean GURPS players over to the "One True Way(tm)" whatever
>you feel that is...

Here are the instructions for subscribing to the TML

Send a message to majordomo@MPGN.COM.  including in the _body_ of the 
message:

	subscribe traveller
OR
	subscribe traveller-digest

You might also want to mention that there are a wide range of other mailing 
lists covering specific aspects of the Traveller universe, but that the TML is a 
good place for the beginner to start.


Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 23:02:51 +0100
From: Mark Watson <markw@antares.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

Allen Shock wrote:

>    1. I would like to see T5 retain the character generation rules of T4 to a
> large part.

I'd like to see a 2 tier character generation mechanism as per CT (as of books 4-7)
and MegaTraveller. Basic character generation as per Basic Traveller and Citizens,
and additionally for major alien races,  should be in the basic game and advanced
character generation could be published in later extended modules. Unlike CT there
should be no difference between the skills attainable in basic character generation
and advanced generation - advanced generation should merely provide extra colour, and
it should be made clear that this is the case.

I'd additionally like to see NPC secondary characteristic vectors as per those
proposed way back in White Dwarf (51?) to help determine NPC reaction rolls.

> 2. I would like to see the practice of taking damage directly off the STR,
> END and DEX of the character discontinued.

Agreed.

> 3. I believe that the MT task system should be returned to the game.

Agreed (cheers wildly and throws his hat in the air)

> 4. The combat system needs a bit of reworking. The one from MT is ok, but
> ditching interrupts and introducing an Initiative roll and allowing people
> to delay until later in the turn will eliminate the need for interrupts.

As a game mechanic, interrupts are OK. Maybe the task system needs a basic and
advanced variant for learning referees/players.

> 5. I would use a version of the QSDS, modified to fit the new task system
> and expanded to allow ships of up to 500,000 tons for ship design. The
> concept of the USP could be retained, although some things would need to be
> altered to fit any new ship combat rules. It should definitley be kept
> simple, IMO; I have more fun with QSDS and the ship design rules in GURPS
> Traveller than I have ever had with any version of FF&S. I am not a
> gearhead, and while there is nothing wrong with being one, the basic rules
> should not be aimed at gearheads.

Hear, hear. Actually I prefer High Guard (because life's too short ...) Again, it
should be possible to develop compatible basic and advanced design rules which cover
design for ships, vehicles and equipment, including robots. Also a sensible, balanced
supplement containing samples in each group early in the release cycle of a game
would be good - ie not a starships volume, or fighting ships of the shattered
imperium, but a volume containing enough in each category for a non-gearhead to get
by without having to design anything.

> 6. The rules should include equipment running the gamut from Mileau 0 to
> the TNE era; they should be generic enough that they are not obviously
> aimed at a specific mileau. Obviously every piece of equipment cannot be
> included, but the basics shound range from TL 11 to TL 15.

I liked the equipment sheets used by DGP. Among the things they provided were
variants for different tech levels. If possible the format should be revived for
equipment supplements.

> 7. Ship combat rules should be simple, hex-based, and tactical. A good
> example is the RPSCS developed by Joseph Walsh and others. perhaps a
> second, abstract High-Guard like system could be included for battles with
> larger ships. I really did not like the system presented in T4, and would
> like something that lets me push a counter around a hexgrid. Mayday-style
> movement would be good.

When it came to ship combat, GDW too often went in for complex boardgames which I'm
guessing lost money.  I generally conduct ship combat using the task system and in a
pretty abstract manner. For the RPG keep it abstract and away from boardgame-type
semantics. Boardgames are useful for conducting large complex battles but by and
large I keep such things out of role playing sessions, and when they arise I know the
macro-level results in advance.

> 8. ALIENS. Every other edition of Traveller has made you wait to play
> aliens. This one should not. Racial data for the major races and capsule
> descriptions of their societies; detailed data can come later, but a lot of
> us know that data anyway, and my experience is that new players expect to
> be able to play aliens. Withholding that info for a "supplement" does not
> mean that players are going to play these aliens "right" anyway. So let us
> be able to play them from the start.

There should be enough in the initial game release to support alien NPCs at least,
and in Traveller this means that they should be capable of random generation. So as
above provide basic character generation in a range of careers and enough to run
alien characters, at least for widespread aliens (major races, plus human variants
such as Vilani and Solomani, plus widespread minor races such as the Newts).

> 9. A few pages devoted to the history and structure of the Imperium,
> perhaps the map of Charted Space, and a map of the Core Subsector circa
> year 0 and the Regina subsector circa 1100. Give the characters a little of
> the setting right in the main book. Settings are important these days, and
> games that don't include them just don't do as well, from what I have seen.

I think:
a) Pick a milieu for the basic setting of the game. Multiple milieus are confusing to
new players, and the game design is still slanted towards the classic era. So
probably CT or MT.
b) Picking a milieu now means picking a timeline. In my view the GURPS guys have got
this broadly right (I'd personally prefer to see a "canon" timeline which avoids the
virus, and which generally proceeds along the lines set out in MTJ 4, with stable
polities emerging from the civil war) although over time the degree of divergence
will probably increase.
c) Picking a milieu means you can get by with a single setting and publish others in
supplements or through franchises. If T5 and GURPS shared the same timeline/milieu
they could extend "published space" through a system similar to the land grant system
that operated under CT.

Also, world generation is too geared towards the Imperium - for referees who want to
stay in the Traveller universe but explore their own worlds (eg core and rim
expeditions) it would be nice to have "blank slate" world generation rules.

> 10. As regards the art; we do not need full color plates. I was far happier
> with GURPS Traveller, which had all black-and-white illustrations, than I
> ever was with the glitzy color used in IG's stuff. I don't dislike Chris
> Foss as an artist; I just think it was an unneccesary expense. I would have
> preferred to have the extra pages that those color plates NOT being there
> could have bought.

I think the idea of the colour plates was to attract new players and thereby bring
down the price point for all of us. I agree it didn't particularly add anything. One
of the other differences from the black and white material in MT was that the layout
was far better in MT - for all the bugs, the layout made the material far more
comprehensible than in later versions. Also better layout meant that B&W
illustrations weren't published at 4 or 6 times their optimum size as they were in
TNE and T4. Bring back Rob Caswell, basically - not just for illos but for design.

> This would be my dream version of Traveller,

It would need to go beyond that to have a sensible program for the supplements to be
published, and the quality thereof. With MT, I liked the choices that DGP made about
what kind of supplement to publish. I'm impressed that GURPS will be following a
broadly similar path, and applaud SJG for it, but at the end of the day I'd like to
see the supplements come out for "Real Traveller".

M

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:13:30 +0100
From: "MJ Dougherty" <martinjd@globalnet.co.uk>
Subject: RE: A proposition

Since GT is TRaveller, ofa form, annd the TML discusses stuff like dogs and
ironlcads and HH books, I haver no probbos with GURPS Traveller players
coming to play with us here on TML.

MJD

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:21:02 +0100
From: "Alex Ferrie" <daishan@malkier.demon.co.uk>
Subject: RE: Dogs, but not Vargr

I wouldn't describe it as telepathy. Remember that Jordan describes wolves
communicating almost via an alternate dimension (what Jordan calls
Tel'aran'rhiod) which mirrors the "real" world. He specifically states that
wolves communicate by impression and images ,although the images tend not to
match the appearance of the thing being depicted.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-traveller@lists.MPGN.COM
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.MPGN.COM]On Behalf Of Leo Hale
> Sent: 06 October 1998 18:32
> To: traveller@MPGN.COM
> Subject: Re: Dogs, but not Vargr
>
>
>      Remember Jordan has his wolves as telepaths in the Eye of the World
> series.
>
> Leo
>
>

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 15:21:29 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: A Proposition

Gentlebeings:

We had someone try to post some general discussion to the TNS mailing list,
and naturally it bounced, but it brings up the question: Where should we
(SJ Games) send people who want to talk about GURPS Traveller. I think a
GURPS Traveller specific board might be a good idea as a single place to
talk specific rules mechanics and the like, however...

I also feel, like many on this list, that Traveller has grown beyond a
single set of rules mechanics, and that the TML is diverse enough to
support GURPS Traveller in addition to all the others. I'm going to propose
that SJ Games set up a discussion board as part of their regular bulletin
board sstem, but I'd also like to post information on the Web site so
people can sign up to the TML. I'm not sure how much it would increase the
traffic. Frankly, I think that most of the real Traveller fanatics (GURPS
or others) ALREADY subscribe to the TML. I think a civilized, open
discussion of all backgrounds is a good thing (we can leave the "my rules
are better than your rules" arguments for e-mail -- I also propose that we
cancel the semi-annual
pirates-dropping-big-rocks-on-virus-infested-robots-discussing-economics
discussion...: )

Can someone save me a lot of effort and shoot me the "how to subscribe"
instructions? I'll wait a day or two, and if there is a huge groundswell of
public opinion on here against it, I'll reconsider. Consider this your
opportunity to wean GURPS players over to the "One True Way(tm)" whatever
you feel that is...




Loren Wiseman
     Traveller Line Editor
     Traveller Guru-in-Residence
     SJ Games
     LKW@IO.COM
     (512) 447-7866 VOX
     (512) 447-1144 FAX

___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________

     I for one think that would be a great idea.  The subscription is
simple just post to Majordomo@mpgn.com the words subscribe traveller or
traveller-digest must be in the body of the e-mail.  The server should sent
them a message right away informing them they have been added to the list.
     It seems important to me for all the peoplle, who play any variant of
traveller, to be on this list so that we can help eachother improve the
traveller universe for everyone who plays.  It's the american way to throw
everything together into one pot and see what comes out of it.  I'm not
saying we haven't produced some real stinkers, but for the most part it has
worked very well for everyone concerned.  The more people who have an imput
into the Traveller universe the better the better it will be.  If for
nothing else this allows people who do not have 10 or more years into
Traveller access to the minds and ideas of those of us who have.
     And this is my $.02 worth on this subject.

Leo

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:28:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Running GURPS:Traveller

	I told myself I wasn't going to get involved in this stupid "GT 
sux" thread, but I can't help but point out factual errors.

From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
> > > G:T is *NOT* standalone.  What is so difficult to understand here?
> > 
> > all you need is Lite to go with it and it is a better product than the basic
> > books 1-3. 
> > 
> > What is so difficult to understand here?
> 
> I don't see this.  Still no star system generation, still no starship
> design.  We'll shelve vehicle design for now, even though the LBBs didn't
> *design* them, they at least told you the *capabilities*. 

	GT _does_ have starship design.  In fact it is the simplest 
Traveller ship design system since High Guard.  It also includes several 
starship designs including *deckplans* for the Scout and Free Trader.  GT 
also _does_ have vehicles including their capabilities in much greater 
detail than Book 2.  What GT does _not_ have, admittedly, is a star 
system generator.  However, it does have a means to *describe* star 
systems and refs are free to make up systems using those stats.  No, it 
doesn't give dice ranges to roll, but most of us just fudged the rolls on 
or *homebrewed* world design anyway.  And isn't *homebrew* what you 
admired so much about the LBBs?
	For those of the Orthodox Traveller Faith, I know that nothing 
can ever rival the minimalist beauty of the LBBs, but GT is a great book 
that is well laid out; full of quality, Traveller appropriate art; and a 
delightful read.  If you believe, as I do, that Traveller is a rich 
background rather that a set of game mechanics, then you will have to 
admit that the Traveller background has never been so completely laid out 
between two covers.  That in itself makes it worth the cover price, IMHO.
	
- -JM
 

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:37:53 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #887

In a message dated 10/6/98 0:44:35 AM Pacific Daylight Time, timc@paratwa.org
writes:

<< Something else to keep in mind -- printing costs are much higher than 
 they were 20 years ago.  Paper costs a lot more.  I bet you'd have a hard 
 time selling one of the LBBs for less than about $10-12 bucks, which 
 would make the "minimum set" more expensive than the 4 GURPS books.  >>

This I disagree with...if they were produced in the same format (48pg booklets
and sold together in a box) I would be amazed to see them run more than $30
dollars...I laid out $26+tax just for Basic 3rd Revised.

Also, there is a lot of reference online to GURPS Lite...which is fine if you
have Internet access.  I think most of us forget that not everybody does...so
they can't get away with the so-called "budget" plan for GURPS.

DustyLV769@aol.com

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:48:34 -0400
From: "Chris Cox" <chriscox@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: FF&S Errata

Robert O'Connor Wrote:

> I've been trying to get a hold of the official errata for FF&S2.
> There are links at various sites on the Traveller webrings, but I keep
> getting errors (usually 404's).

Sorry about taking so long to reply, been busy playing with my dolls and not
reading my mailing lists. Anyhow, copies of the FF&S Errata can be found
either at my web pages, The Draconis Cluster
(http://dragonspace.com/trav.htm), or Joe Heck's web pages
(http://www.missouri.edu/~ccjoe/traveller/index.html). The 404s are a result
of people linking to my recently canceled AOL account. So anyone who’s
linked to the AOL address, please replace that with the new link
(http://dragonspace.com/ffs-errata.htm).

Thanks

Chris Cox
"Graphics grunt on Wall Street"
(chriscox@ix.netcom.com)

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 17:54:58 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Biannual TML flame war (was: G:T)

Bruce Johnson wrote:
> 
> Steven Hudson wrote:
> >
> > >From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
> > >Subject: Re: Biannual TML flame war (was: G:T)
> > ...
> > >I wonder if the folks over on the  D&D list get into this sort of thing?  ;-)
> >
> >   Yes. Just now they're going through their biannual "Are Evil Dragons
> > Unredeemable?" essay contest.
> 
> We usually redeemed them for gold and experience points...lots and lots
> of gold and experience points...
> 
Of course, dragons were more likely to "cash in the empties" [empty
suits of armor, weapons, etc., formerly carried by Purina Dragon Chow
PCs] to build up their treasure hoards.... ;-)

ObTrav:  Do vampire ships in TNE stock up on spare parts this way?

> <ba-DUMP>
> 
> --
> Bruce Johnson
> University of Arizona
> College of Pharmacy
> Information Technology Group

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #904
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 6 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 905



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

re: Transponders
Re: Missile defense question
Re: Tech advancement
Re: Missile defense question
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)
Re: T5 Wants
Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.
Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
Re: "Dogs" in traveller
Maps, Maps, Maps - Come and Get 'em.
Re: Missile defense question
Coke
MT errata
Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
Re: Addaxur
Re: Missile defense question
re: Biannual TML flamewar....
Re: No starship design in GURPS Traveller??
Re: Trransponders & Malaya

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 11:16:25 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: re: Transponders

At 15:52 6/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:

>How is that.  There is nothing in cannon that says a jumping ship is
>detectable apone arrival execpt by normall sensor scan.  Space is real big
>and active searches like radar and lidar have limited range. The pirate is
>not sending any siganl so how would the system know about it's presents.
>Again canon sugests this is posible in many adventure books like 'Rock and a
>Hard Place" with the asteroid ship Rock and the shuttle Pebble.

I can't see how a ship arriving out of jump won't make a fair bit of noise.
The most obvious (to me, anyway) noise being the change in gravity
gradients and vectors within the system because a several thousand ton
object has just effectively been created out of nothing. I don't know how
the resulting gravity signal will be but I bet there'll be one.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 11:29:55 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Missile defense question

At 17:44 6/10/98 +0100, Matt Clonfero wrote:
>While a modern 5" mount might try to hit a missile, it's unlikely that
>it would - a sea-skimming missile that travels at Mach 2 covers the
>distance from the radar horizon to impact in *seconds*. Even a gun-based
>CIWS (the Phalanx 20mm or Goalkeeper 30mm mounts) have problems with the
>modern sea skimmers - the current favoured solution are point-defence
>missile systems (Sea Wolf, RAM).

Which missiles travel at MAch 2? Last I heard only the big Soviet ones did,
and most of those weren't really sea skimmers. Harpoon, Excocet etc are all
near supersonic.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 11:25:44 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

At 15:51 6/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:

>Again your knowledge of this era is far beter than mine.  Also your above
>coralary is also correct.  There is the complication of a non limear aproach
>to such problems.  Midevil fortifications could not be breached directly but
>were easily defeated by blockade and sapping.  Tactic beating Technology.
>The Majinoe Line (or however it's spelled) of the french was bypassed and
>left to 'wither on the vine'.  The same was true for the Japanese fortress
>islands.  We took what we needed and starved the others out.

I wouldn't say that medieval fortifications were 'easily' taken by sapping
or blockade. Sapping was a tricky technique at best, and many castle walls
were built down onto bedrock. 

As for blockade - totally surrounding any descent castle was often
effectively impossible, especially a properly garrisoned one, as you have
to have sufficient strength availible in reserve to be able to stop a
breakout at any point on your perimeter. You also have the problem of
supplying your beseiging force (bear in mind that the defenders have
probably taken all the portable food into the castle and hidden or burned
the rest). To make matters even worse the beseigers were more likely to
suffer disease than the defenders because a castle did have some sort of
sanitary system whereas a military camp generally did not, and this taken
together with poor nutrition and dubious water supplies is a very good
breeding ground for nasty bugs.

Also later castles were designed with forse projection in mind, so not only
did you have to worry about relief forces you had to watch for attacks from
the castle itself.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:12:49 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Missile defense question

In a message dated 10/6/98 10:31:21 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Matt-
C@aetherem.demon.co.uk writes:

<< While a modern 5" mount might try to hit a missile, it's unlikely that
 it would - a sea-skimming missile that travels at Mach 2 covers the
 distance from the radar horizon to impact in *seconds*.  >>

There is still generally enough time to at least have a chance at hitting it
within that time frame...CIWS is an even better proposition, due to ROF (2000
rounds/min or better).  Even a Mk76 5" gun has a ROF of 1 every 3 seconds; not
much, but it has a much larger area of effect (burst radius).

As I recall, quick-firing 3" and 5" guns were developed in the late 1800's
specifically as an anti-torpedo and anti-torpedo boat defense.  My question
WRT the bay weapons stems from this in a way;  you would not normally do this,
but in a situation where you have 10 laser turrets, 10 repulsors, and 10 sand
turrets and there are 40 missiles incoming, isn't some chance better than
none?

Dusty

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 00:13:53 +0100
From: Phil Kitching <PhilK@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

On Tue, 06 Oct 1998 10:05:04 +0800 Colin Hutchinson
<chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
> snip
> >Especially vector movement like Mayday and BR. I never did understand
> >why BL had to have such an incredibly complex movement system that was
> >not quite vector.
> >Also how about this time having the design and combat systems work
> >together? A silly request, I know.
> >
> snip
>  In what way does the movement system in BR differ from BL?

Maybe there where alternatives or errata but:

In BR and Mayday, movement is traditional vector with a present
position counter, a past position and a predicted future position
- - which the player then changes by an amount up to their ship's
G rating.

In BL you have one counter on the board (which indicates facing)
plus others off the board on a ship chart to indicate current velocity
and facing (plus one to indicate if you are moving down hex edges and
another to indicate accumulated G if a heading change takes more than
one turn).
Then you have the rules to workout how long it takes to change heading
(at least just slowing down is easy).

The net result of all this confusion is less counters on the hex map
(pointless with half inch counters on a 2 inch hex) which is even more
odd when you consider that BL games are supposed to be single ship
actions (or at least small numbers) and BR is for fleet actions with
lots of ships.

Finally, in BR I can easilly see where everything is going (which is
precisely the sort of info that advanced computer displays can give
a starship captain) and in BL I cannot.

Phil Kitching

- -- 
- - --
  Philk@btinternet.com (don't blame BT for any of this, they only pay me:)
  http://www.btinternet.com/~salvo (sorry no Traveller)
  Postmark Design Bureau, Emerging Technologies Division.
 "Microwaving half-baked ideas from across the Galaxy"

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:15:50 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: T5 Wants

In a message dated 10/6/98 11:06:33 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca writes:

<< >Art: Good quality B&W line or grayscale art. The best part of T4, IMNSHO,
 >is the B&W pencils... they really gave a "Look" to the TU.
 
 Yup. Bring back Rob Caswell and the Keiths.
  >>

And definately Larry Elmore!  He did a lot of the B&W art in T4, and is one of
the best artists (WRT gaming) that I have seen.  Remember Dragonlance, Mythus
and several issues of Dragon?

Dusty

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 23:23:24 GMT
From: johnl@vnet.net (John Lansford)
Subject: Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.

On Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:19:55 -0700, you wrote:

>Charles Prevatte wrote:
>> 
>> Virginia?  Is that a ship?  Or the state?  As far as I know there were only
>> two ironclads in the cival war.  The ones mentioned above and as far as I
>> know neither ever sank any other ship.

Oh my goodness. 

There were dozens of ironclads built during the Civil War, by both
sides. They ranged from the little CSS Manassas (sunk during the
Battle of New Orleans) to the massive USS New Ironsides and the twin
turreted monitors built late in the war. 

>The 'Virginia' is the actual name of the vessel, not the "Merrimack".
>
>The Merrimack was name of the Union frigate salvaged from the Norfolk
>Naval Yard, refitted with armor and christened the "Virginia" The
>Virginia first attacked and sank 2 Union blockade ships before the
>memorable, if inconclusive battle with the Monitor.

USS Congress and USS Cumberland were sunk by CSS Virginia.

>The Monitor sank in a _gale_ off the atlantic coast., and if I recall
>correctly it was due to a hatch either breaking off or being left open
>accidentally.

Due to her low freeboard, water rushed in through the engine air
intakes, put out the boilers, and rendered the ship unable to answer
her helm. Not to mention waves breaking over the turret...


John Lansford

The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage:
http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:24:37 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside

In a message dated 10/6/98 12:50:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
prevattec@worldnet.att.net writes:

<< Virginia?  Is that a ship?  Or the state?  As far as I know there were only
 two ironclads in the cival war.  The ones mentioned above and as far as I
 know neither ever sank any other ship. >>

The CSS Virginia was the Confederate ironclad...it was modified from the CSS
Merrimack, which was originally a wooden vessel (if my naval history is
correctly remembered).

Dusty

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 16:43:04 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: "Dogs" in traveller

Does anybody have ideas about what 'companion' animals would be like in the
Traveller universe?  What 'Biological' inhancemant would good old shep go
through to become the pet of tomarrow?  What about felus dimesticus?  What
new 'pets' and gaurd animals would there be?  I think such animal could add
some interesting color to traveller ships passengers and adventures.  How
do
the aventures deal the the 'gaurd beast' protecting the warehouse where
their confiscated cargo is stored?

Charles.


     Hey Charles, do you own a book (or set of books produced by FASA
called central casting?  They have one for all the different types of role
playing games.  In the suppliment called "Hero's of Tomarrow" they have a
section on pets/campanion animals.  In this chapter they have a system for
rolling up unusual pets, and giving them some traits.  Your FLGS should
have these books since they were just reprinted and revised.

Leo

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:57:51 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Maps, Maps, Maps - Come and Get 'em.

Stumble on over to Bloo's Traveller Site and the
Astro-Cartography Section.

http://portcaddo.com/bloo/traveller/Travmaps/

Subsector Maps and World Maps available in the following
formats:

.cdr
.pct
.pdf
.ai
.bmp
.cpt
.gif
.mac
.pcx
.png

Subsectors are available at 640 and 800 widths,
World maps available at 800 and 1040 widths.
Although both are available in the raw formats
(.cdr, .pct, .pfd, and .ai)

Bloo

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 18:56:38 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@hex.net>
Subject: Re: Missile defense question

- --=====================_4088389==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


At 11:44 AM 10/6/98 , Matt Clonfero wrote:
>Jim Clem wrote:
>
>>The USN's newer 5 inch guns are autoloaded, and capable of a relatively 
>>high ROF, and rigged to fire controllers that allow them to be used for 
>>surface or air targets, supposedly including missiles.  Anyone out there 
>>know more about this??
>
>While a modern 5" mount might try to hit a missile, it's unlikely that
>it would - a sea-skimming missile that travels at Mach 2 covers the
>distance from the radar horizon to impact in *seconds*. Even a gun-based
>CIWS (the Phalanx 20mm or Goalkeeper 30mm mounts) have problems with the
>modern sea skimmers - the current favoured solution are point-defence
>missile systems (Sea Wolf, RAM).

Well the MK 86 GFCS(Gun FireControl System) using the Mk 45? five inch gun has
*good* chance of engaging a sea skimmer, if the mk 45 did not break down under
the high ROF, but CIWS has a better chance of all. 

Also the *common* variety of sea skimmers do not traveler at mach 2 skimming
the ocean. There is a former USSR missiles that travelled faster than Mach
2 at
about 100,000 feet, dropped like a spit ball over the target, upon impact it
had reduced speed to under mach 2. Early CIWS could not engage this type of
missile but projected later mods were supposed to be able to.

On the platforms(ships) that I served on, the MK 23 TAS radar was designed
just
for sea skimmers, and did it very well. Ohh but the feldercarb paperwork on
that damn thing when we were in US coastal waters...it seems that the FAA and
MK TAS were lets say "kissing close" on radar frequencies. When we had it
installed at Long Beach Naval Shipyard, we caused *problems* with LAX''s FAA
radars, but only took them two weeks to locate us, and we were pier side all
that time. But every time we were in US coastal waters we had to submit our
*planned* steaming schedules then the FAA would tell us what frequencies we
could operate on if any.

By the way NEC's were for Improved Point Defense(NATO Seasparrow)(WC Sup), Mk
23 TAS(WC Sup), CIWS and Harpoon(WC Sup), secondary OJT's were Whirly-1?,
SLQ-32, Mk 86 and Sonar Dome Diver.

Sinbad Sam

Sinbad Sam
"Black Curtain" Rod Holder...
AI Virus inferior races(Aslan, Humaniti, Kkree, Droyne) Interfacer
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
sinbad@ignore.hex.net

- --=====================_4088389==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html><div>At 11:44 AM 10/6/98 , Matt Clonfero wrote:</div>
<div>&gt;Jim Clem wrote:</div>
<div>&gt;</div>
<div>&gt;&gt;The USN's newer 5 inch guns are autoloaded, and capable of a
relatively </div>
<div>&gt;&gt;high ROF, and rigged to fire controllers that allow them to
be used for </div>
<div>&gt;&gt;surface or air targets, supposedly including missiles.&nbsp;
Anyone out there </div>
<div>&gt;&gt;know more about this??</div>
<div>&gt;</div>
<div>&gt;While a modern 5&quot; mount might try to hit a missile, it's
unlikely that</div>
<div>&gt;it would - a sea-skimming missile that travels at Mach 2 covers
the</div>
<div>&gt;distance from the radar horizon to impact in *seconds*. Even a
gun-based</div>
<div>&gt;CIWS (the Phalanx 20mm or Goalkeeper 30mm mounts) have problems
with the</div>
<div>&gt;modern sea skimmers - the current favoured solution are
point-defence</div>
<div>&gt;missile systems (Sea Wolf, RAM).</div>
<br>
<div>Well the MK 86 GFCS(Gun FireControl System) using the Mk 45? five
inch gun has *good* chance of engaging a sea skimmer, if the mk 45 did
not break down under the high ROF, but CIWS has a better chance of all.
</div>
<br>
<div>Also the *common* variety of sea skimmers do not traveler at mach 2
skimming the ocean. There is a former USSR missiles that travelled faster
than Mach 2 at about 100,000 feet, dropped like a spit ball over the
target, upon impact it had reduced speed to under mach 2. Early CIWS
could not engage this type of missile but projected later mods were
supposed to be able to.</div>
<br>
<div>On the platforms(ships) that I served on, the MK 23 TAS radar was
designed just for sea skimmers, and did it very well. Ohh but the
feldercarb paperwork on that damn thing when we were in US coastal
waters...it seems that the FAA and MK TAS were lets say &quot;kissing
close&quot; on radar frequencies. When we had it installed at Long Beach
Naval Shipyard, we caused *problems* with LAX''s FAA radars, but only
took them two weeks to locate us, and we were pier side all that time.
But every time we were in US coastal waters we had to submit our
*planned* steaming schedules then the FAA would tell us what frequencies
we could operate on if any.</div>
<br>
<div>By the way NEC's were for Improved Point Defense(NATO Seasparrow)(WC
Sup), Mk 23 TAS(WC Sup), CIWS and Harpoon(WC Sup), secondary OJT's were
Whirly-1?, SLQ-32, Mk 86 and Sonar Dome Diver.</div>
<br>
<div>Sinbad Sam</div>
<br>

<font size=2>Sinbad Sam<br>
&quot;Black Curtain&quot; Rod Holder...<br>
AI Virus inferior races(Aslan, Humaniti, Kkree, Droyne) Interfacer<br>
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions<br>
sinbad@ignore.hex.net<br>
</font></html>

- --=====================_4088389==_.ALT--

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 20:00:57 EDT
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com
Subject: Coke

<<David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
<<Subject: Re: Traveller, G: Trav, and Coke
<<
<<At 02:06 am 10/5/98 EDT, you wrote:
<<>I think I have finally hit on a metaphor that perfectly sums up my feelings
<<>re: Traveller and GURPS Trav...remember the difference between Coke (now
<<>Coke Classic) and New Coke?   Coke is Coke...but obviously not to a large
<<>majority of folks out there (is New Coke even available anymore?)

<<	Even worse, Coke Classic is NOT "Coca Cola" as it existed prior to
<<New Coke ... the expensive sugar in the secret recipe was replaced
<<with much cheaper corn syrup.

What I hear is that before, the bottlers were required to use cane or beet
sugar, and now they can use whatever is cheapest. In most places, that's corn
syrup, but in places like Hawaii, that's cane sugar, and in places like
Colorado and Louisiana it is beet sugar. 

Loren Wiseman

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 20:03:06 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: MT errata

Greetings!

     I had a friend recently ask me for my MT errata, and I have come to
realize that it is no longer on me hard drive.  If anyone has any errata for
MT (I seem to recall having to compile it from several different sources)  we
both would truly appreciate it!

Thanks in advance, 
DustyLV769@aol.com

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 20:03:56 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside

In a message dated 10/6/98 12:50:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
prevattec@worldnet.att.net writes:

<< Virginia?  Is that a ship?  Or the state?  As far as I know there were only
 two ironclads in the cival war.  The ones mentioned above and as far as I
 know neither ever sank any other ship.
 
 They were both badly under guned due to weight of armor.  They were also not
 very good designs.  One sank in a mild storm.  Later designs worked better.
 
 Charles. >>
There were DOZENS of ironclads of various types (monitors, casement ironclads,
"tinclads", light draft riverine versions of the above, etc, and two Federal
ocean going armored ships). The Virginia is the Confederate name for the
Merrimac. There were a lot of interesting battles (Mobile Bay, running the
Vicksburg forts, Memphis, Fort Sumpter-Charleston campaign, etc.). There were
even amphibious invasions that were the granddaddy of the Pacific theatre
invasions (Fort Fisher, Island number 10 etc.). The Civil War naval war is an
interesting read, and you being a PTO expert will pick up the similarities...

Seth

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:05:09 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Addaxur

>><<   Are the Addaxur (AM:4 - Zhodani) covered in detail anywhere?  >>
>>
>>No. But I have a minor race creation system in draft form. Want to start
>>talking about them?
>
>  We just did :) We know (from AM: 4 - dirty Zho's) that they have an
empire
>[or reserve :( ] of ten systems in sub-sector G of Tienspevnekr, and were
>discovered 300 years after the Zho's used jump drives to start expanding
the
>polity they'd established using STL (-5,120/~5,110). It's unclear how they
>feel about losing the rest of their original (37 system) empire, but
presumably
>these were only lightly settled at best.


  Uh. Zhodani Module, page 3:
  "Zhdant has a population of 83 million, of whom more than 90% are racial
Zhodani. Significant non-Zhodani population is primarily Addaxur."


  When I did Tienspevnekr sector for HIWG five years ago (The Tienspevnekr
writeup on the HIWG CD is mine), that line led to my placing Addaxur
worlds and populations all over the sector. I KNOW where all of the
original Addaxur worlds are, and where the "reservation" is now...

...but I still don't know what they look like. I was sort of aiming
at a multi-legged reptiloid hyena, but the concept faded. I maintain
that the vast majority are low-slung and positively cheerful.
"Happy carnivores."

 The Addaxur were the Zhodani's first real First Contact situation. The
Zho passed the test with flying colors for two reasons: they and the
Addaxur really are compatible, and the Zhodani spent years watching the
Addaxur before speaking to them. This set of techniques works sometimes,
and has utterly failed at others (thus generating library data, hee hee)

 The Addaxur Reservation is a true sovereign state by ancient pact and
tradition. "Reservation" does not carry the same stigma that is attached
to what we Yanks did/are doing/will do to the American Indians. Many of
the worlds of the old Addaxur "Empire" still have Addaxur on them. The
Zhodani did not deport them 5000 years ago, and have not discouraged
Addaxur immigrants since then.


GypsyComet
GypsyComet@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/gypsycomet/index.html




      What about some type of arachnid type creature?



Leo

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:04:54 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Missile defense question

Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> 
> At 17:44 6/10/98 +0100, Matt Clonfero wrote:
> >While a modern 5" mount might try to hit a missile, it's unlikely that
> >it would - a sea-skimming missile that travels at Mach 2 covers the
> >distance from the radar horizon to impact in *seconds*. Even a gun-based
> >CIWS (the Phalanx 20mm or Goalkeeper 30mm mounts) have problems with the
> >modern sea skimmers - the current favoured solution are point-defence
> >missile systems (Sea Wolf, RAM).
> 
> Which missiles travel at MAch 2? Last I heard only the big Soviet ones did,
> and most of those weren't really sea skimmers. Harpoon, Excocet etc are all
> near supersonic.
> 
If I may offer a piece of advice...

Matt Clonfero has been honing his knowledge of modern naval weapons for
_years_ as, among other things, a regular participant in the
sci.military.naval newsgroup.  Don't expect to sharpshoot him.

Concerning Mach 2 sea-skimmers, try SS-N-22 (NATO codename: SUNBURN) on
for size....

ObTrav:  As a tactical problem, what would be the late-20th-century
analogue to the standard 6G det-laser missile?  How much more
performance would be needed to equate to SUNBURN, and how much more
damage potential would be needed to equate to SHIPWRECK (an apt NATO
codename if ever there was one...)? 

> --
> IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--
> 
> "A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
> 
> Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
> Palmerston North, New Zealand
> Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 20:04:25 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Biannual TML flamewar....

Black Ice wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Of course, dragons were more likely to "cash in the empties" [empty
suits of armor, weapons, etc., formerly carried by Purina Dragon Chow
PCs] to build up their treasure hoards.... ;-)

ObTrav:  Do vampire ships in TNE stock up on spare parts this way?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nope - they stock up on spare _ships_.

Walt Smith

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:29:17 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: No starship design in GURPS Traveller??

> I don't see this.  Still no star system generation, still no starship
design.  We'll shelve vehicle design for now, even though the LBBs didn't
*design* them, they at least told you the *capabilities*.

No starship design?? This must come as quite a shock to those of us who
have been suffering under the mass delusion that Appendix B, "Modular
Starship Design" is located on pages 149-162 of GURPS Traveller! Must
rather shock David Pulver as well, since he wrote it. Oh, and look..another
hallucination! Vehicle designs for a tracked ATV, an Air/Raft, a Ground Car
and a wheeled ATV, on pages 147-148. Boy, I must really need to get my eyes
checked.
     Keven, you have made your point. You have proven conclusively that
you're
commenting on something that you are ill-informed about. You have also made
it abundantly clear that you don't like GURPS. I can handle a matter of
taste. I don't like bold pronouncements like "This is not Traveller"
(saying "This is not Traveller TO ME" would be more accurate). You are
entitled to your opinion, as long as it is labelled as such.


Allen



      Here! Here!



Leo

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 00:41:27 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Trransponders & Malaya

On Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:56:29 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 22:02:39
>From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
>Subject: Re: Transponders
>
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)
>>
>>You really do not understand logistics.  The US military would colapse in a
>>matter of weeks and in some cases days without private contracters and
>>civilian transport and supplies.  There are numerous studies and military
>>excercise bases on this information.  As for your 'handguns' vs MBTs WRONG.
>>US citicens have a lot more than handguns like dynamite and the production
>>equipment to make much more powerfull devices plus all the military hardware
>>in national gaurd staions the cost gaurd and the civilian contraters
>>warehouses that hold LAW rocket, tanks unter construction, and of course the
>>power generating system are in private hands.  
>>
>
>As long as an armed rabble can understand small unit doctrine, avoid
>informants, avoid situations where the government forces can use their
>greatly superior firepower, maintain their morale under conditions of poor
>supply and medical care and have a secure base in which to train recruits
>and so on, they'll be fine.
>
>Having a government opposing you which does not have a political
>understanding of counter-insurgency helps a lot too.
>
>Look up a decent history on what happened to Che, the Black Panthers, the
>Malaya campaign and the Red Brigades. All of them had substantial support.
>All of them lost.

Don't know about Che, I suspect you're exaggerating about the BPs and RBs ...
but you are DEAD WRONG about Malaya ...

Assuming you are talking about the Malayan Insurgency?

The Communist Party of Malaya was close to 100% ethnic chinese. The population
of rural Malaya is close to 100% ethnic malay (or non-chinese, anyhow).

The British and Australians used the natural antipathy between the two (which
still exists between Chinese and Malays in Malaysia, and between Malaysia and
ethnic-chinese dominated Singapore) to hunt down and destroy the Malaysian
Insurgents.

The MCP gained no support from the people amongst whom it was *supposed* to be
hiding a la Mao's tenets. Or so close to none that it doesn't matter.

So, you are *wrong* in saying the MCP had "substantial" support.

Phil


- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #905
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 6 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 906



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: A Proposition
Re: Re TNE Assets
Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
Scouting enemy systems (Was: Transponders)
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #904
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: A Proposition
Re: Transonders and computers
Re: EMS Sensors
Re: MT errata
re: Transponders
re: Traveller, G: Trav, and Coke
Re: Running GURPS:Traveller
[none]
TL7 passive sensors
Re: What I would like to see in T5.
re artists
Re: Running GURPS:Traveller
Limits to tech advancement
contact info for Frank Chadwick
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 20:37:27 -0400
From: Daniel Poulin <pould@netcom.ca>
Subject: Re: A Proposition

I feel that Traveller is Traveller whatever the system.  I play it because
of the background, not the system (hell, if it was the system, I'd be off
the bandwagon a long time ago since Traveller went through many incarnations
before anyway).  I have stuck to MegaTraveller and I still purchased Gurps
Traveller (HERESY!!!!). (good work again by the way...).  If there is to be
a Gurps Traveller discussion group, I wanna be in!.  I would prefer not though.

Daniel Poulin
pould@netcom.ca

At 14:08 06/10/98 -0600, Loren Wiseman wrote:
>Gentlebeings:
>
>We had someone try to post some general discussion to the TNS mailing list,
>and naturally it bounced, but it brings up the question: Where should we
>(SJ Games) send people who want to talk about GURPS Traveller. I think a
>GURPS Traveller specific board might be a good idea as a single place to
>talk specific rules mechanics and the like, however...
>
>I also feel, like many on this list, that Traveller has grown beyond a
>single set of rules mechanics, and that the TML is diverse enough to
>support GURPS Traveller in addition to all the others. I'm going to propose
>that SJ Games set up a discussion board as part of their regular bulletin
>board sstem, but I'd also like to post information on the Web site so
>people can sign up to the TML. I'm not sure how much it would increase the
>traffic. Frankly, I think that most of the real Traveller fanatics (GURPS
>or others) ALREADY subscribe to the TML. I think a civilized, open
>discussion of all backgrounds is a good thing (we can leave the "my rules
>are better than your rules" arguments for e-mail -- I also propose that we
>cancel the semi-annual
>pirates-dropping-big-rocks-on-virus-infested-robots-discussing-economics
>discussion...: )
>
>Can someone save me a lot of effort and shoot me the "how to subscribe"
>instructions? I'll wait a day or two, and if there is a huge groundswell of
>public opinion on here against it, I'll reconsider. Consider this your
>opportunity to wean GURPS players over to the "One True Way(tm)" whatever
>you feel that is...
>
>
>
>
>Loren Wiseman
>     Traveller Line Editor
>     Traveller Guru-in-Residence
>     SJ Games
>     LKW@IO.COM
>     (512) 447-7866 VOX
>     (512) 447-1144 FAX
>
>
>
>

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 09:13:49 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Re TNE Assets

>
>Not exactly... that NORMALLY speeds up TNE play however
>UPP: A77558-5-5
>Skill		Easy	Avg	Diff	Form	Imp
>Piloting-2	28	14	7	4	2
>Admin-4		36	18	9	5	2
>
>Is easier for some players. The problem comes when these types use a hand
>comp with the right program for a +1 to base asset (difficult collumn),
>resulting in the following rolls
>
>Pilot-2 + comp	32	16	8	4	2
>Admin-4 + comp	40	20	10	5	3
>
>more extreme example could be applied, but I found that TNE really slowed
>down most players in my group, save peter. Including myself.
>
Ahh... so the problem is (and quite legitimately) that those who cannot do
this on the fly spend ages working out their assets.  This has not so far
proved a problem, but i can see that it might.

Cheers
Colin

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 09:17:35 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside

>The funny thing is that the ironclads were in part an attempt to return to
>'the old days' where ships were, in fact, very nearly immune to gunfire.
>The old wooden ships of the line used to take pretty much all day to pound
>another ship to the point where you could board it, and this was usually
>after both sides had decided to fight. One of the reasons Admirals who
>managed to catch an outnumbered enemy and destroy or capture them were so
>highly thought of was because forcing an opponent into a fight against his
>will was damned difficult.
>
Too true, the wonders of reliable engines finally bring about a reduction
in the reliance on sail, and finally make it redundant.  Before then you
need the Wind Gauge, and to get that you need to be lucky and or Brilliant.

Cheers
Colin

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 09:21:52 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside

Sigh! Our mails have crossed.  See my last.  I agree.
cheers

>I did not mean monitors as a ship class.  I ment the ironclad called
>Monitor.  One of the first two ironclads along with the Merrimack.  The
>battle between them was inconclusive.
>
>Charles.
>
>
>

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 03:41:58 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Scouting enemy systems (Was: Transponders)

Charles Prevatte writes:

>Then how do you explain the posibility of clandestine recon.?  Like the
>'Rock and a Hard Place' and several others?  Is it necessary to jump in at
>say the orbit of pluto to be undetected?  Regardless of the number of
>sensors with enough distance you get below the resolvable angle for light
>for an object of ship size.

Well, I haven't used any ship combat rules more recent than High Guard. I
don't know how the newest detection ranges work out. I understand that
they are far more realistic than the earlier rules (Frankly, I think that
detection ranges is an instance where it was a mistake to go for more
realism  --  IMO it detracts from playability). But anyway, if you play
shortish detection ranges, scout vessels can jump in outside detection 
range and coast closer to whatever they want to observe. But even if
you play with realistic detection ranges, scouts can jump into a system.
They will be detected, but if they are far away from where the defenders
are stationed and move about all the time, there's not much the defenders
can do about it, except curse.

 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 98 18:49:07 -0700
From: Tim Carroll <timc@paratwa.org>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #904

>This I disagree with...if they were produced in the same format (48pg 
>booklets
>and sold together in a box) I would be amazed to see them run more than $30
>dollars...I laid out $26+tax just for Basic 3rd Revised.

Boxes raise the cost of a game by a lot -- also, bookstores don't like 
carrying boxes.

The only company I've seen recently that's done a product like this is 
Rubicon Games; they've done a few half-folded booklets for about $10.  
They are adventures and only sold through mail-order.



>Also, there is a lot of reference online to GURPS Lite...which is fine if you
>have Internet access.  I think most of us forget that not everybody does...so
>they can't get away with the so-called "budget" plan for GURPS.

Yeah, but enough people do that it is a viable option for people on a 
budget.  Realistically, given a set of players at least one of them will 
have access to the Internet, either via a school, a public library, or an 
AOL account.

Actually, there's been some talk of printing up a bunch of copies of 
GURPS Lite and selling them cheaply or giving them away.  My roommate 
actually did that when he and I were running the SJ Games booth down at 
Gateway con in LA a few weeks ago.

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 09:44:30 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

I thought you were suggesting that BL did not use vector based movement or
non-Newtonian motion or some such (Since I play BR and BL this worried the
daylights out of of me!)  Indeed they are different, but fortunately not in
the way I thiought you meant.

Cheers
Colin
>

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 03:55:07 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

Charles Prevatte writes:

>What traveller is Knightfall under CT, TNE, T2300?

It's one of the last MT products.

Charles, you sometimes quote more material than is needed to follow the thread.
Could you try to cut down a bit, please? 
 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:49:06 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: A Proposition

At 02:10 pm 10/6/98 -0600, you wrote:
>I agree. I hate the "my rules are better than your rules" arguments.
I find this

	To some extent, I find even those discussion useful WHEN

	1) They're civil. Each side recognizes the other's basic right to
exist, breath air, and push electrons across the net.
	2) They're rational. Each side tries to explain WHY they like one
interpretation/rule/etc or the other better, rather than just
claiming ideological purity.

	For example, the on and off discussion of transponders led me to
work out for myself a model of how a transponder would work in my
universe (explained in 20th century terms, of course ...). 
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:30:03 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: Transonders and computers

At 03:51 pm 10/6/98 +0000, you wrote:
>>	I can't give you a reference off the top of my head but PGP *does*
>>use session keys. The public key crypto is extremely slow, so

	<* snip *>

>This is a new developement to me.  I'll have to look into it.  It
sounds
>quite reasonable.  If the public key is longer than the session key
the the
>message would have to be decoded using the brute force method as the
session
>key could not be reliably decoded directly.  This would indeed
increase
>security by an order of magitude.

	PGP 2.6.2 PGPDOC2.TXT:

	"... PGP "bootstraps" into a conventional single-key encryption
algorithm by using a public key algorithm to encipher the
conventional session key and then switching to fast conventional
cryptography.  So let's talk about this conventional encryption
algorithm.  It isn't the DES. ... PGP does not use the DES as its
conventional single-key algorithm to encrypt messages.  Instead, PGP
uses a different conventional single-key block encryption algorithm,
called IDEA(tm)."

	Also, "Applied Cryptography, 2ed," by Bruce Schneier, p33

	"In the real world, public-key algorithms are not a substitute for
symmetric algorithms. They are not used to encrypt messages, they are
used to encrypt keys. There are two reasons for this:

	"1. Public-key algorithms are slow. Symmetric algorithms are
generally at least 1000 times faster than public-key algorithms. ...

	"2. Public-key cryptosystems are vulnerable to chosen-plaintext
attacks. ..."

	IIRC, the IDEA session key is 128 bits. Public keypairs are usually
1024 or more bits, significantly longer than the IDEA key.

	As for the statement that the NSA has claimed they can crack
PGP--while I haven't paid much attention, I don't recall hearing that
anywhere. I've no doubt they can crack a small key; while I wouldn't
be surprised if they can crack larger ones, neither would I leap to
believe it.
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:50:36 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: EMS Sensors

At 11:38 pm 10/7/98 +0100, you wrote:
>Is it just me or does it seem strange that Active EMS can 'see'
further
>than Passive? Personally I think it should be the other way around.
>Modern sensors such as RWR and passive sonar tend to have longer
ranges
>than do their active variants........or am I missing something?

	You're missing the Definitive Sensor Rules by the resident
astronomer, passive sensor guru, and all-around good guy ...
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:52:41 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: MT errata

At 08:03 pm 10/6/98 EDT, you wrote:
>Greetings!
>
>     I had a friend recently ask me for my MT errata, and I have
come to
>realize that it is no longer on me hard drive.  If anyone has any
errata for
>MT (I seem to recall having to compile it from several different
sources)  we
>both would truly appreciate it!

	See my site ... 
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:42:58 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: re: Transponders

At 12:25 pm 10/6/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Question, though: how long does it take to (legally) replace a
>transponder?
>
>A ship comes out of jump at a medium pop B-starport system
>a little off the X-boat routes. It manuevers, but has no transponder
>or commo. A fighter flight intercepts, gets close and hears the
>captain transmitting through a short-range jury-rigged commo
>link. He's an honest merchant captain, a power surge as they
>entered jumpspace wrecked their commo array - about a week's
>work in a B-class port. The transponder read the surge as a
>tamper attempt and fried itself. _Lady Jane_ gets boarded by
>customs police, then flies formation with the patrol craft to the
repair yards.

	Well, I wouldn't have the transponder _completely_ disintigrate ...
just the critical portion needed to continue identifying itself as
valid. The ship's history would be burned into read-only forge proof
(I mean resistant ...) storage. The Lady would be escorted to the
starport, where they would pull up this memory, authenticate it, and
depending on the contents determine how much hassle to give the guy.
A new transponder might have to be shipped in from the nearest class
A starport.

	IMTU, the transponder functions as (a) tracking aide for system
control, (b) identification and registration for the ship (*near*
unforgeable), and (c) flight data recorder. Key information gets
added to read-only memory, such as ownership, crew data, flight
history, and ships logs. The transponder also maintains "circular"
history of information that only becomes important under certain
circumstances, in which case it gets dumped to permanent storage as
well.

	For example, commo traffic gets stored and then overwritten ...
unless a "Mayday" or "Signal GK" is received, in which case the last
time period gets saved. Next time you call at a class C or above
starport, they're going to see that and you better be able to either
prove you responded as required, or justify why not. ALL ships
receiving a distress call are required to respond.

	Likewise, sensor data is routed through a circular buffer. But if
you fire your weapons, the most recent data gets saved again AND the
transponder adds a special code to your signal. The next IN patrol or
customs ship will use that sensor data and other information to
determine if you really were attacked by a pirate, or were actually
trying to pull a little armed robbery yourself.

	Flight history is recorded both whenever you set down at any class A
or B, and some C starports, as well as from jump settings. The
transponder saves all those to permanent storage, and it's possible
to reconstruct where you've been based on a known starting point, and
the jump settings used.

	(Before some of you flame me ... IMTU means "In MY Traveller
Universe" ... and no, I still don't think it's got the feel of some
Big Brother Orwellian reality. There's still room for rats at the
wainscoting of society ... steel rats).
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 19:19:55 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: re: Traveller, G: Trav, and Coke

At 09:24 am 10/6/98 -0400, you wrote:
>jim clem wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>	Even worse, Coke Classic is NOT "Coca Cola" as it existed prior to
>New Coke ... the expensive sugar in the secret recipe was replaced
>with much cheaper corn syrup. Conspiracy theorists claim New Coke
was
>simply a smokescreen to cover up the real switcheroo ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>It gets worse than that...
>
>Corn syrup is only "much cheaper" because of the power of sugar
>industry lobbyists. The price of sugar is artificially inflated
through
>the roof - the corn syrup industry wouldn't even exist if sugar
prices
>weren't so high.
>
>A nice side effect has been the slow destruction of the American
>sugar industry - production in Hawaii alone has slipped from over
>a million tons a year (in 1987, and for decades before that) to less
>than 400,000 tons/year. The lobbyists managed to work themselves
>out of a job - the Hawaii Sugar Planter's Association (a major
lobbyist
>group) closed their Washington offices a year or two ago.
>
>As Coca-Cola moves into the Corn-Syrup Industry's camp, the
>power of the Corn Barons continues to grow at the expense of
>the Sugar Planters..... <g>

	Great ... now fifty years from now the corn syrup lobbyists will
have artificially inflated the price of corn syrup, and Coca Cola
will come out with Improved Coke, and then will back down in a wave
of public protest and bring back Original Coke, only they'll secretly
change the formula to use the much cheaper sugar ...
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:12:44 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Running GURPS:Traveller

Keven R. Pittsinger writes:

>That's not the segment of the market I was talking about.  I was refering to 
>people who've never played an RPG before, and thus wouldn't *have* any GURPS 
>stuff laying around at all.

Why would anyone buy a game supplement before buying the core rules? When you
buy/bought any version of _Traveller_, you bought a complete game and was
entitled to expect a complete game. When you buy GURPS:Traveller you are
buying a setting for the GURPS rules and can't expect them to reprint scads
of rules that are already found elsewhere. A little overlap is of course
permissible, even commendable, but if the G:T rules contained too much
duplicated material, then those who DID have a lot of GURPS stuff lying
around would have a legitimate complaint.

>And what did people do before GDW came out with all the supplements?  We 
>*homebrewed* it.  At least we had all the rules we *needed* to homebrew it.

I haven't seen G:T yet, but I have GURPS:Basic and GURPS:Space. With those
two I could homebrew something even without G:T ;-)


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8
> 

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:13:11 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: [none]

>Then how do you explain the posibility of clandestine recon.?  Like the
>'Rock and a Hard Place' and several others?  Is it necessary to jump in at
>say the orbit of pluto to be undetected?  Regardless of the number of
>sensors with enough distance you get below the resolvable angle for light
>for an object of ship size.
>
>Is this ANOTHER question to refer to Marc?
>
>As for heplar I have never used them.  I'm a CT player myself.
>
>Charles.

Simple: astrographic and orbital data can be gathered from several parsecs
away (AM1 aslan, IIRC). Jump in in such a manner that your exit sig is
blocked by a large body. Putting a planet between you and the monitoring
world would seem to be the most effective... and, based upon the ability to
garner number of planets, and orbital periods beforehand, as well as rather
exact distances, you could plot and time adjust your jump to put you in a
blind spot behind an inner system body, assuming they don't have monitoring
around all inner system worlds. Which, more than likely, they don't if the
worlds are not inhabited. Recon is dangerous, but possible.

HEPlaR is a high temp fusion plant exhaust rocket. with the delta v's
generated for the fuel used, it has to be high energy, which also means
(usually) high RF sig.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:13:24 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: TL7 passive sensors

I would make TL7 sensors look something like this:
 
Sensitivity     Scanner Area    Tracker Area
11.5                  1            0.5
12                    4              1
12.5                                 4
 
Volume is 5 m3 per m2 of area. Mass is 4/5 ton per m3 and cost is MCr 5 per m2.
 
(Note that this is different than TL8, where scanners and trackers are the
same size. Note also that visible sensitivity is -0.5 through an atmosphere,
and IR is -2)
 
Bruce

P.S. This assumes a society with good computer tech. If for some reason the
society is lagging in computers - all sensor results being procesesed
manually - reduce scanner (but not tracker) sensitivity by 2 points. 

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 21:23:41 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5.

Paul Bendall wrote:

>Charles R Hensley wrote:
>
>> Nice clear INACCURATE info.   I.e. aircraft and helocopters that can
>
>OK so I've only flicked through Vehicles and not read it closely :-)
But I
>very nearly bought it as it looked up to the same standard as Arsenal.
There
>were a few typos in that too but I still consider it a good book.

Emperor's Vehicles was a great idea that was poorly executed, hopefully
in T5 we can get it right.

Charles

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:22:35 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: re artists

><< >Art: Good quality B&W line or grayscale art. The best part of T4, IMNSHO,
> >is the B&W pencils... they really gave a "Look" to the TU.
>
> Yup. Bring back Rob Caswell and the Keiths.
>  >>
>
>And definately Larry Elmore!  He did a lot of the B&W art in T4, and is one of
>the best artists (WRT gaming) that I have seen.  Remember Dragonlance, Mythus
>and several issues of Dragon?
>
>Dusty
YES!!!! Elmore, Caswell, Keiths, and Liz Danforth

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:25:40 EDT
From: Thendal@aol.com
Subject: Re: Running GURPS:Traveller

ENOUGH!!!!

Look if you don't like the GURPS system there are still plenty other versions
of Traveller out there.

So enough with the LBB's and the "stand alones". 

You'll be arguing forever.

If you don't like the GURPS system don't use it!!!

If you prefer CT, MT, T:TNE or T4 , more power to you. 

I myself love the Traveller background,
It's just no matter how "good" a game system is , someone somewhere is going
to find something wrong with it.


Thendal

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:27:39 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Limits to tech advancement

Charles Prevatte writes:

>>That speed will not continue.  It is "canon" that tech slows down big time
>>and that we're in an unusual advancement curve.  In fact, tech advancement
>>slows to a snails pace.
> 
> Pardon?  What canon?  Where does it say that?

Traveller history shows that it takes the 3rd Imperium 300-400 years per
step to get from TL 12 to 15 (but 15 to 16 apparently only takes a bit
more than a century). There are two possible explanations for the rapid
advancement of technology on Terra from TL 4 to 9. Either each TL
advancement usually takes centuries and the spurt on Terra is a freak
occurrence or the advancement to TL 9 is ordinary enough, but hits some
sort of "wall" when you get to TL 10 or thereabouts. In either case the
darrian advancement from TL 3 to TL 16 in four centuries is a freak.

Mind you, no one is claiming that this is a realistic view of how things
will work in the Real World. But it is the way things work in the TU.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:30:06 +0000
From: edjs@bitslayer.net
Subject: contact info for Frank Chadwick

Does anyone know Frank Chadwick's email address or other contact info?


- --
Edward Swatschek
edjs@bitslayer.net - edjs@mindlink.net - ICQ 2684960
http://home.mindlink.net/edjs/

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:46:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

On Tue, 6 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest in the person of
 Phil Kitching <PhilK@btinternet.com> wrote:
 
> In BR and Mayday, movement is traditional vector with a present
> position counter, a past position and a predicted future position
> - - which the player then changes by an amount up to their ship's
> G rating.

This is similar, but not identical, to what GURPS Traveller uses.

> In BL you have one counter on the board (which indicates facing)
> plus others off the board on a ship chart to indicate current velocity
> and facing (plus one to indicate if you are moving down hex edges and
> another to indicate accumulated G if a heading change takes more than
> one turn).
> Then you have the rules to workout how long it takes to change heading
> (at least just slowing down is easy).

Yikes! Lots of counters. I guess you'd need a large play area for both the
map AND the record sheets.

GURPS Traveller also presents a vector-movement combat system. The system
produces the same effects as a full vector system like Battlefleet
Mars, Mayday or Book 2, but through the concept of a placeholder counter
that is removed after each ship's movement reduces counter clutter to
only two per ship.

- -David

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #906
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 7 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 907



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Missile designs.
Re: Point-Based Systems (was GT)
Re: Coke 
Re: Trransponders & Malaya
Galactic 2.3
Re: Transponder's true nature
FAQ?
Re: Galactic 2.3
Re: Missile defense question
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)
Re: FAQ?
Re: Running GURPS:Traveller
Re: FAQ?
Re: Transponders
Re: A Proposition
Addaxur data (was Re: Addaxur)
Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)
Re: Piracy

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 10:33:40 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Missile designs.

A few things:

1)There is no need for a  laser communicator unless you need to know what
the missile is doing.  You can control it if it ghas a receiver, or you can
leave it to chance that it will find and destroy on its own.  If you want
to use it to hand off locks back to the parent that is another matter.
2) Use Fuel cells instead of batteries.
3) consider HEPLAR,some one , (Whoose work I have kept, but do not have it
on me) designed a nice range of such missiles.  If ypou do not have it and
want it then let me know.
4) Self ccontained thrusters produce power for free, although this is
probably only when they are thrusting.
%) below is a back of a hardcopy of your missive design using EAPLAC, and
accounting for Hull armour, internal structure, ignoring the restrictions
on the minimum size of EAPLAC rocket thrust, and the power generatred by
the auxiliary generators.

TL12 500kt det laser with  1 hex PEMS and laser communicator 10 hex SR

Component price Volume Mass Power  
Warhead    1.2    .388  .388  -
.18MW 
Fuel cell  .0048  .24   .24   +.18
Fuel 
HCD      .0001124 .45   .45    -
PEMS
processor   .6      .3    .6   -.03
Ant. FA             .1    .1           AD=3.5m, AA=1m^2
AV=3 SD
cylinder   .000519 .04125 .6182 -
Int str.   .000973  .0695  1.0428 - 
5G
Laser
Comm       .056    .028   .056          AA=1m^2

EAPLAC     .021533 5.38325 5.38325 
           1.883937  7    8.87825



Avge mass = 6.186625
FC = .3
G Turns = 5.8 RU 6
G rating = 5/6

SA=17.5m^2,
r=1.18m
D=2.37m
MV=.17m
MVM US CYL =1.1 price mod .6

This comes with a bulls roar of the designs in FF&S1
Ommitting the HUll armour or ISV will probably makre it a 7/7

Chers

Colin

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 98 21:14:56 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Point-Based Systems (was GT)

On 10/05/98 at 01:15 PM,  Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior) said:

>>Is it a law of nature that the only way a 30 (or 40) year old can
>>learn anything is by losing limbs or gaining inimical enemies?  I
>>don't think so.

>No, this is a game-balance feature to _force_ munchkins to take a
>disadvantage.  Otherwise all munchkin characters will be
>exceptionally healthy and sane.  Mature gamers generally don't need
>it.  (Mind you, my definition of a "mature" gamer includes playing
>realistically-flawed characters for the fun of it, without the prod
>of game points.)

Rob, I agree with you about this, generally, but like with most
things some people take the "flawed character" bit too far.  

You don't have to make your character a misanthropist with a bum
leg, an overpowering clastrophobia, and a massive chip on their
should for him/her to be interesting.  I had a player that did that
in a recent game.  Yes, he did a good job of playing the character,
but his character was NOT fun for the other characters to be
around, and was a drag on everyone's fun...*except* the guy running
him.  He appeared to get his jollys by blocking everyone else.
That's not mature play...so it isn't taking disadvantages that makes
for mature gamers, which, of course, you *didn't* say. ;->

What I most agree with is your final few words "...for the fun of
it, without the prod of game points."

My philosophy is that you should play a character that is
interesting to you and the other players...that is FUN.  Give the
character flaws, sure, but always end up with someone you'd want to
hang out with...flaws and all.  A character that, not only can YOU
have fun with, but that will be fun for all the other players to
play with.

I tell new would-be players that role playing games are mostly about
playing a role, and staying in character, but that they are games
too...and like any good game you can win.  The way to "win" is to
entertain *everybody*, to make the game interesting and exciting for
everybody involved.  The player and character that does that is a
winner.  Oh, and before anyone jumps on the "winning" aspect I also
explain that rpg's are both a team game and a non-zero sum
game...meaning *everybody*, including the GM, wins when we all play
well.  ;->


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 22:44:49 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Coke 

> <<>I think I have finally hit on a metaphor that perfectly sums up my feelings
> <<>re: Traveller and GURPS Trav...remember the difference between Coke (now
> <<>Coke Classic) and New Coke?   Coke is Coke...but obviously not to a large
> <<>majority of folks out there (is New Coke even available anymore?)
> 
> <<	Even worse, Coke Classic is NOT "Coca Cola" as it existed prior to
> <<New Coke ... the expensive sugar in the secret recipe was replaced
> <<with much cheaper corn syrup.
> 
> What I hear is that before, the bottlers were required to use cane or beet
> sugar, and now they can use whatever is cheapest. In most places, that's corn
> syrup, but in places like Hawaii, that's cane sugar, and in places like
> Colorado and Louisiana it is beet sugar. 

I grew up on beet sugar.  There's a slightly different taste to it than cane 
sugar.  And beet sugar's all through the West; Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico, etc.

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 21:36:19 -0500
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: Trransponders & Malaya

>>
>>Look up a decent history on what happened to Che, the Black Panthers, the
>>Malaya campaign and the Red Brigades. All of them had substantial support.
>>All of them lost.
>
>Don't know about Che, I suspect you're exaggerating about the BPs and RBs
...
>but you are DEAD WRONG about Malaya ...


He is wrong about Che also.  Che tried to start a revolt in Bolivia and he
was turned in by the peasants he was trying to raise.

The government had instituted land reform and Che got sold out quickly.

TV

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:49:49 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: Galactic 2.3

I have been trying for a number of days now to download this program from
the web pag where it is offered, and no luck; it keeps timing out. Getting
it by e-mail is probably not going to work, but I am on IRC a lot and also
available on ICQ (4483653). if someone who has that program could help me
out, I'd appreciate it :)

Allen

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:57:07 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

Gary (TravelrTNE@aol.com) writes:

>The burden to disprove is on you.  I don't have to prove anything.  The Deyo
>transponders are *Official* whether you like it or not.  The operations and
>theory behind them are described in some detail, but the tech behind them is
>unexplored (in reality because the writers weren't from the 57th century).
>How can you disprove something that isn't detailed?  You can't.  The "tamper
>circuit" is presented as a given factor.

The burden to prove or disprove is irrelevant. A conflict in the canon
demonstrably exists. Forgable transponders are *Official* whether you like
it or not. The forgable transponder is presented as a given factor. How
believable the Deyo chip is in itself is irrelevant (My own belief that
the story is internally inconsistent comes not from the pseudo-science
babble, but from my opinion about sovereign governments that allow rival
governments to install black boxes in all their shipping, foreign and
domestic).
 
>It is *official* (Survival Margin) whether you like it or not. I'd prefer
>to justify everything that makes up the OTU instead of discarding things.

No you don't. You're perfectly willing to discard forgable transponders.
You just want to keep the bits that you like and get rid of the bits you
don't like. Nothing wrong with that. I want exactly the same. What ticks
me off is that you want to pretend that your version is the only possible
one and that anyone who try to get rid of your bits is a silly fool while
you are a selfless, pure-spirited, objective defender of the One True Way.
I'm also not too fond of your attitude that any material that contradicts
your preferred interpretation is somehow inferior to the bits that agree
with you.



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
"Facts are stubborn things, but not half so stubborn as fallacies."
                - Stella Maynard in "Anne of the Island"

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:05:21 EDT
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com
Subject: FAQ?

I have a vague memory of a FAQ associated with the TML. Can some kind soul
fill me in?

Loren Wiseman

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:12:04 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Galactic 2.3

From:           	"Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Date sent:      	Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:49:49 -0400

>I have been trying for a number of days now to download this program from
>the web pag where it is offered, and no luck; it keeps timing out. Getting
>it by e-mail is probably not going to work, but I am on IRC a lot and also
>available on ICQ (4483653). if someone who has that program could help me
>out, I'd appreciate it :)

I have it (updated with all of Jo Grant's additional sectors). If you want I'll
zip it up and send it to you. I can break it into disk sized chunks if that
would help.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:21:32 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Missile defense question

In a message dated 10/6/98 4:17:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
rboleyn@clear.net.nz writes:

<< Which missiles travel at MAch 2? Last I heard only the big Soviet ones did,
 and most of those weren't really sea skimmers. Harpoon, Excocet etc are all
 near supersonic. >>

Modern naval is not my forte', but I heard that Boeing, Aerospatial, and
several other manufacturers are working on the next generation of cruise
missiles that are stealthy, seaskimming and supersonic...Yech! 

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 98 22:34:39 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)

On 10/05/98 at 11:30 PM,  CardSharks@aol.com said:

>> Very fine idea, I recognise the p[roblem.  Some sort of ON THE
>> BRIDGE rules to keep people involved, otherwise a small ship has
>> little to offer a group of adventurers in combat.
 
>This is an excellent suggestion.

Yes, it is.

This is the *very* thing that Joe Walsh and I had in mind with
RPSCS.


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 21:42:28 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: FAQ?

At 11:05 pm 10/6/98 EDT, you wrote:
>I have a vague memory of a FAQ associated with the TML. Can some
kind soul
>fill me in?

	Q1: Gee, I was just thinking about the kinetic energy associated
with even a lifeboat if you thrust long enough--is that a problem?
	A1: *THWACK*

	Q2: We've been trying to figure out just what is meant by Feudal
Technocracy--any ideas?
	A2: *THWACK*

	Q3: Is piracy really possible, given unforgeable transponders?
	A3: *THWACK*

	Q4: Are unforgeable transponders reasonable?
	A4: *THWACK*

	Q5: What happens to all the jump fuel?
	A5: *THWACK*

	Q6: Why use liquid hydrogen, when you can carry much more in the
form of water?
	A6: *THWACK*

	Q7: Has anybody else noticed it's hard to break even using the trade
rules?
	A7: *THWACK*

	Q8: Can you *THWACK*

	*THWACK*

	*THWACK*

	*THWACK*

	*THWACK*

	*THWACK*

	(ooops...)	
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 11:35:33 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Running GURPS:Traveller

Indeed it was so inclusive, and very sadly had more errata than pages.  The
quality of the product in that regard was so low it nearly put me off
anything that GDW published.  Fortunately they got better.  By comparison
T4 was perfection itself, (well ...not really).  I wonder if poor quality
control can be made a hanging offence for the aggravation it causes :)

>Rupert Boleyn wrote:
>
>> Just to throw some fat on the fire I'd like to point out that Deluxe TNE
>> had everything including the complete construction system in it, including
>> a couple of subsectors, and a sector map.
>
>If memory serves it was about £30 in the UK, which I considered to be
pretty OK.
>I am a bit biaised towards boxed sets though.
>

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:44:10 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: FAQ?

From:           	GDWGAMES@aol.com
Date sent:      	Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:05:21 EDT
To:             	TRAVELLER@MPGN.COM
Subject:        	FAQ?
Send reply to:  	traveller@MPGN.COM

>I have a vague memory of a FAQ associated with the TML. Can some kind soul
>fill me in?

Its located at

<http://www.spirit.net.au/~jamesd/tml-faq.html>

Maintained by:

James Dempsey <jamesd@spirit.com.au>

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 05:54:43 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Transponders

Charles Prevatte writes:

>That is not what I meant.  The pirate robs with the heavily armed ship with
>NO transponder then transfers his booty to a SECOND ship with a legal
>transponder.  If the pirate ship is damaged the legal ship buys the parts
>for it legally and then takes it to the pirate ship.  The legal ship never
>has to be in the system where the piracy takes place.

It is my belief that a pirate ship would have trouble capturing enough
booty to support itself (depending on your assumptions about the value
the average cargo and a lot of other factors, of course). Adding a
'tender' will increase that problem.
 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 98 23:43:16 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: A Proposition

On 10/06/98 at 02:08 PM,  Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com> said:

>We had someone try to post some general discussion to the TNS mailing
>list, and naturally it bounced, but it brings up the question: Where
>should we (SJ Games) send people who want to talk about GURPS
>Traveller. 

Send them here. The more the merrier!

>I think a GURPS Traveller specific board might be a good
>idea as a single place to talk specific rules mechanics and the like,

You mean a SJ Board, like the playtest boards?  Loren, I sure wish I
could download those messages, read and write my replys off line and
upload replies.  The way they are set up over there, they are a
regular pain...so much of a pain I didn't participate much at all.

Set up a real, honest to goodness, mailing list, or send them here.
That's my suggestion.

>TML. I think a civilized, open discussion of all backgrounds is a
>good thing (we can leave the "my rules are better than your rules"
>arguments for e-mail -- I also propose that we cancel the semi-annual
>pirates-dropping-big-rocks-on-virus-infested-robots-discussing-economics
>discussion...: )

Vain hope, that! ;->

I enjoy system discussions, as long as they stay civil and don't
degrade into flame-wars.  Personally, I'd like to see the GURPS
system cross-pollinate with all the Traveller systems.  What comes
out might be a "best of breed."


Eris,
    Traveller for everyone!
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 00:57:12 EDT
From: GypsyComet@aol.com
Subject: Addaxur data (was Re: Addaxur)

Leo asks:

>>...but I still don't know what they look like. I was sort of aiming
>>at a multi-legged reptiloid hyena, but the concept faded. I maintain
>>that the vast majority are low-slung and positively cheerful.
>>"Happy carnivores."
>>
>>GypsyComet
>
>      What about some type of arachnid type creature?
>
>
>Leo

  The arachnid leg structure is not well suited to high-G, IIRC.
I also have a bias against sentient spiders in the region thanks
to Chuck Kallenbach, with the Sred'ni in The Beyond. Someone
suggested to me the last time this came up that the Addaxur
might be rather turtle-like and be scavengers. The idea has more
appeal to me than yet another lizard-man. If GTs Addaxur are
proportioned like your typical Tolkien Dwarf (ie. short and WIDE),
I can probably cope, but heavy gravity and bipedal forms just don't
mix well...

 Here's some of what I have...

 LIBRARY DATA (TIENSPEVNEKR SECTOR; excerpts):

 Abrr Subsector (Tienspevnekr G):
    Contains the Addaxur Reservation. The original name for the
subsector as the Zhodani explored was Tsachi.  After the Addaxur
were discovered, the name for the region became Abrr ("Surprise").
The Council Seat retains the original name.

 Addaxur:
    While many Addaxur live within the ten world Reservation, members
of this race can be found anywhere in the Consulate.  The Addaxur
lend a unique quality to the culture of Zhodani worlds they inhabit.
Any world with a significant population of Addaxur will have an "X#"
note in its comments.  The number ranges from zero to nine, each
digit representing 10% of the total world population.  Thus "X4"
indicates that about 40% of the population is Addaxur.  The Addaxur
consider Zhodani a comfortable presense, and there are very few
worlds beyond the Reservation which are totally Addaxur.  These rare
worlds are labeled as the Reservation is: "Ax".

 Addaxur Reservation:
    The Addaxur have a ten world reservation in Abrr subsector. They
rule these worlds absolutely, with no interference from the Consulate.
Only one world has any steady Zhodani presence.  Addax, the
reservation capital (and Addaxur homeworld) has a joint Navy base.
The Consulate has gone to great lengths to keep interference to a
minimum. While the Addaxur have been an integral part of the central
Consulate for over 5000 years, and can be seen in nearly every
corner of Zhodani space, they continue to hold their homeworlds in
relative isolation from the Zhodani.  Except for Addax, the worlds of
the reservation are off-limits to outsiders, and Consulate citizens
may visit them only with an invitation.

Ushaddax      2013 E558446-7    Ni                 604 Ax G1 V            
Daxia         2114 E303520-9    Ic Ni Va    SF     304 Ax K9 V M6 D       
Amaxu         2213 B582443-9    Ni                 313 Ax F6 V            
Addax         2214 A9D2744-D  Z Ag Ri* Cr          204 Ax M1 V            
Drunshu       2216 D72A455-7    Ni Wa              803 Ax K8 V            
Umashaxar     2314 B000355-E    As Lo Ni    S1     201 Ax M3 V M1 D       
Shantusax     2316 D84A55A-6    Ni Wa              802 Ax M9 V            
Korubal       2317 A200100-A    Lo Ni       S1     303 Ax G0 V M1 D       
Mesh Tuxar    2414 B3015AD-C    Ic Ni Va           120 Ax M4 V            
Nasaxu Ar     2415 E865889-3    Ri                 512 Ax M6 V           



 GypsyComet@aol.com
 http://members.aol.com/gypsycomet/index.html

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 23:53:40 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Tech advancement  - an aside
...
>Virginia?  Is that a ship?  Or the state?  As far as I know there were only
>two ironclads in the cival war.  The ones mentioned above and as far as I
>know neither ever sank any other ship.
>
>They were both badly under guned due to weight of armor.  They were also not
>very good designs.  One sank in a mild storm.  Later designs worked better.

  I thought that we'd worked through those issues already? :) If the Virginia
was undergunned (and the Monitor was _designed_ to fight the Virginia) then
what can you say about the three Northern fleet units that it had gutted the
day before, and their failure to significantly affect their foe?

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 14:46:52 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)

>Yes, it is.
>
>This is the *very* thing that Joe Walsh and I had in mind with
>RPSCS.
>
>
Two things:
Do you know where I can look at a copy of this?

A big concern of mine is that such a system be fully integrated into the BL
equivalent, for T5 (indeed for TNE which I play, I would want to be able to
fully integrate it)  BL and BR (with fixes for meson guns) did this nicely
at another level.

cheers
Colin

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 08:22:00
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy

(note : Most of what follows is a re-hash of the Great Piracy Debate of
1997-8. I am still convinced that Piracy is only viable in the Traveller
universe during Long Nights, Civil Wars, Hard Times and the like. I dont
believe it is viable on the frontiers of a stable Imperium, becuase those
frontiers were all militarized. It'd be like trying to mug tourists near
Checkpoint Charlie IMO).

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: re: Transponders
>
>>  What happens if the practice drone (err, pirate) with NO transponder meets
>>a patrol? (hint: target practice off the port bow, sir!). The desired effect
>>can be much more easily achieved using a ship's boat or armed pinnace,
>>especially
>>as non-starships (or at least small craft) may very well not be required to
>>use SDG transponders.
>>
>
>They would fight.  Pirates do not want to meet a patrol ship except maybe yo
>ambush it.  Also what happen when a 400 ton patrol ship meet a 4000 ton
>pirate?  Whos target drone then?

Easy. If it's alone, it jumps out and reports the location of the pirate
ship to the nearest concentration of forces - military ships would have
good enough sensors to see our hypothetical 4000t pirate outside combat
range. If it has a companion, the junior captain jumps out, while the
senior captain announces 'Medals all round, chaps' and closes to engage. In
the greater scheme of things, it doesnt matter if the Patrol Frigate gets
fried, but any sort of damage will cause the raider problems.

Next, lets have a look at the ecology of a 4000 ton pirate ship.

If it's a Vargr ship, a Vargr with enough charisma can probably get it
built via public subscription (' Argavid says Join the Gnasher Supporters
Club, and help Argavid show those Imperials What ... loot, booty,
*charisma* awaits').

If it isnt, someone is going to have to come up with a gigacredit or so, or
a State that is prepared to risk Imperial retaliation while either someone
walks off with one of their light cruisers, or operates pirate support
infrastructure on their turf.

If it's a mutineer ship, I need convincing that going to some neutral State
and selling them the ship isnt a better option (Federation of Arden and the
Sword Worlds come immediatly to mind ... either or both could buy it off
the mutineers at 10% of value).

OK, so we have our pirate ship. How much tonnage in ships does it need to
capture each year to pay for food, supplies, expendables and annual
maintainence, plus crew salaries for the ship, any secret support bases and
any supporting merchant ships ?

Is this number higher than that which would attract Imperial attention, or
force the Hortalez et Cie Subsector Director to declare the subsector 'held
covered' - that insurance contracts will be paid out only for ships
travelling in 8 ship or greater convoys, with 1 escort of 400 dtons per 8
ships ? Captains may also consider jacking up their freight rates on
account of the 'help covered' status (aka 'Lets Amber Zone the subsector
due to pirate activity'), and install enough fuel bladders for an emergency
jump-1.

Imperial attention is worse. Hunting down pirates is (in my opinion)
excellent practice for the wartime duty of hunting down commerce raiders,
so it's a great way to hold an impromptu fleet excersise.

Pirating ships on outbound legs is difficult, as they may choose to risk
misjump by jumping within 100 diameters, and traffic control presumably
routes outbound ships well apart. Pirating ships on inbound legs requires
hanging around within sensor ranges of the planet. This tends to make
people curious, especially if you dont have a valid sensor signal, and
arent prepared to answer signals.

If the planet cant afford SDBs, they can either make a deal with a friendly
neighbourhood megacorp (trading rights to customs revenue and starship
operation for an agreed level of military protection), or find some IISS
Detatched Duty Scout, spend a couple of megacredits up-arming her Type S,
and *voila* ... instant Customs Patrol. Heck, they'll probably take local
kids up for the ride, show em what they know, and write a nice letter of
reference for the IISS recruiters. It's a good way off a iceball ...

>>  In any case, where is the legal ship, what is it doing, who is paying for
>>its' operations, and why the heck don't the anomalies indicated by these
>>questions get it flagged for some serious investigation? 
>>
>
>Doing it's nornal business.  The pirate meet the legal ship at prearrange
>deep space points as discribed in the traveller adventure.  No anomolies.
>The legal ship makes deep space jumps regularly and sometimes it meet the
>pirate.
>

No anomolies ? No-one notices a ship that sells cargos, but never seems to
buy them ? Especially when ships have been disappearing ?

While you are figuring the economic level of activity for the pirate,
remember to add in the time lost travelling to and from the rendezvous.

I'd really, really like to see some hard numbers that favour the pirates.

Ian Whitchurch

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #907
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 7 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 908



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: A Proposition
Mea Revolutionary Culpa
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
RE: Blank Subsector Map
Book 0: Understanding (GURPS) Traveller
Limits to tech advancement
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
Re: Running GURPS:Traveller 
Re: Galactic 2.3
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
Re: Tech advancement
Re: re transponders
Monitor & Merrimack (Was: Tech advancement)
re: EMS Sensors
Re: Limits to tech advancement
GURPS Trav power plants
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 08:36:35
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: A Proposition

>From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com>
>Subject: A Proposition
>
>Gentlebeings:
>
>We had someone try to post some general discussion to the TNS mailing list,
>and naturally it bounced, but it brings up the question: Where should we
>(SJ Games) send people who want to talk about GURPS Traveller. I think a
>GURPS Traveller specific board might be a good idea as a single place to
>talk specific rules mechanics and the like, however...

People have talked about CT rules, MT rules, TNE rules, T4 rules and T5
rules. I really dont think talking G:T rules will disrupt things that much.

>I'm not sure how much it would increase the
>traffic. Frankly, I think that most of the real Traveller fanatics (GURPS
>or others) ALREADY subscribe to the TML. I think a civilized, open
>discussion of all backgrounds is a good thing (we can leave the "my rules
>are better than your rules" arguments for e-mail -- I also propose that we
>cancel the semi-annual
>pirates-dropping-big-rocks-on-virus-infested-robots-discussing-economics
>discussion...: )

To be fair, a lot of good roleplaying stuff has come out of the Great
Piracy Debate of 1997-8 - I am thinking of Walt Smith's stuff in
particular. His first-person interview of the emigre noble, still fighting
the Revolution from his light cruiser-turned-pirate was brilliant, IMO. I
might take up the cudgels in favour of the pirate-chasers at most
opportunities, but I respect people who make a workable case for piracy :)

The occasional economics debates are needed IMO - the economics and trade
rules in most of Traveller are very, very badly broken, and this annoys me
at least - I think Trav should be not only have a hard(ish) science
background, but also hard(ish) social science background.

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 18:34:55
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

I tried to be too subtle, and to write email before coffee.

The link was groups who *thought* they had the support of 'the people', and
found out they were wrong.

All of them were, in the end, crippled by support that was too sectional,
too diffuse or ethnically based.

Sorry for the confusion ... 

By the way, I for one would like to see Andrew Vallance repost his articles
on the Ine Givar.

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:03:49 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

Date sent:      	Wed, 07 Oct 1998 18:34:55
From:           	Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>

>By the way, I for one would like to see Andrew Vallance repost his articles
>on the Ine Givar.

Sorry can't, they're now the property of SJG. :*<

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:20:21 +0100
From: "BDS Training & Consultancy Limited" <info@bds-training.co.uk>
Subject: RE: Blank Subsector Map

Could you possibly send me  one too in BMP format.

Regards

Bryan

Bryan@bds-training.co.uk

- -----Original Message-----
From:	owner-traveller@lists.MPGN.COM [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.MPGN.COM]
On Behalf Of steve daniels
Sent:	05 October 1998 19:49
To:	traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject:	Re: Blank Subsector Map





Mike Basinger wrote:

> I'm looking for a blank subsector map in a editable graphical format (bmp,
gif, etc...). Does anyone know where I can find one?
>
> Mike

I've got some.  Which format would you prefer?

Bloo

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 02:31:07 -0700
From: Joel Pratt <jpratt@ucla.edu>
Subject: Book 0: Understanding (GURPS) Traveller

Many of the criticisms aimed at GT seem to come from a fundamental
misunderstanding of what GT is for.

GURPS sourcebooks have two primary audiences:
1) Players/refs who already play GURPS and want to expand their campaigns.
This group is well served by GT because GT nicely describes the Third
Imperium, its history, organization, technology, starships, types of
characters and campaigns. Vehicle design rules are not included because
GURPS already has a set of vehicle rules (VEHICLES). Psionics are not
covered because they are in the basic rulebook (more complete rules for Psi
than appeared in *all* Traveller rulesets and supplements until T4's
Psionic Institutes); thoroughly complete rules are in GURPS PSIONICS.
System creation, planetary mapping, and exotic environment rules were
published a decade ago in the award-winning SPACE. To repeat these rules in
GT would not be well received by existing GURPS players.

2) Refs/players who use another RPG system and want to expand their campaigns.
This audience (which is probably larger than the first) is also well served
by GT because GT nicely describes the Third Imperium, its history,
organization, technology, starships, types of characters and campaigns. The
system they are using (Fading Suns, Alternity, Trinity, Space Opera, Star
Wars, etc.) presumably includes rules for character creation, combat,
psionics, vehicles, and planet design. Even pre-existing Traveller players
will find GT to be of use. It's the best one-volume explanation of the
Traveller campaign setting ever printed, and it's the *only* in-print
source of information for the classic c. 1100 Traveller setting.

GT was never intended as a standalone game. GURPS Traveller is intended as
a supplement for, you guessed it, GURPS.  That's why it's called "GURPS
Traveller" and not "Traveller". The standalone version is TRAVELLER 4th
Edition, published by Imperium Games (corporate motto: "Traveller players
are so stupid they'll buy ANYTHING!"). GT was established as a way of
expanding the Traveller audience (to GURPS players) as well as creating an
alternate rules set for players who might want to use it. It is very
similar to White Wolf's licensing of their Vampire/Werewolf/Mage games to
GURPS. Somehow, Vampire players were able to figure out that GURPS Vampire
was not a standalone game (the standalone game was called Vampire and it
was sold by White Wolf) - why can't certain Traveller players?

GT was also never intended as an introductory game. GURPS is very
intentionally positioned as an 'advanced' role-playing system, presuming a
certain level of experience from its referees and players. Note the lack of
"What is Roleplaying" or "How to be a good referee" chapters or
introductory adventures in the core rulebook. Compare to Basic D&D and Star
Wars, which are aimed at newly-minted RPGers.

To criticise GT for missing features present in other GURPS books, not
being standalone, or not catering to new RPGers is to miss the point
completely.

(I also wonder at those who claim that GT is not really Traveller because
it doesn't feel like proper Traveller mechanics. I can only ask: which
ones? There were at least *5* different and largely incompatable sets of
traditional mechanics for Traveller, not to mention the changes in the
basic assumptions of the game universe (AI, Heplar, Fusion+, jump torps,
max ship size, etc.))

- --Joel Pratt
jpratt@ucla.edu

"Bill Clinton does not have the moral fiber to be a mass murderer."
 -- Nobel Peace Prize recipient Dr. Henry Kissinger, Spring 1997

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 09:39:26 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Limits to tech advancement

On Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:39:27 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:27:39 +0200 (METDST)
>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
>Subject: Limits to tech advancement
>
>Charles Prevatte writes:
>
>>>That speed will not continue.  It is "canon" that tech slows down big time
>>>and that we're in an unusual advancement curve.  In fact, tech advancement
>>>slows to a snails pace.
>> 
>> Pardon?  What canon?  Where does it say that?
>
>Traveller history shows that it takes the 3rd Imperium 300-400 years per
>step to get from TL 12 to 15 (but 15 to 16 apparently only takes a bit
>more than a century). There are two possible explanations for the rapid
>advancement of technology on Terra from TL 4 to 9. Either each TL
>advancement usually takes centuries and the spurt on Terra is a freak
>occurrence or the advancement to TL 9 is ordinary enough, but hits some
>sort of "wall" when you get to TL 10 or thereabouts. In either case the
>darrian advancement from TL 3 to TL 16 in four centuries is a freak.

<strain> <STRAIN>

<No, I can't!>

Oh well, I was *really* trying to ignore the semi-annual technology debate.

But I *really* can't let this one go.

It is made fairly plain in all the material on the Vilani that they were
*incredibly* conservative ... worse than the Chinese, in fact, and that this was
the reason for the slowness of their technological advance.

It is also fairly plain that the Terrans (and it was Terrans who made the
Darrian experience possible) are *not* as hidebound.

The strong implication is that the Terrans were swamped by the Vilani - socially
and culturally if not racially - just like the Chinese did for their invaders.

You may disagree with this assessment (and I know a lot do!), but I think the
evidence is certainly suggestive ... the Terrans advance (relatively speaking)
explosively *until* they "win" the Nth Interstellar war. Or, more accurately,
until Admiral Estigaribbia stages his coup that crushes Terran independence and
inventiveness in favour of becoming a Vilani Cultural Puppet <grin> (yes, that
was a *deliberate* red rag ... any bulls out there?) ... well, he certainly
*does* crush terran independence, and, *I* think it is obvious that he crushes
their inventiveness, too.

The ROM is scientifically stagnant as a result (ignoring the highly debatable
implications some people have tried to put on T4 stuff referring to the ROM,
which, maybe, shouldn't be ignored ... take your pick).

The 3I is *certainly* stagnant *in comparative terms* to the pre-ROM terrans,
but better than the 1st Empire.

Where would "we" be if Estigaribbia had not staged his coup? Or if it had been
defeated? If the Terrans had forced the Vilani to measure up to *our* standards
rather than being strangled by the dead hand of Vilani conservatism.

I have my opinions, which I know you disagree with ... but its interesting to
speculate.

Of course, the *real* truth is that the whole thing was a plot by Grandfather!
he *knew* that the Terrans would, if left unchecked, "soon" (we're talking
someone at least 250,000 years old, remember!) be a technological nuisance,
perhaps even a threat, to him ... so he manipulated things (an earlier version
of psychohistory) to get Estigaribbia to stage his coup.

In fact, if the truth be known, the reason Estigaribbia died without issue is
because he was actually a cunningly designed android/clone/biological robot
placed in that position *by* Grandfather! (Well, prove he wasn't! <grin>)

>Mind you, no one is claiming that this is a realistic view of how things
>will work in the Real World. But it is the way things work in the TU.

So you have to figure out why. And my explanation is at least based on some
historical experience that makes sense. Not the only explanation, of course
<sigh>

- --- Flame Retardant Underwar ON ---

<cringe>

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:44:15 +0100 (BST)
From: Ewan Quibell <E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:

> Date sent:      	Wed, 07 Oct 1998 18:34:55
> From:           	Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
> 
> >By the way, I for one would like to see Andrew Vallance repost his articles
> >on the Ine Givar.
> 
> Sorry can't, they're now the property of SJG. :*<
> 
> Andrew etc.

Did you get a free subscription the piramid, or cold hard cash ? Do we get
to see them in a traveller product ? or are they lost to the traveller
community forever ?

Enquiering minds need to know .... :-)

Ewan

	Ewan Quibell
	Data Communications Technician        The Game's afoot:
	Computer Centre                       Follow your spirit, and apon
	University of Brighton                  this charge
                                              Cry 'God for Harry, England,
	E.D.Quibell@brighton.ac.uk              and Saint George !'

                                                    Henry V 3:1
	#include<stddisclamer.h>                    W. Shakespeare

	My spelling is entierly due to dyslexia, typoes and poetic license

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 05:14:30 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

Ewan Quibell wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:
> 
> > Date sent:            Wed, 07 Oct 1998 18:34:55
> > From:                 Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
> >
> > >By the way, I for one would like to see Andrew Vallance repost his articles
> > >on the Ine Givar.
> >
> > Sorry can't, they're now the property of SJG. :*<
> >
> > Andrew etc.
> 
> Did you get a free subscription the piramid, or cold hard cash ? Do we get
> to see them in a traveller product ? or are they lost to the traveller
> community forever ?
> 
> Enquiering minds need to know .... :-)
> 
> Ewan
> 
Best bet is to subscribe to Pyramid.  $15/year, for _much_ more content
than a print magazine can carry (updated weekly!).  Go to:

http://www.sjgames.com

and follow the links to Pyramid.

<<snips sig file>>

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 03:28:36 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Running GURPS:Traveller 

At 03:46 PM 10/6/98 -0400, you wrote:

>I don't see this.  Still no star system generation, still no starship
design.  We'll shelve vehicle design for now, even though the LBBs didn't
*design* them, they at least told you the *capabilities*.

Have you even *read* the fragging book?  

The increasingly steamed dberry@hooked.net.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 06:36:24 EDT
From: Thendal@aol.com
Subject: Re: Galactic 2.3

In a message dated 98-10-06 23:17:18 EDT, you write:

>a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz

Do you think you could send me Galactice 2.3 the same way as you're doing for
 "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>.

Thank you 
Thendal

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:47:46 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

Date sent:      	Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:44:15 +0100 (BST)
From:           	Ewan Quibell <E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk>

>On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:

>> Date sent:      	Wed, 07 Oct 1998 18:34:55
>> From:           	Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>

>> >By the way, I for one would like to see Andrew Vallance repost his articles
>> >on the Ine Givar.

>> Sorry can't, they're now the property of SJG. :*<

>Did you get a free subscription the piramid, or cold hard cash ? Do we get
>to see them in a traveller product ? or are they lost to the traveller
>community forever ?

I got (or will get when the vagracies of NZ post sort themselves out) paid in SJG 
products (for me its a better option). The article appeared in The Pyramid last 
Friday. And yes part of the products I choose was a sub to Pryamid (well I like 
to read what I wrote). Now I just have to go through the agony of waiting for it to 
be rated by the readers :*>. I believe the article is compatible with the material 
on the Ine Givar which is in BTC.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:52:17 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

>The guns
>mounted on the iron clads were intended to defeat wooden ships not iron
>clads and the inclads were so overweighted that they sank in a moderate storm!

The "Monitor", for example, carried essentially the largest guns made in
the period, and was clearly designed with fighting other ironclads in
mind; it was still incapable of penetrating the "Virgina"'s armour. 
Armour had advanced past gunnery by a large margin, until later inovations
(armour-piercing shells, rifled guns) adjusted the balance.

Perhaps its just a difference in perspective between Charles and me...
Anyone who's unwilling to admit that defence had outstripped offsense in
(for example) the middle years of WWI must have a flexible set of 
definitions. Similarly, in modern cryptography, if it takes weeks or months
of effort by massively parallel large-scale government computers to brake
encryption that runs in milliseconds on an elderly PC or workstation, I would
say that encryption is ahead (particularly when one considers ideas such
as rapid key changes, longer keys, etc.) It's not *perfect*, but it's
way, way, way ahead.

Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 05:15:16 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: re transponders

>Regardless of the number of
>sensors with enough distance you get below the resolvable angle for light
>for an object of ship size.

Note that you don't need to be resolved to be detected. (For example,
every star in the sky is unresolved by your eye.)

Bruce

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:20:16 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Monitor & Merrimack (Was: Tech advancement)

Date sent:      	Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:52:17 -0700
From:           	bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)

>>The guns
>>mounted on the iron clads were intended to defeat wooden ships not iron
>>clads and the inclads were so overweighted that they sank in a moderate storm!

>The "Monitor", for example, carried essentially the largest guns made in
>the period, and was clearly designed with fighting other ironclads in
>mind; it was still incapable of penetrating the "Virgina"'s armour. 
>Armour had advanced past gunnery by a large margin, until later inovations
>(armour-piercing shells, rifled guns) adjusted the balance.

Okay now Im not disputing you on encryption, but there has to be two very 
important cavets to the action off Hampton Roads. Firstly the Monitor's guns 
were totally untested and she was only allowed to use 15 pounds of powder per 
shot (this is a _very_ light charge for her 11 inch SB guns). Secondly the 
Virgina (ex-Merrimack) only fired shell throughout the engagement. It is quite 
likely that there would have been a very different result if either of these factors 
had been different.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 05:21:45 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: EMS Sensors

>Is it just me or does it seem strange that Active EMS can 'see' further
>than Passive? Personally I think it should be the other way around.

In FFS2, passive sensors do indeed reach farther than active sensors, which 
makes physical sense...although active sensors are harder to hide from.

Bruce

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 01:10:08 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

At 09:39 7/10/98 GMT, Phillip McGregor wrote:

>It is made fairly plain in all the material on the Vilani that they were
>*incredibly* conservative ... worse than the Chinese, in fact, and that
this was
>the reason for the slowness of their technological advance.
>
>It is also fairly plain that the Terrans (and it was Terrans who made the
>Darrian experience possible) are *not* as hidebound.
>
>The strong implication is that the Terrans were swamped by the Vilani -
socially
>and culturally if not racially - just like the Chinese did for their
invaders.
>
>You may disagree with this assessment (and I know a lot do!), but I think the
>evidence is certainly suggestive ... the Terrans advance (relatively
speaking)
>explosively *until* they "win" the Nth Interstellar war. Or, more accurately,
>until Admiral Estigaribbia stages his coup that crushes Terran
independence and
>inventiveness in favour of becoming a Vilani Cultural Puppet <grin> (yes,
that
>was a *deliberate* red rag ... any bulls out there?) ... well, he certainly
>*does* crush terran independence, and, *I* think it is obvious that he
crushes
>their inventiveness, too.
>
>The ROM is scientifically stagnant as a result (ignoring the highly debatable
>implications some people have tried to put on T4 stuff referring to the ROM,
>which, maybe, shouldn't be ignored ... take your pick).
>
>The 3I is *certainly* stagnant *in comparative terms* to the pre-ROM terrans,
>but better than the 1st Empire.

This doesn't explain why the various Terran/Solomani states (which weren't
swamped by Vilani, being outside the first Imperium's old borders) in the
long night and early 3I periods didn't outstrip the Syleans and the Third
Imperium technologically. Nor does this explain how the 3I managed to stay
in front of the Solomani Confederation during the later part of its
membership in the Imperium and its seperation.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 08:48:30 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: GURPS Trav power plants

  After carefully perusing the Starship design system for GT, I discovered a
paragraph on pg 162 which states that a power plant has sufficient internal
fuel for 200 years!  Is this a typo, or just a complete abandonment of one of
the important aspects of every prev version of Traveller?   With 200 years to
operate the M-drive, jump drives are not necessarily needed (if your patient,
that is).  Fuel amounts changed w/ each version, granted; but all the prev
systems had about a 4-week limit to the power fuel (give or take).

Can anyone enlighten me (or care to comment?)

DustyLV769@aol.com

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 08:47:55 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@citnet.com>
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

Andrew,

To, perhaps, relieve you of a small portion of the agony. I read the article
last night (dl'd a copy and snuck  it into work). Very well written piece!
Excellent work! Please let us see more.

Mike Peters, Letterworks@CITnet.com
"For my part, I travel not to go anywhere, but to go. I travel for travel's
sake. The great affair is to move."
Robert Louis Stevenson
- -----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Wednesday, October 07, 1998 7:14 AM
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa


Date sent:      Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:44:15 +0100 (BST)
From:           Ewan Quibell <E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk>


I got (or will get when the vagracies of NZ post sort themselves out) paid
in SJG
products (for me its a better option). The article appeared in The Pyramid
last
Friday. And yes part of the products I choose was a sub to Pryamid (well I
like
to read what I wrote). Now I just have to go through the agony of waiting
for it to
be rated by the readers :*>. I believe the article is compatible with the
material
on the Ine Givar which is in BTC.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 02:14:04 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

From:           	DustyLV769@aol.com
Date sent:      	Wed, 7 Oct 1998 08:48:30 EDT

>  After carefully perusing the Starship design system for GT, I discovered a
>paragraph on pg 162 which states that a power plant has sufficient internal
>fuel for 200 years!  Is this a typo, or just a complete abandonment of one of
>the important aspects of every prev version of Traveller?   With 200 years to
>operate the M-drive, jump drives are not necessarily needed (if your patient,
>that is).  Fuel amounts changed w/ each version, granted; but all the prev
>systems had about a 4-week limit to the power fuel (give or take).

>Can anyone enlighten me (or care to comment?)

Its from GURPS Vehicles. To me its annoying and would probably change a 
few minor points in the background as well; but its not that serious. In TNE and 
T4 most fusion plants carried 1 years fuel (the fuel glupping fusion plants of CT 
and MT are just plain silly), but the limitation on STL were 1) supplies (you still 
have to eat) and 2) the 1000 diameter threshold for thrusters. As long as these 
factors have are still constant there's no real change to the background. No 
more annoying than the loss of fusion guns and repulsors.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 06:20:40 PDT
From: "jim clem" <travmind@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB

- ----Original Message Follows----
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 11:53:02 -0800
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: OFF TOPIC: SFB
Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM

>>
>>Yep, I lost most of my old CT, along with a LARGE collection of
>>wargames, and a nearly complete set of SFB (and you SFB players out
>>there know, thats no small pile of stuff) in a fire.  It'll never be
>>again I fear.
>
>Ouch, a full set of SFB?  That did hurt.  Get replacement will not be 
easy.
>I wish they'd get off there butts and get back into production.
>
>Charles.

Since, until the tiff between ADB and TFG is resolved, there is no
production of SFB... don't hold your breath.
ADB writes and owns the copyrights.
TFG publishes under exclusive liscence and sells to distributers.
TFG has failed to pay ADB for over a year on products already sold.
ADB won't make more til they get paid or TFG gives up the exclusive
printing/distribution rights.
TFG won't pay til they get more product.

mexican standoff going to court. (based upon materials posted by various
SFB staffers to newsgroups and on the SFB Web page).
==========================================
Aye, tis a sad state of affairs.  So in the meantime, I'm writing my own 
version, a merging of what I feel are the best concepts of SFB, 
StarFire, and some other things, into my own game system.  Anyone care 
to get involved?  I'm planning to make it available for free.  And 
trying to arrange it so it doesn't interfere with ADB and TFG's 
copyrights.  We can discuss this between ourselves, or If there is 
enough interest, I can set up an egroup for us.  Lemme know!



Jim Clem, B.S.E.
GM, The Scattered Worlds Traveller PbEM, Where Humaniti Carves out a New 
Home
http://www.geocities.com/area51/dimension/7081/trvpg1.html
Founder and CEO, Diasporan Systems, Inc.


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #908
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 7 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 909



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: FAQ?
Re: Tech advancement
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Missile defense question
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Archbishop Snerd
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)
Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)
Re:Ironclads, the facts...long.
Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Piracy
Re: Point-Based Systems (was GT)
Re: Tech advancement
Re: Transponders
Corsairs, economic analysis (long)

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 07:51:28 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: FAQ?

David J. Golden wrote:

>         Q7: Has anybody else noticed it's hard to break even using the trade
> rules?
>         A7: *THWACK*
>
>         Q8: Can you *THWACK*
>
>         *THWACK*
>
>         *THWACK*
>
>         *THWACK*
>
>         *THWACK*
>
>         *THWACK*
>
>

Yep, another classic post! LOL!

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 07:22:39 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

It's possible, of course, that we're arguing at cross purposes to Charles.
None of us are attempting to assert that there were periods in which there
were perfect defences that couldn't be beaten by any imaginable force under
any imaginable circumstances - just that there were periods in which 
defence was (significantly) ahead, so that given balanced cost/resources/
forces/etc. attacks would have little effect (infantry in WWI, 
guns vs ironclads, NSA vs PGP) unless the attacker could expend 
significantly higher resources. 

Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 10:28:19 -0400
From: Ethan Henry <egh@klg.com>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> wrote:
>
> Traveller history shows that it takes the 3rd Imperium 300-400 years per
> step to get from TL 12 to 15 (but 15 to 16 apparently only takes a bit
> more than a century). There are two possible explanations for the rapid
> advancement of technology on Terra from TL 4 to 9. Either each TL
> advancement usually takes centuries and the spurt on Terra is a freak
> occurrence or the advancement to TL 9 is ordinary enough, but hits some
> sort of "wall" when you get to TL 10 or thereabouts. In either case the
> darrian advancement from TL 3 to TL 16 in four centuries is a freak.

Well, one could argue that the amount of time it takes to advance by one
TL is proportional to the amount of people making the change... The
Vilani
got to TL 9 or 10 probably as quickly as Terra did, but then they
started 
expanding, which makes it harder to advance en masse.

I think the TL 15 -> TL 16 thing around 1120 (or whenever G:T is set) is 
due to a few pockets of TL 16 technology arising in combination with
the reasonably well-developed communications network present in the 3I.

The First Imperium had to contend with subjugating minor races, long
travel
times and a rapidly growing population base, all of which make it
difficult
to chuck out all your crappy old equipment in favour of new stuff.

The Terrans, during the Interstellar Wars, advanced relatively rapidly
to TL
12 or so (don't start that old flame war again!!!). Most societies
caught up
in large wars tend to accelerate their technological advancement, as
things
are getting replaced all the time due to damage anyway.

> Mind you, no one is claiming that this is a realistic view of how things
> will work in the Real World. But it is the way things work in the TU.

I don't think it's horribly unrealistic.

- --
Ethan Henry                                            egh@klg.com
Java Evangelist, KL Group                       http://www.klg.com

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 10:39:01 -0400
From: Ethan Henry <egh@klg.com>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor) wrote:
> So you have to figure out why. And my explanation is at least based on some
> historical experience that makes sense. Not the only explanation, of course
> <sigh>
> 
> - --- Flame Retardant Underwar ON ---
> 
> <cringe>
> 
> Phil

Phil! What's with the persecution complex? Your explanation suits me
fine.

Now, I think the Vilani have legitimate reasons for being
technologically 
conservative and that it's not just some wierd, arbitrary cultural value
they picked off a table in the 'World Builder's Handbook', but aside
from
that, it's a perfectly fine, reasonable explanation.

Furrfu.
- --
Ethan Henry                                            egh@klg.com
Java Evangelist, KL Group                       http://www.klg.com

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 07:52:17 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Missile defense question

>From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: Missile defense question
...
>ObTraveller: Anti-missile missiles? Is this even possible?

  Probably - even a small warship can deploy fighters to function as
forward elements in its' own miniature task force/escort array. Even
worse, you probably can design remote laser drones (a la 2300 AD) or
KKMs (or EMP or fixed plasma rounds) warheads.

  The latter option would certainly complicate things, and might lead
to an equilibrium where missiles become a strike density augmentation
system that has to be deployed fairly close to its' nuke-det activation
range, or that can only effectively engage the outer layer of a defense
structure in a given strike.

  Not that complication is inherently bad, mind you :)

        Steven Hudson

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 07:42:20 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

At 04:27 AM 10/7/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte writes:

>> Pardon?  What canon?  Where does it say that?
>
>Traveller history shows that it takes the 3rd Imperium 300-400 years per
>step to get from TL 12 to 15 (but 15 to 16 apparently only takes a bit
>more than a century). There are two possible explanations for the rapid
>advancement of technology on Terra from TL 4 to 9. Either each TL
>advancement usually takes centuries and the spurt on Terra is a freak
>occurrence or the advancement to TL 9 is ordinary enough, but hits some
>sort of "wall" when you get to TL 10 or thereabouts. In either case the
>darrian advancement from TL 3 to TL 16 in four centuries is a freak.

Pocket Empires gives standard times for raising TL.  Rising from 4 to 8 is
indeed rapid (and cheap!), but each step above that requires massive
amounts of time and investment.
- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:47:33 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: Archbishop Snerd

Douglas Berry wrote:
<massive snip from an e-mail with the subject: Re: re: GT>
>It's perfectly acceptable to lay down the law: no hunteds.  Or to impose a
>group hunted on the party (The Archbishop of Snerd is after all of you!)


Now why didn't s/he make _101 Religions_?!

For those who've *not* rushed out and bought this yet, I finally laid eyes
on it yesterday and bearing in mind my bias (having edited some 60% of the
book), it looks great.


Grovel mode
Grovel mode
Grovel mode


May I also publicly apologise to Steve Daniels who contributed 7 religions
and mysteriously got missed from the credits.  The culprit will of course
spend eternity in a particularly nasty religion's hell.  How about _101
Hells_ anyone?  Don't the Chinese have 7?


Grovel mode off
Grovel mode off
Grovel mode off


As I've seen only brief comments on the book would anyone object to *me*
reviewing it?!  I reckon I can be impartial enough...

Someone needs to make sure Jeff Zeitlin's _Freelance Traveller_ is up on
all the latest!

tc

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 07:48:42 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

At 11:44 PM 10/7/98 +0100, you wrote:
>Charles R Hensley wrote:
>
>> Nice clear INACCURATE info.   I.e. aircraft and helocopters that can
>
>OK so I've only flicked through Vehicles and not read it closely :-) But I
>very nearly bought it as it looked up to the same standard as Arsenal. There
>were a few typos in that too but I still consider it a good book.

To be honest, Emperor's Vehicles was one of the biggest failures of T4.
The lack of Tech Levels for each vehicle was a killer.
- --

+--------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net  |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/    |
+--------------------------------------+
| "Oh, My God.. they killed STREPHON!  | 
|  You Bastards!!!!                    |
|                -Grand Admiral Kyle   |
+--------------------------------------+

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:32:55 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)

Douglas E. Berry wrote:

>>Hm, I see a way out of the problem of dyslexic one-handed 14-year-old
>>streetkids with loads of skills.
>
>In GURPS, that 14 year old can spend a maximum of 28 points on skills.  The
>rule is 2x age.

So? As a player of mine once showed me, give the character a 14DX and a
14IQ, then take 56 half-point skills. That's a load of skills at better
than average for a 14-year old. :-)

Players. Can't live with 'em, can't shoot 'em (although dropping heavy
objects on their character's heads makes for an adequate substitute at
times).

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:38:02 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re:Ironclads, the facts...long.

At 02:19 PM 10/6/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte wrote:
>> 
>> Virginia?  Is that a ship?  Or the state?  As far as I know there were only
>> two ironclads in the cival war.  The ones mentioned above and as far as I
>> know neither ever sank any other ship.
>
>The 'Virginia' is the actual name of the vessel, not the "Merrimack".
>

Tank you for the information.  I was unaware that the 'Viriginia' was the
'Merriback' or that it had sunk union blockade ships.

Charles L.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:38:05 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.

At 11:23 PM 10/6/98 GMT, you wrote:
>On Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:19:55 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>Charles Prevatte wrote:
>>> 
>USS Congress and USS Cumberland were sunk by CSS Virginia.
>
>>The Monitor sank in a _gale_ off the atlantic coast., and if I recall
>>correctly it was due to a hatch either breaking off or being left open
>>accidentally.
>
>Due to her low freeboard, water rushed in through the engine air
>intakes, put out the boilers, and rendered the ship unable to answer
>her helm. Not to mention waves breaking over the turret...
>

Tank you also for the information.  I simple do not have the reference
material here to look up that type of information.  It appears I was
mistaken in several ways but then it's been a lot of year sence high school
histoy.

Charles L.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:38:07 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

At 04:27 AM 10/7/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte writes:
>
>>>That speed will not continue.  It is "canon" that tech slows down big time
>>>and that we're in an unusual advancement curve.  In fact, tech advancement
>>>slows to a snails pace.
>> 
>> Pardon?  What canon?  Where does it say that?
>
>Traveller history shows that it takes the 3rd Imperium 300-400 years per
>step to get from TL 12 to 15 (but 15 to 16 apparently only takes a bit
>more than a century). There are two possible explanations for the rapid
>advancement of technology on Terra from TL 4 to 9. Either each TL
>advancement usually takes centuries and the spurt on Terra is a freak
>occurrence or the advancement to TL 9 is ordinary enough, but hits some
>sort of "wall" when you get to TL 10 or thereabouts. In either case the
>darrian advancement from TL 3 to TL 16 in four centuries is a freak.
>
>Mind you, no one is claiming that this is a realistic view of how things
>will work in the Real World. But it is the way things work in the TU.
>
>

I understand that but what is the relationship between TL and computational
power?  In GURPS it's an order of magnatude (x10) but I have not seen this
related in traveller or any other game in this way.

Charles L.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:38:10 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 08:22 AM 10/7/98, you wrote:
>
>(note : Most of what follows is a re-hash of the Great Piracy Debate of
>1997-8. I am still convinced that Piracy is only viable in the Traveller
>universe during Long Nights, Civil Wars, Hard Times and the like. I dont
>believe it is viable on the frontiers of a stable Imperium, becuase those
>frontiers were all militarized. It'd be like trying to mug tourists near
>Checkpoint Charlie IMO).
>
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: re: Transponders
>>
>>>  What happens if the practice drone (err, pirate) with NO transponder meets
>>>a patrol? (hint: target practice off the port bow, sir!). The desired effect
>>>can be much more easily achieved using a ship's boat or armed pinnace,
>>>especially
>>>as non-starships (or at least small craft) may very well not be required to
>>>use SDG transponders.
>>>
>>
>>They would fight.  Pirates do not want to meet a patrol ship except maybe yo
>>ambush it.  Also what happen when a 400 ton patrol ship meet a 4000 ton
>>pirate?  Whos target drone then?
>
>Easy. If it's alone, it jumps out and reports the location of the pirate
>ship to the nearest concentration of forces - military ships would have
>good enough sensors to see our hypothetical 4000t pirate outside combat
>range. If it has a companion, the junior captain jumps out, while the
>senior captain announces 'Medals all round, chaps' and closes to engage. In
>the greater scheme of things, it doesnt matter if the Patrol Frigate gets
>fried, but any sort of damage will cause the raider problems.
>
>Next, lets have a look at the ecology of a 4000 ton pirate ship.
>
>If it's a Vargr ship, a Vargr with enough charisma can probably get it
>built via public subscription (' Argavid says Join the Gnasher Supporters
>Club, and help Argavid show those Imperials What ... loot, booty,
>*charisma* awaits').
>
>If it isnt, someone is going to have to come up with a gigacredit or so, or
>a State that is prepared to risk Imperial retaliation while either someone
>walks off with one of their light cruisers, or operates pirate support
>infrastructure on their turf.
>

I was thinking Vargr pirates.  You are right about unsupported pirates being
good target pratic for the local navy.  They can only run so far so fast but
with a border to cross...

>If it's a mutineer ship, I need convincing that going to some neutral State
>and selling them the ship isnt a better option (Federation of Arden and the
>Sword Worlds come immediatly to mind ... either or both could buy it off
>the mutineers at 10% of value).
>

Well they could grab a big merchant or two and have all that much more to
sell.  One or two week of piracy before the sell of would work.  It takes
time for the Navy to hear about the problem and they would have one of those
Navy transponders to hide behind.

>OK, so we have our pirate ship. How much tonnage in ships does it need to
>capture each year to pay for food, supplies, expendables and annual
>maintainence, plus crew salaries for the ship, any secret support bases and
>any supporting merchant ships ?
>
>Is this number higher than that which would attract Imperial attention, or
>force the Hortalez et Cie Subsector Director to declare the subsector 'held
>covered' - that insurance contracts will be paid out only for ships
>travelling in 8 ship or greater convoys, with 1 escort of 400 dtons per 8
>ships ? Captains may also consider jacking up their freight rates on
>account of the 'help covered' status (aka 'Lets Amber Zone the subsector
>due to pirate activity'), and install enough fuel bladders for an emergency
>jump-1.
>

How many loads of say a 4000 ton freighter filled with computer chips would
it take?  ONE!  Part of being a sucessfull pirate is intel on the goods.
Spies in ships departments ect.  Vargr are known for this.  See the
Traveller adventure.  A pirate is a great cover for an inside job.

As for how many ships are lost in a sector before problems begin?  That
depends on traffic.  In the city near where I work there are fatal criminal
attacks on a weekly basis.  It 'par' for this city.  Have they insituted
martial law?  No.  The insurence rates have gone up but thats about it.  In
most places where there are insurence companies they are required to offer
insurence to all.  It's the rates that change and even those have caps set
by law.

>Imperial attention is worse. Hunting down pirates is (in my opinion)
>excellent practice for the wartime duty of hunting down commerce raiders,
>so it's a great way to hold an impromptu fleet excersise.
>

Very true.  'YIPE! Imps!  Jump for the border boys! Fast!'

A pirate inside 100 dia. is toast.  A pirate that has not got his H2 tanks
full and a ploted jump deserves to be toast.

>Pirating ships on outbound legs is difficult, as they may choose to risk
>misjump by jumping within 100 diameters, and traffic control presumably
>routes outbound ships well apart. Pirating ships on inbound legs requires
>hanging around within sensor ranges of the planet. This tends to make
>people curious, especially if you dont have a valid sensor signal, and
>arent prepared to answer signals.
>

You need spies and inside help.  That what you use to make it profitable and
lower the risk.  See TA.  Also you use astological bodies to hide behind.

>If the planet cant afford SDBs, they can either make a deal with a friendly
>neighbourhood megacorp (trading rights to customs revenue and starship
>operation for an agreed level of military protection), or find some IISS
>Detatched Duty Scout, spend a couple of megacredits up-arming her Type S,
>and *voila* ... instant Customs Patrol. Heck, they'll probably take local
>kids up for the ride, show em what they know, and write a nice letter of
>reference for the IISS recruiters. It's a good way off a iceball ...
>

Great idea!!!  I love this!  Why didn't I think of this?!?!  Great thing to
use for my group.  It's a totally new idea for a campain!  Free lance space
cops!

>>>  In any case, where is the legal ship, what is it doing, who is paying for
>>>its' operations, and why the heck don't the anomalies indicated by these
>>>questions get it flagged for some serious investigation? 
>>>
>>
>>Doing it's nornal business.  The pirate meet the legal ship at prearrange
>>deep space points as discribed in the traveller adventure.  No anomolies.
>>The legal ship makes deep space jumps regularly and sometimes it meet the
>>pirate.
>>
>
>No anomolies ? No-one notices a ship that sells cargos, but never seems to
>buy them ? Especially when ships have been disappearing ?
>

The legal ship cross the border.  As for always selling that would be a dead
give away.  The legal ship does bussiness a usual...he just supliment his
cargo with stollen goods and sell them far from the attack.  One ship would
be hard press to do this for one successful pirate but 10 merchants...  Have
you ever heard of organised crime.  One military transponder and the pirate
can disappear and move far away as the SS Gaurdian defender of the Vargr
Express Trading Co.  While the merchant ship take the boot back to the Extences.

>While you are figuring the economic level of activity for the pirate,
>remember to add in the time lost travelling to and from the rendezvous.
>
>I'd really, really like to see some hard numbers that favour the pirates.
>
>Ian Whitchurch
>
>

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:38:15 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Point-Based Systems (was GT)

>My philosophy is that you should play a character that is
>interesting to you and the other players...that is FUN.  Give the
>character flaws, sure, but always end up with someone you'd want to
>hang out with...flaws and all.  A character that, not only can YOU
>have fun with, but that will be fun for all the other players to
>play with.
>
>I tell new would-be players that role playing games are mostly about
>playing a role, and staying in character, but that they are games
>too...and like any good game you can win.  The way to "win" is to
>entertain *everybody*, to make the game interesting and exciting for
>everybody involved.  The player and character that does that is a
>winner.  Oh, and before anyone jumps on the "winning" aspect I also
>explain that rpg's are both a team game and a non-zero sum
>game...meaning *everybody*, including the GM, wins when we all play
>well.  ;->
>
>
>

True.  The role playing is the fun of it.

One of my favorite characters was a mountain man guide saddled with a group
of very young knights in a fantacy adventure world.  The knights were loaded
with knightly disadvantage, Vows, Duties, Codes, all required by their
knightly orders.  My guide had only bad temper (A surly old coot), blood
lust, (he NEVER forgave or forgot), and intolerence to tenderfeet (including
his charges).  His intolerence took the form of pratical jokes like NOT
mentioning that a given knight was making his bed in a poison ivy patch.
The guide was the only one with any survival skills.  He was not much of a
combatant though.  Short sword, knife, and bow and 'light leather armor' in
the form of his homemade skin clothes.

Things got interesting when the 'damsel in distress' turned out to be a
runaway brat with magery and our only mage.  The GM ruled that my guide had
little experence with the opposite sex except for those you pay for...  The
young knights had no experience with any female except court ladies and
seving girls.  There were some really comic moments.  Great good fun.  Her
bratships encounter with poison ivy leaves as towlet paper. (One of the
knight's doing as revenge for something she did to him.  (Compusive
behavior: Gitting even.  He got into a lot of troble that way.  Most of it
was pratical jokes though.)  The knight's raid on the brothel.  (informant
gave us the wrong address for a kidnapping rin to side trak us.  The Guide
recognised the place when they got there but would the knights or the brat
listen?  Noooo...  The guide had a little 'talk' to the informat...with a
knife...the informant had a little information he need to screem...)  Saving
a diferent 'Lady' from a fate worse than death...when she did not want to be
saved.  The GM was a lady with a fondness for historical romance novels.  A
very different but very fun game.

Charles L.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:38:19 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

At 11:25 AM 10/7/98 +1300, you wrote:
>At 15:51 6/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:
>
>>Again your knowledge of this era is far beter than mine.  Also your above
>>coralary is also correct.  There is the complication of a non limear aproach
>>to such problems.  Midevil fortifications could not be breached directly but
>>were easily defeated by blockade and sapping.  Tactic beating Technology.
>>The Majinoe Line (or however it's spelled) of the french was bypassed and
>>left to 'wither on the vine'.  The same was true for the Japanese fortress
>>islands.  We took what we needed and starved the others out.
>
>I wouldn't say that medieval fortifications were 'easily' taken by sapping
>or blockade. Sapping was a tricky technique at best, and many castle walls
>were built down onto bedrock. 
>
>As for blockade - totally surrounding any descent castle was often
>effectively impossible, especially a properly garrisoned one, as you have
>to have sufficient strength availible in reserve to be able to stop a
>breakout at any point on your perimeter. You also have the problem of
>supplying your beseiging force (bear in mind that the defenders have
>probably taken all the portable food into the castle and hidden or burned
>the rest). To make matters even worse the beseigers were more likely to
>suffer disease than the defenders because a castle did have some sort of
>sanitary system whereas a military camp generally did not, and this taken
>together with poor nutrition and dubious water supplies is a very good
>breeding ground for nasty bugs.
>
>Also later castles were designed with forse projection in mind, so not only
>did you have to worry about relief forces you had to watch for attacks from
>the castle itself.
>

All true, but it the castle force attacked you outside the castle they lost
the benefit of the defensive position and had to attack your defesive
postions arround the castle.  They would loose more men that the attackers
and not have these men to defeand the walls.  I see this as a valid tactic
only if:

1)  The attacker does not have enough men to take the castle.

2)  An outside force is attacking the attacker flank at the same time.

3)  As a last ditch attempt to escape a castle doomed to fall.

Charles L.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:38:29 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Transponders

>(1) This is very close to what I do at work - fraud prevention for
>outsourced contracts in an Australian government department. We deal with
>1400 seperate contracts worth about $2.1 billion split between about 300
>contractors dealing with about 1.1 million clients for about two million
>payable events per year. We have 4 people in our section, plus a
>theoretical one dedicated staffer in each of six State Offices. I really,
>really think that any world would have the capability to track the ships
>that trade on it, provided it is willing to collect basic records.
>

I have no dought that these thing are true today in a world where the
greatess distance travellable can have records sent in minutes.  What happen
when getting a record from 'next door' takes two week?  What about a
wandering ship that is from two sector away?  It may take a year to get any
responce and two or three years to get a complete responce.

>(2) This is where the IN using civilian merchant ships helps a lot. Hire
>them to 'assist with Fleet Maneuvers' ... they will stay out of trouble
>until their records show up. And if not, well you can always remind them
>that 'The IN Gnasher has a meson gun whose firing port is bigger than your
>ship'.
>

And said Gnasher can be vaporised by the colition of my scout ship moving at
.9c.  What's the point?  With the tech available to the average ship it's
posible to devistate a hemisphere.  

The merchant ship just refuses and jumps out.  If the IN hold the ship,
charge them for your time and expence.  There has to be consiquences built
into the system for abuse of power and wrongfull impressionmant or else each
ship's captain would be kidnapping local girls for their own use.  

Where are the lines drawn?  What is going to far?  What happens when the
captain of that merchant ship is the empirer's cozen?  Or that girl is the
govener's little girl?  Where is the uniform code of military justice?
Where is the basis for military disciplen?

If the IN run rough shod over the civilians they will fine the cost of
shiping their supplies going through the roof and someone up the line will
start to ask questions about them.  Bother the MM long enough and you end up
having to ship your own goods.  Remeber the MM is a power unto themselves in
the TU.  They have infuence of their own.  Are there any canon sources
dealing with these situations?  What are the laws of the empire?  In theory
and pratice as they are not always the same.

Charles L.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:27:20 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Corsairs, economic analysis (long)

I was looking over the 400tn Corsair from Supplement 4, _Citizens of 
the Imperium_, with an eye towards economic viability - as someone
said, these ships wouldn't exist unless someone was building them,
and they wouldn't be built unless someone was making money with
them.

I ran the numbers with the following assumptions:
- --------------------------------------------

1> Crew is getting standard salaries, no bonuses for higher skill levels.
2> Crew consists of Pilot, Navigator, Medic, three Engineers,
     Steward, and Gunner. The Medic, Steward, and/or an Engineer
     can take on a gun turret as needed.
3> The ship is buying refined fuel at every stop, enough to fill the
     jump fuel tanks and half-fill the power plant tanks.
4> The ship must pay for shuttle service at each port of call, at the
     rate of Cr10 per ton of cargo transported each way.
5> The ship is running with a full load of cargo and passengers.
- -------------------------

Note that #3 may not be necessary if the ship can use unrefined fuel
and skim a gas giant - as it may be an ex-military (or paramilitary)
ship, it may have this capability as a Scout Ship does.

Note that #4 may be an unnecessary expense, many highports have
cargo waiting in orbit, or factors willing to pay the shuttle fee.

I admit that #5 is an assumption in favor of the crew, it should balance
out other assumptions made against them. If the ship intends to do
Trading instead of just freight hauling, it should probably give up the
two high passengers it can carry in favor of a couple trade specialists.
If it decides to try it's hand at Exploratory Trade (a job it's pretty well
suited for), it will probably want to carry another gunner and either
a scientist or a trade specialist.
- ----------------------------------

Some miscellanous bits:
- ------------------------------------

Where did the ship originally come from?

As I've mentioned before, there are some things that aren't efficient
on the 400-ton Corsair. Why three hardpoints instead of four? Why
unstreamlined, but with no small craft or vehicles?

As the numbers will show, the Corsair isn't a purpose-built trade
vessel, at least not originally. There's simply no way to make the
economics numbers work out (as I will show). IMO, the Corsair
is a used, modified scout or patrol vessel turned over to civilian
hands through auction or other means.

I designed a Patrol Scout on a 300-ton hull, with the fuel and drives
to provide jump-2, 3G performance even if something (like a cargo
pod or mission module) bumped the displacement up to 400-tons.
This was one possibility - it would be an older design, perhaps a
precursor to the familiar 400tn Type-T Patrol Cruiser from CT.
This would explain the missing hardpoint, and would give the ship
an excuse to have military-grade (if outdated) sensors, and would have
been designed to use a variable-signal military transponder. Even
if that transponder were removed, or otherwise demilitarized,
it should be easier to get a (stolen?) military transponder working
in this ship than it would be in a civilian vessel. 

Another possibility is that the Corsair is simply a multirole ship,
and part of that cargo bay (that can swallow a 100 ton ship,
remember) was originally designed as a hangar for a Pinnace or
Ship's Boat. The missing hardpoint would have to be explained as
a design limit, especially if this is not designed as a purely combat
vessel - the Fat Trader only has half as many hardpoints as it could
have, for example. If the Corsair is a multirole ship, it could be either
military or civilian - a fleet auxiliary or armed merchant.

In either case, I see this ship as a used starship, aging and somewhat
outdated.

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

On to the analysis.

The build price of the ship comes to MCr175.6.  _Citizens of the Imperium_
places it's value at "about MCr180", which is either a rounded figure
or includes the modifications mentioned - variable transmissions,
variable transponder, other spoofing gear. This gear might not be
needed by an honest merchant, but we'll stick with the MCr180
figure for now.

Per-trip expenses (Life Support, salaries and starport expenses as
in the assumptions above, maintenance fund) come to about KCr90.

Income from cargo (at KCr1 per ton), two High Passengers and some
Low Passengers brings in about KCr180 per trip - a profit (before
financing) of KCr90 twice a month.

Now add in the per-trip bank payment of KCr375 to the figures - this
ship, if used in a cargo-hauling role when bought new, will lose more
than half a MCr a month...that's a lot of speculative trading. This ship,
when new, will not be an independently-owned Free Trader ship.

However, _Citizens of the Imperium_ does mention that this ship
(due to age and pedigree), though having an original value of
MCr180, could only be sold for about one-quarter that value. If you can
sell it for that, someone could buy it for that - we'll keep the cost
of maintenance the same (based on the MCr180 figure), but we'll
cost the bank payments based on a MCr45 purchase price.

Your bank payment drops to Cr93750 a month - running other
people's cargo and passengers, you only lose Cr7500 a month...
a better business proposition than a Far Trader, and your ship
(though older and perhaps less reliable) is more capable than
the Far Trader in every respect except passenger capacity.
You could probably even lose some cargo space to a Pinnace
or Ship's Boat - if it travelled loaded, your lost cargo space
shouldn't hurt you that much. A little speculative trading on the
side and a ship like this could make a very tidy profit, as well
as have the legs, speed and guns to access some markets
that might otherwise be too dangerous.

Note that a megacorp or shipping company might want to snap
these babies up if a bunch of them showed up on the auction
block. Even if you only use them for freight hauling (a waste
of capability, but they might have to during slow times), standard
400tn Corsairs bought for MCr45 will give you a 10%/year return
on your investment - that's KCr90 profit per trip, 50 trips per year.

Questions this presents for Traveller Universe building: How common
are used starships? What kind of market pricing affects such starships?
How much is a well-maintained, 40-year old paid-off Free Trader
worth? What effects does it have on interstellar commerce, culture,
and security to have flotillas of older spacecraft inhabiting the spaceways?

Since I like the idea of old ships hanging around - especially in an
area that's been starfaring for over a millenia - IMTU there are bunches
of used ships. I haven't gotten into details yet on what differences
there are between an old, well-maintained ship and a new one,
but there must be some - otherwise people might stop taking out
loans to buy new starships.

"Come on down to Crazy Ishuggzhi's Used Starships, where our
prices are In-SANE!!!"

Walt Smith

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #909
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 7 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 910



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

GT book
Brilliant Lances Movement (was: What I would like to see in T5)
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #908
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)
Re: Tech advancement
Re: Tech advancement
Mapsite (Was-Re: Blank Subsector Map)
I think 2.4 is out (was-Re: Galactic 2.3)
Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB
Transponders on scouts(Question)
Re: Missile defense question
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Re: Brilliant Lances Movement (was: What I would like to see in T5)
Keith "Lost Supplements" Catalog...
Re: Keith "Lost Supplements" Catalog...
Re: GT book
Re: Missile defense question
RE: Keith "Lost Supplements" Catalog... 
Re: Brilliant Lances Movement (was: What I would like to see in T5)
Re: Keith "Lost Supplements" Catalog...
Re: Transponder's true nature

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:48:42 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: GT book

My copy of GT came today....Anyone want to play TCS with the GT rules?  I
volunteer to be the ref....

for practice we can start with a piracy/privateer scenario.  I allready
have one set up, I just need 3-5 players.

those of you from the playtest are welcome back.

then we can go with either a free for all, or 2-3 teams with 1000MCr per
player

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 11:51:27 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Brilliant Lances Movement (was: What I would like to see in T5)

Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au> writes:
>>Especially vector movement like Mayday and BR. I never did understand
>>why BL had to have such an incredibly complex movement system that was
>>not quite vector.
>>Also how about this time having the design and combat systems work
>>together? A silly request, I know.
>>
>snip
> In what way does the movement system in BR differ from BL?  

Brilliant Lances uses a heading system. It _is_ a vector movement system,
and it's even fairly simple (but very poorly explained).

I think that the reason for the difference is that the Mayday system (used
by Battle Rider) ignores facing, while for Brilliant Lances facing is very
important.

After one practice game Shalom and I had no trouble with BL, provided we
played every couple of months to keep our hands in. I wouldn't like to
maneuver more than half a dozen ships this way, but then the game wasn't
really intended for larger battles (judging by the scenarios). (Note: you
can run larger battles, it will just be a bit slow.)

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:46:29 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #908

> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 08:48:30 EDT
> From: DustyLV769@aol.com
> Subject: GURPS Trav power plants
> 
>   After carefully perusing the Starship design system for GT, I
discovered a
> paragraph on pg 162 which states that a power plant has sufficient
internal
> fuel for 200 years!  Is this a typo, or just a complete abandonment of
one of
> the important aspects of every prev version of Traveller?   With 200
years to
> operate the M-drive, jump drives are not necessarily needed (if your
patient,
> that is).  Fuel amounts changed w/ each version, granted; but all the
prev
> systems had about a 4-week limit to the power fuel (give or take).

Actually, power plants in TNE and presumably T4 since both came from FF&S
had a duration of one year. And when calculating fuel space for ships built
with FF&S, the size of the power plant fuel was so infintessimally small as
to often dissapear in the rounding process.

Yes, it is a change..for Traveller. It is consistent with the way Fusion
power plants operate in GURPS. It may also make a lot more sense than the
way Traveller plants operate (I am not a physicist, so someone should
comment on this). Anyone who would choose to putt along in normal space for
300-400 years to get where they are going insted of using their jump drives
to get there in a week is a bit daft in my opinion :) Such power plants
also make things like sublight generation ships and such more practical.
Finally, the sidebar does note that while the FUEL doesn't need to be
replaced for 200 years, the plant itself is fragile and needs annual
maintainece or it may stop working..so it still hits the players in the
wallet.

Chalk it up to being in an "alternate universe" and rest assured that when
T5 comes out, power plants in Traveller will be back to their wasteful,
inefficient selves...<g>

Allen

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 11:58:52 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)

><< 
> Very fine idea, I recognise the p[roblem.  Some sort of ON THE BRIDGE
>rules
> to keep people involved, otherwise a small ship has little to offer a
>group
> of adventurers in combat.  Maybe it shouldn't (BL is very much a wargame,
> howvere good it is), but some more detauil fdor this might be good or
>make
> it impossible.
> 
>  >>
>This is an excellent suggestion.
>
>Marc Miller

Ah, good. Marc, I like this idea too. The "Bridge" system should be:

1) task-based
2) have decision-making roles for the entire bridge crew, not just
dice-rolling for everyone but the captain
3) give the same results as the wargame-style combat system
4) clearly state any assumptions and limitations

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:02:19 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

>Perhaps its just a difference in perspective between Charles and me...
>Anyone who's unwilling to admit that defence had outstripped offsense in
>(for example) the middle years of WWI must have a flexible set of 
>definitions. Similarly, in modern cryptography, if it takes weeks or months
>of effort by massively parallel large-scale government computers to brake
>encryption that runs in milliseconds on an elderly PC or workstation, I would
>say that encryption is ahead (particularly when one considers ideas such
>as rapid key changes, longer keys, etc.) It's not *perfect*, but it's
>way, way, way ahead.
>

Yes and no as far as perspective.  as far as cryptography is concurned it's
a bad example of 'offence' vs 'defence'.  You are not trying to 'distroy'
the message you want to read the message.  By definition decrypting take
longer than incrypting because you do not know how to do it.  So from a
porint of view of time and cost encryption is 'winning' but the message can
still me recovered if it needs to be.  All I was ever saying was that no
system is perfect.  The discussion has wandered pretty far from that point
by now so it makes sence that it's gotten a little confused.

Charles L.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:02:22 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

At 07:22 AM 10/7/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>It's possible, of course, that we're arguing at cross purposes to Charles.
>None of us are attempting to assert that there were periods in which there
>were perfect defences that couldn't be beaten by any imaginable force under
>any imaginable circumstances - just that there were periods in which 
>defence was (significantly) ahead, so that given balanced cost/resources/
>forces/etc. attacks would have little effect (infantry in WWI, 
>guns vs ironclads, NSA vs PGP) unless the attacker could expend 
>significantly higher resources. 
>


Exactly!  My original point was that nothing is perfect or unbeatable.  This
discussion has wandered far form that and gotten into examples that had
nothing to do with the original proposal the Transponders could be forged.
It was asserted the the transponders were unforagable.  I said that it might
cost many MEGS and a lot of man hours but it could be done.  The discussion
degenerated into 'examples' that had nothing to do with the question.  I'm
sorry if I left you hanging.  I was only really following the main point of
the discussion.

Charles L.

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 12:14:57 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Mapsite (Was-Re: Blank Subsector Map)

BDS Training & Consultancy Limited wrote:

> Could you possibly send me  one too in BMP format.
>
> Regards
>
> Bryan

http://portcaddo.com/bloo/traveller/Travmaps/



Bloo

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 12:16:05 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: I think 2.4 is out (was-Re: Galactic 2.3)

Thendal@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 98-10-06 23:17:18 EDT, you write:
>
> >a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
>
> Do you think you could send me Galactice 2.3 the same way as you're doing for
>  "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>.

I think Mr. V. is up to version 2.4.  Don't know about the d/l site, but I
may a zip of 2.4 around.  I'll post if I do.

Bloo

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 12:18:25 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB

At 06:20 AM 10/7/98 -0700, you wrote:
<<snip>>
>==========================================
>Aye, tis a sad state of affairs.  So in the meantime, I'm writing my own 
>version, a merging of what I feel are the best concepts of SFB, 
>StarFire, and some other things, into my own game system.  Anyone care 
>to get involved?  I'm planning to make it available for free.  And 
>trying to arrange it so it doesn't interfere with ADB and TFG's 
>copyrights.  We can discuss this between ourselves, or If there is 
>enough interest, I can set up an egroup for us.  Lemme know!

IMO, I would like to see a ship combat system similar to SFB for Traveller.
 Most of the necessary rules are already written, all that would be needed
would be damage charts for the Traveller weapons.  I'd love to see how a
spinal Meson Gun off of a 500kton Battleship stacks up to a plasma-R.

Later,

Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 12:19:52 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Transponders on scouts(Question)

Reading the transponder debate with intrest, I have a small question...

Does a Scout have a military grade transponder?

if so does a detached duty scout keep its original transponder?

does anyone have some 'canon' information on this? (I welcome opinions as
well.)

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 09:38:40 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Missile defense question

 
>ObTrav:  As a tactical problem, what would be the late-20th-century
>analogue to the standard 6G det-laser missile?  How much more
>performance would be needed to equate to SUNBURN, and how much more
>damage potential would be needed to equate to SHIPWRECK (an apt NATO
>codename if ever there was one...)? 

Aging STYX missiles are probably the analog for the 6G AND missile.
TL13 or so HEPlaR missiles - with around 12G24 performance - are close
to SUNBURN (they could easily be 20G10, making them short ranged but
hard to shoot down, for a closer analog.) Thruster-plate missiles - 10 to 15
G forever - are something like SHIPWRECK.

Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 09:32:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

DustyLV769@aol.com writes:
> After carefully perusing the Starship design system for GT, I discovered a 
> paragraph on pg 162 which states that a power plant has sufficient internal
> fuel for 200 years!  Is this a typo, or just a complete abandonment of one
> of the important aspects of every prev version of Traveller?   With 200
> years to operate the M-drive, jump drives are not necessarily needed (if
> your patient, that is).  Fuel amounts changed w/ each version, granted; but
> all the prev systems had about a 4-week limit to the power fuel (give or
> take). 
> 
> Can anyone enlighten me (or care to comment?)

As far as realism goes...the fuel consumption for GT fusion reactors is
somewhat low -- but most Traveller fusion reactors have insanely _high_ fuel
consumption.  Given that you can recycle unburned fusion fuel, and that we
assume that fusion reactors by TL 12 are fairly efficient, the fuel requirement
for a megawatt fusion reactor should be under a kilogram per year (in fact,
arguably under .1 kilograms per year).

In any case, by TNE, ships tended to have a year or more of power plant fuel.

As far as J-drive not being necessary -- they aren't.  This is a feature of
thruster plates, and not limited to GT.  However, they're dramatically superior
to STL drives.  In any case, your ship is not necessarily going to operate
properly for years at full thrust without major maintenance.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:56:13 +0200
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Brilliant Lances Movement (was: What I would like to see in T5)

>Brilliant Lances uses a heading system. It _is_ a vector movement system,
>and it's even fairly simple (but very poorly explained).
>
>I think that the reason for the difference is that the Mayday system (used
>by Battle Rider) ignores facing, while for Brilliant Lances facing is very
>important.
>
>After one practice game Shalom and I had no trouble with BL, provided we
>played every couple of months to keep our hands in. I wouldn't like to
>maneuver more than half a dozen ships this way, but then the game wasn't
>really intended for larger battles (judging by the scenarios). (Note: you
>can run larger battles, it will just be a bit slow.)

mayday didn't use facing but could just as well have it. BL system doesn't
offer anything the BR system doesn't have except headache. In T5 hopefully
there will be an abstract space combat system a la whatsitsname simple
roleplaying space combat or something with movement abstracted like TNE.
Large scale batlles with/without miniatures can be dealt with separately
like BR.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 10:07:03 -0700
From: Sanders <timmon@primenet.com>
Subject: Keith "Lost Supplements" Catalog...

Keith "Lost Supplements" Collection Catalog

I've nearly finished a small catalog that features the front covers of the
supplements, a brief description describing each supplement, and ordering
information. I will be mailing it out later this week. If you ordered LOM,
then I will automatically be sending you a copy. For those who missed out
on LOM, and would like a copy of the catalog, please send me an email
containing your snail-mail address.

Cordially,
Paul Sanders
Clans MacAlasdair, Comyn, and O'Delany 

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 13:39:25 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Keith "Lost Supplements" Catalog...

Hi Paul!

Please send a copy of the catalog to:

Kurt Feltenberger
3400 Eastern Blvd
F-7
York, PA  17402

Thanks!

Kurt


At 10:07 AM 10/7/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Keith "Lost Supplements" Collection Catalog
>
>I've nearly finished a small catalog that features the front covers of the
>supplements, a brief description describing each supplement, and ordering
>information. I will be mailing it out later this week. If you ordered LOM,
>then I will automatically be sending you a copy. For those who missed out
>on LOM, and would like a copy of the catalog, please send me an email
>containing your snail-mail address.
>
>Cordially,
>Paul Sanders
>Clans MacAlasdair, Comyn, and O'Delany 


Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:40:41 -0400
From: "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>
Subject: Re: GT book

>My copy of GT came today....Anyone want to play TCS with the GT rules?  I
>volunteer to be the ref....
>
>for practice we can start with a piracy/privateer scenario.  I allready
>have one set up, I just need 3-5 players.
>
>those of you from the playtest are welcome back.
>
>then we can go with either a free for all, or 2-3 teams with 1000MCr per
>player


Do you mean space combat from G:T? E-mail or what? I may be interested.

Stilleon

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:13:11 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Missile defense question

Dusty wrote:

><< While a modern 5" mount might try to hit a missile, it's unlikely that
> it would - a sea-skimming missile that travels at Mach 2 covers the
> distance from the radar horizon to impact in *seconds*.  >>
>
>There is still generally enough time to at least have a chance at hitting it
>within that time frame...CIWS is an even better proposition, due to ROF (2000
>rounds/min or better).  Even a Mk76 5" gun has a ROF of 1 every 3 seconds; not
>much, but it has a much larger area of effect (burst radius).

This is getting to be a bit technical, but CIWS uses a closed-loop
tracking system. In simple terms, it sees the missile, it sees it's
outgoing rounds, and it adjusts aim to make them meet. This is a viable
solution with 1980's missiles (which come in a about 500 knots, crossing
the distance between the radar horizon and impact in about three
minutes). With modern missiles, the time to traverse this region can be
under a minute. Add to this the problems of manoeuvring targets (modern
missiles don't always come in dumb), and you have a hard problem.

An unautomated system, like the 5", is only going to hit a missile by
chance - and then, only if it's ready and the crews are alerted.

>As I recall, quick-firing 3" and 5" guns were developed in the late 1800's
>specifically as an anti-torpedo and anti-torpedo boat defense.  My question
>WRT the bay weapons stems from this in a way;  you would not normally do this,
>but in a situation where you have 10 laser turrets, 10 repulsors, and 10 sand
>turrets and there are 40 missiles incoming, isn't some chance better than
>none?

Yep - but what would be better, IMHO, would be a hard-kill system
designed to take out missiles.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt.
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk  | To Err is Human
My employers and I have a deal - They don't | To forgive is not Air Force Policy
speak for me, and I don't speak for them.   |   -- Anon, ETPS

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:56:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu>
Subject: RE: Keith "Lost Supplements" Catalog... 

In Reply to Your Message of Wed, 07 Oct 1998 10: 07:03 PDT
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 13:56:44 -0400
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@strauss.udel.edu>

: Keith "Lost Supplements" Collection Catalog
: 
: I've nearly finished a small catalog that features the front covers of the
: supplements, a brief description describing each supplement, and ordering
: information. I will be mailing it out later this week. If you ordered LOM,
: then I will automatically be sending you a copy. For those who missed out
: on LOM, and would like a copy of the catalog, please send me an email
: containing your snail-mail address.

Could you please send one to:

        Jerry Alexandratos
        145 S. Chapel St.
        Newark, DE  19711

Thanks in advance...

       --Jerry

*) Jerry Alexandratos             || "I'm going to try speaking some (* 
*) darkstar@udel.edu              ||  reckless words, and I want you (*
*) alexandr@hawk.pearson.udel.edu ||  to try to listen recklessly."  (*

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:59:28 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Brilliant Lances Movement (was: What I would like to see in T5)

 
> > In what way does the movement system in BR differ from BL?  
> 
> Brilliant Lances uses a heading system. It _is_ a vector movement system,
> and it's even fairly simple (but very poorly explained).
> 
> I think that the reason for the difference is that the Mayday system (used
> by Battle Rider) ignores facing, while for Brilliant Lances facing is very
> important.
 
I've come to find that facing is a lot less important than BL states
(IMHO, of course). I'd actually prefer a system of facing somewhere
between "Batteries Bearing" (HG/MT) and BL. Just having front and
rear facings, and calling front the direction you're changing the
vector would be fine (as long as you use a majority of maneuver on
that movement).

- -Merrick

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 14:12:43 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Keith "Lost Supplements" Catalog...

Yikes!

Sorry, that should have been sent off-list.

Kurt

At 01:39 PM 10/7/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi Paul!
>
>Please send a copy of the catalog to:
>
>Kurt Feltenberger


Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:17:13 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

> >Give them complete specs.  I've acquiesed to this... hell... even let them
> >in RS Omicron (under extremely heavy supervision and internal security, of
> >course).
> 
> I love the way you reply to the bits you (think you) have the answers to and
> ignore the rest. Thank heaven for cut and paste.

It's more than possible i missed the quote below, but I think I was just
ignoring it as irrelevant.  The point i was making was for the imperials to
truthfully give them *everything* regarding the deyo transponders.  Any
paranoid mistrust would be beyond this issue.  As far as the Zhos there would
always be psi and their access to the real knowledge.  People are suckers for
the truth.  How much Zho trade is there in Imperial space?  Actually the Zhos
are besides the point, as they avoid the Collapse entirely.  The vast majority
of the alien polities (including the Solomani Confederation) could well not be
installed w/ Deyo transponders.  It doesn't change the story.  I don't care to
argue about minutia that won't change the net effect.

> >This doesn't happen.  All the transponders record is registry information,
> >etc.
> 
> Ah! I'm sorry, I was under the impression that you had claimed that one
> reason why transponders couldn't be forged was that they exchanged "past
> history" notes about their earlier travels and encounters that was so
> detailed that it was an impossible task to simulate them. That must have
> been someone else, then. I really do have to start keeping back files of
> current discussions.

I have them, but it's rather tedious to go through all those old digests
looking for specifics on a rather long running thread.  Both you and Charles
came up w/ that... it must've been inferred from something I said, maybe.
Chips that have previously encountered each other know that there should be a
reliable mutation that takes place from the time of creation and if that exact
change (according to the date of manufacture) isn't present (as would be the
case in a cloned or copied chip), return a false squawk.  Maybe that?

> Anyway, just what is the information the Deyo chips exchange and how do they
> recognize a perfectly genuine transponder that has been fed false info?

Initially, each chip was educated by a 'trainer chip' and taught contextual
data which included the date, the world on which they were created, and
selected items of history passed on from the trainer chip's memory.  Once
installed they were given "detailed registry information" on the ship they
were installed in.  Any change to any of that information was reported to teh
chip and it would record the information.  Nothing was overwritten or
overlayed, but a complete running history (of the registry information only!)
was kept (and broadcast to other transponders during the authentication
process).

One of the very main goals of geneering these chips was that be able to
recognize "unaltered, untampered members of their specific strain."
Additionally, they were limited to only receiving information from other
authenticated sibling chips. Authentication was done by interactively
exchanging information (both from teh dedicated memory chip in the black box
and their ship's main computer and databanks).   All authentic chips slowly
mutate at the same constant rate that will show an incremental change in their
thought processes over time.  It is the recongition of that change in a
previously encountered chip that ensures it hasn't been merely copied and
counterfeited.  Again, feces happens, so any flaws (due to combat damage,
power surges, deliberate tampering, whatever) merely indicates further
investigation is warranged.  An authenticated squawk could well conceal an
enemy vessel, but the crew does know that the identity received is correct.  

Feeding false info to a chip (from a corrupt port official/whatever) doesn't
ever overwrite existing info.  The chip still knows its past.   False info fed
*first* into a ship...  As you (?) have said (and I believe) there will be
more than just the trasnponder authenticating the identity of  a ship... the
transponder is just the quick and easy "license plate."  Eventually this will
catch up and is more of an anti-corruption issue rather than fallability of
the transponder.  The point is that the info can never be changed.  The info
the corrupt port official/whatever feeds in is never forgotten nor
overwritten.

I've obviously only been paraphrasing and giving smaller quotes from Survival
Margin.  I'd advise reading the whole shabang as I doubt i've done it justice.

> >lol.  How can they be forged?  If you've given a method for forging them,
> >please repost (or give me the date/time of that message).  You have alot of
> >misconceptions about the operations of the chips.
> 
> Well, it's lucky for me that I have such a knowledgable expert as you to set
> me straigth.

LOL. Well you've had at least one biggie (the registry info issue)...  Don't
be so sensitive.

> Now pay attention: 1) You steal a blank transponder. One of those millions
of
> transponders that are made at the Central Repository of All Deyo Chips and
> shipped all over the Imperium. 2) You bribe someone with the required
> knowledge and equipment to install genuine transponders to install it.
> 
> Hey presto! You now have a false transponder indistinguishable from a
genuine
> one.

It will tell the false info but that will never change.  As you yourself (I
think?) have supported,there will be more than just teh transponder.
Eventually the paper trail should catch up to that ship and its transponder
will never be able to cover up its earlier lie.

"For example, the transponder of a stolen starship will not attempt to conceal
the fact that it is a stolen vessel, should the data at its disposal confirm
that fact."..."questions [like] "are we at war w/ that world?" or, "was a ship
by that name reported stolen?" are outside the purview of the SDG-313F
transponder circuitry."  Your specific case would also be outside the purview
of teh transponder circuitry.  

> >Seeing how the Spinward Marches is a backwater, it's more than acceptable
> >a ship or hundred fell through the cracks...
>
> It surprises me not at all that it is acceptable to you. But it is not what
> Survival Margin states: "...over the course of a 12-year phase-in period,
> were retrofitted to all existing vessels..." (SM, p. 71). All existing
> vessels, it says. The 12 year grace period is what it takes to get all the
> way out into the uttermost edges of the Imperium. Including the Spinward
> Marches.

So change the date to 1100 w/ a 12 year phase in period.  My desire is to do
reconciliaton of all the data (while excising none).

> _Citizens of the Imperium_, p. 15: "The ship's transponders can be altered
to
> identify the vessel as having any of a variety of missions and identities."

An incongruity I acknowledge.  

> _76 Patrons_, p. 7: "The registration transponder of the vessel will then be
> changed, new papers forged, and the ship will be turned over to the
> adventurers as payment."

"The registration transponder *changed?*  Can that be explained as putting a
new transponder in?

> _76 Patrons_, p. 12: "...the ship's papers are forged..."

Papers. Not transponder.

> _76P_, p. 13: An adventure involving a scout using his ship to attack a
yacht.
> Another adventure where the PCs are hired to use their ship in an attack on
a
> SuSAG facility.

huh?  The point?  

> _76 P, p. 37: "The patron does not own the free trader, but has stolen it."

huh?  The point?

> _Knightfall_, p. 45: "[The ship has had] its transponder replaced with a
> military grade transponder (one that allows changing IDs from a panel dialog
> on the bridge)."

The Ziru Sirkaa starts using their own system of transponder (if just as a
further show of independence).  Why not Massilia?

2 of 6 ain't bad. ; )

> _Knightfall_ is by GDW and is set circa 1120. I can't imagine what reason
you
> will cook up for why that somehow dosen't count, but I'm confident that you
> will think of something.

After the Rebellion. Vland also started their own transponder system after
their split from Lucan.  Even if just as a further symbol of independence.  I
couldn't live w/ myself if i disapointed you, Hans. ; )

> SOM describes just such a setup. But I was forgetting, DGP products don't
> count, do they?

Nope.  Not in a canon discussion.  Don't get me wrong, it's good, well written
stuff (that i've payed rather hideous amounts to acquire), but like all 3rd
party stuff IMO.

> >Of course, you have yet to prove that the material is not *self-
consistent.*
> >The TTA, for example, is easily explained (and most of the area behind the
> >claw can go for the same expanation). Backwater, not yet in line w/
Imperial
> >regulations.
> 
> "...over the course of a 12-year phase-in period, were retrofitted to all
> existing vessels..." (SM, p. 71). ALL existing vessels, it says.

Yup.  Do you desire a reconciliation of the information?  Or just to bash the
[contradictory] information you don't like?

> >"In the interest of moving this discussion along I'll refrain from the
> >obvious rejoinder."  ; )
> 
> It's encouraging to see that you are not incapable of learning. Give
yourself
> a pat on the back from me.

Done. : )

> >I see nothing in MT (outside of DGP and that is limited to the SOM)
> 
> Until Marc Miller declares the DGP material uncanonical it is just as much
> part of the Traveller background as anything else. And I do not concede that

> Incidentally, _Knightfall_ takes place in Massila, a core sector, in 1120.

During the Rebellion.

> >Only registry information is recorded by the transponder.  And in any case,
> >the transponders aren't used in the New Era.   They're history, man. : )
> 
> This appears to me to be completely and utterly irrelevant to the discussion
> at hand. What point are you trying to make?

Hmm... point... :::mumble, mumble::: ...  They're not used in the New Era.
Nevermind.     ; )

Gary

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #910
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 7 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 911



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)
Re: Transponder's true nature  (not so long)
Re: Fuzzy logic (Was: Transponders)
Re: Subject: FFS/QSDS Sheets
Off topic: RW US Aircraft
BITS / Gencon UK photos
re: BITS and Pieces
Re: Corsairs, economic analysis (long)
Re: Tech advancement
re: Big Brother Transponders
GT EMS Sensors
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
re: Corsair, economic analysis
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Re: Keith "Lost Supplements" Catalog...
Re: GURPS Trav power plants

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:17:17 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Big Brother Transponders ; )  (was:Transponder's true nature)

> >You're getting into areas in which YOU have ZERO practical knowledge.
Dont'
> 
> True, and not true also.  Most of my gaming group are or were military.
> Including SF, Rangers, Airforce, Support services, and one Navy.  All of
> them agreed that IF it came to US vs ARMY the ARMY would loose.

That's a ludicrous scenario.  Yes the general population could probably win
through sheer numbers, but there is nothing that would pit "Total Military"
Versus "Total Population."

> >If we're just rolling through, recon will make sure the path is clear of
major
> >obstructions and we just roll through buttoned up.
> >
> 
> Your recon team would be outnumbered 100 to one on the emenies home ground.
> No recon, sorry dead.  Are you willing to bomb and destroy the assets you

lol. You don't much bout Marine Recon do you? Again, this is premised on a
ludicrous scenario i'm not going to discuss unless you lay out a sensible one,
if you care to.

> I have no idea who gave the BBs the Big brother idea.  It was a topic when I
> joined this group two weeks ago when I learned it existed.  All I have been
> saying was that the BBs could not be that intrusive because the TU sociaty
> does not show the marks of such tight fisted control and that an unbeatable
> BB was not posible.  Those were my only two points that I wanted to make.

That the BB is "unbeatable" is all according to perspective.  It should be in
the realm of believability, especially considering the flattening of tech
advancement, that something could be unbeatable in a limited timeframe (1088
to whenever they would have normally lasted w/o replacement).  Grandfather or
anyone else TL25+ could obviously break them w/ teleporters or ghul-knows-what
tech exists by then.

You wanted a task difficulty... the only way IMO to effectively get a false
trasnponder is to do something like Hans has said and install one and tell it
a lie.  It only knows what its told.  Still, theres no way to make the
transponder lie itself and no way to convince a transponder of authentiticity
w/o a real transponder (even if its a misinformed one).  That's on a
corruption issue and not on fallability of the transponder itself.

Gary

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:17:21 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature  (not so long)

>It would've been a hierarchy of difficulties.  Only by getting by *all* of
> 
> What are they?  Define the problem as you see it.  Remember there maybe a
> nonlinear solution to the situation.

I've already listed them.

"Reread my posts or read the paragraph I wrote above.  I am
geting tired of repeated myself.  You egnore half my comments because you
can not justify your position in regard to them."

> >them, would it be at all *possible* (though still unlikely).  First they
would
> >need to know whats in the black box.  Unknown to the general populace.
Next,
> >they need to be able to "forge" the BB (the chips inside actually).
Cloning a
> >chip will mean it hasn't evolved/mutated over the time since the originals'
> >creation, but just since it's been cloned, and will produce a false squawk.
> >"The chips were not bred for full independant intelligence, but rather to
> >respond in a sophisticed fashion in a few prescribed areas.  These areas
were
> >the ability to communicate with each other, to exchange and update
> >information, and, most importantly, to recognize other sibling chips as
> >authentic unaltered, untampered members of their specific strain.  By
> >additionally limiting the chips to only receiving new information from
other
> >authenticated sibling chips, the information loop could be sealed to
exclude
> >counterfeit data."  SM pg 69
> >
> 
> The 'loop' is not sealed if it includes transmiting the data through space.

You do know how to read, right?  THEY ONLY RECEIVE INFO FROM
***AUTHENTICATED*** CHIPS.   Closed loop is a euphamism.  Sheesh.

> >have them, tries to fiddle w/ something he must role play to get to.  If
> >certain state-of-the-art and top secret items and knowledge are not at the
> >disposal of the players, then certain acts will always be impossible.
> >
> 
> If they require this information/items.  That may not be so.  The egnigma

They do.  That is the underlying premise anyways.

> >> that the attemp failed is ok but you must know how it could be done or
you
> >> are not playing fair with your player and are cheating them.  It is the
job
> >> and the duty of the GM to make the rule consistant and play by them.
> >
> >And I do that quite well. : )
>
> 
> Then explain the traveller adventure.  It takes plave after your grace

How bout where YOU say: "Then we throw out the TA.  "?  You said it, not me.

> period.  They were faking your unfakeable chip.  Were is your consistancy?
> The Marches are part of the Empire.  By your own posts all transponders were
> replaced.  What about the entrees in Citisen of the Empireem?

The "entrees" in "Citisen of the Empireem?"  Never heard of it.  I don't have
Citizens of the Imperium, either.  You're not just echoing Hans are you?

> No, you have to build the tools to build the tools...and once the tools are
> built they can be used to fake the produce of those tools.

Wow.  Ain't science great?   LOL

> >What does that have to do w/ anything?  I'm sure a silicone based life-form
> >could probably perceive whole craploads more in the EM spectrum than we
can.
> >That it can "feel" what a comp system "feels" like.  And that sort of fine-
> >tuned spoofing will be very difficult for carbon-based humans to impose
> >convincingly on such a creature.
> >
> 
> The EM spectrum is LIMITED.  Your chip lifeforms can only percieve what
> their sensors can recieve.  Bandwith is limited.  Type of modulation is

They *EXIST* in that environment.  Apparently the distinction is inconceivable
to you. 

> >> tollerence would cause a false squak but one inside the tolerence band
would
> >> be seen as corrent and legitimate.
> >
> >Tollerance?  lol.  It's the *Thought processes" of the chip that convince
> >other chips of authenticity, not the specifics of what's in the chatter,
but
> >the way the chatter is formed.  Think more of random synapse firing, etc
> >rather than predictable and stable
> >
> 
> First you say they are simisentiant and not they are smarter than sentiant
> life?  Please make up your mind.  If the firing were 'random' them it would

I'm convinced you're losing your mind, are hallucinating, or both.  I've never
said they were anything more than "simisentiant."  I've talked about the
reliable mutation and how the chips are edjucated and how chips recognize
other authentic chips numerous times...  

"Reread my posts or read the paragraph I wrote above.  I am
geting tired of repeated myself.  You egnore half my comments because you
can not justify your position in regard to them."

> not be recognizable.  That is what random means!  You can not design at or
> near the uncurtainty limit.  If the chips can recognise a predictable drift
> in signal patern then human who are far smarter can instament a forgery.  A
> human with the proper equipment can moniter the entire EM spectrum.  There
> are no secret places in the EM spectrum.

I have no clue what you're talking about.  LOL.  "Secret places in the EM
spectrum?"  Sure man.  Whatever you say.

> >Really?  Tell me about mesons and how decay really works, my friend.  You
can
> >make a fortune if you can figure it out (much less jump drives).
> >
> 
> Their is neither time nor bandwith for me to educate you.  You would argue

lol.  I just think you don't know how meson decay really works.  Much less
jump drives... it's ok.  I don't either.  It's all fiction, guy.  Really.  

> that what I was saying was opinion if I said the sun was HOT!  As for the
> races in the above they are simply different animals and very plausable.
> Laser work and they have useable range.  Range is limited in the atmosphere.
> The Nova project has a 'spinal mount' size laser for fusion research.  It
> has been operational for 15 years.  It could blow a 4 inch hole through a
> concrete block wall in a fration of a second.

What does that have to do w/ anything?  You know how big canonical space
combat ranges are,right?  A moderate range is about 300,000 km.  No Real World
laser goes that far w/ an appreciable effect.

> >lol.  They're two seperate things.  Virus is the electronic meta-identity
that
> >inhabits the chips.  But it is *not* just the chip.  Virus is a whole
'nuther
> >program (A TL16-17 to be precise, which matches canon: true AI being
TL16-17).
> >
> >> could not occure inside a working computer and a simple system flush and
> >> reload form backups would get rid of that virus.
> >
> >It would depend on how computers work in the 57th century.  TL13+ computer
> >cores
> >have organic cores and synaptic processing?  There may well not be an iotia
of
> >current computer componets and elements in there.  How does that work?
lol.
> 
> No organic.  Nerual networks.  I have never seen any canon that said
> organic!  The chips in GK are not ORGANIC.  They are silicon based.  Organic

You do read right?  TL-13+ ***COMPUTERS***, not the damned transponders.  

> >In truth, noone knows.  Its *SCIENCE FICTION* man!  When you get your
degree
> >in 57th century computer engineering come back and tell me Virus can't
work.
> >
> 
> Then by this definition YOU CAN NOT STATE THAT YOUR INTERPRTATION IS 
> VALID BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT FROM THE 57TH CENTURY.  Invalid argument.  

No.  You gave a by fiat "so Virus is impossible" according to Signal GK, which
was a moronic statment.  

> A little paranoia is a good thing and you are not paranoid if they really
> are after you. (Grin)

I don't believe in "they."  And if you do, i'm sorry. : )

Gary

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:17:07 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Fuzzy logic (Was: Transponders)

> >I think that the storyline (of the life, death, and aftermath of the Third
> >Imperium) should be justified and reconciled where there are incongruities.
> 
> Funny, that's the position I've argued all along. But you claim that there
> are no incongruities in the first place.

Hmm... i distinctly remember you wanting to excise certain things...  wasn't
this one of em?  Or was that just the *other* discusson?

> >Me and Hans have discussed matters in this province before. He doesn't like
> >TNE and i'm not losing sleep about it.
> 
> You must get most of your excersise from jumping to conclusions. I've never
> said that I don't like TNE. I spent a lot of effort on the Pocket Empire
> mailing list working on a TNE campaign background (and had a lot of fun

Well then mea culpa.  I sentence myself to 1001 self denunciations.  

> doing it). What I don't like are inconsistencies. And I'm not too fond of
> people who introduce new elements that are inconsistent with previously
> published material and then insist that the NEW stuff should be considered
> superior to the old one merely because it is new. My attitude to new stuff
> is that it is the obligation of the author of such to make sure that it is
> "backward compatible" (Unless the old stuff was flawed to begin with, of
> course).

Maybe the old stuff was flawed to beging w/? ; )  Nevermind. 

> >You've removed my meaning from the context it was presented in.  What I
> >admitted was that The Traveller Adventure is just as easily moved to 1086
> >IMTU as it is in the 1100 era, and that the transponders of TTA are the
> >pre-Deyo transponders (adopted in 1088 w/ a 12 year retrofit period).
> 
> You can do that IYTU bacause it is yours and no one disputes your right to
> do anything you damn well please in your own personal TU. That's not in
> dispute. What we are discussing (well... what I am discussing, anyway) is
> what we, each of us personally, think that future authors of official
> Traveller material _ought_ to regard as canon.

Fine.  How bout best of both worlds and reconcile the situation so both are
validated?
Especially as far as the consequencies to trying to keep the official timeline
valid?  Moving the date of an adventure w/ minor impact on the TU at large, or
the general imperial policy discussed in Survival Margin?  Or discarding one
or the other entirely?

> >Being in the Spinward Marches (I presume) and thus a backwater, maybe one
> >can justify TTAs transponders being the old style even in 1105. Ya think? ;
)
> 
> Can you? That would involve regarding one of the statements in _Survival
> Margin_ as untrue, and the moment you do that, you lose whatever moral
> advantage you may have from insisting that _Survival Margin_ is the gospel

You're right.  I'd much rather move the date of the adventure.  (Actually I
don't have it, so its easier to ignore it entirely).

> truth. If you are willing to change one statement in SM, what justification
> do you have for requiring the rest of us to accept the rest of it
> unconditionally? Do you have different standards of the arguments you
require of
> us and of the arguments you allow yourself to use?

Nope.  I desire only to affirm the official storyline and reconcile it w/
whatever obscure trivia can be gleaned from old OOP adventures.

Gary

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:38:19 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Subject: FFS/QSDS Sheets

 "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net> wrote:

>For the record folks, the newest version of the spreadsheet should be out
>RSN...it won't have the BL/BR stats completely done yet (sorry), but it has
>a couple of serious bug fixes. The biggie has been grav compensators and
>(ACK) power plants...they were calculating scale efficiences _completely_
>wrong. Ack ack ack...

Hey Andy,

When you've done that can you put in features to convert to Full Thrust and
2300's Star Cruiser, and also get rid of all the multiple sheets so I can
convert it to Clarisworks 5?

;-)

Dom (being silly)

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:41:15 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Off topic: RW US Aircraft

Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU> wrote:

>During that same excercise, my brother was in a control tower for
>a small airfield. He watched an A-10 fly by below him - and it was
>only a three-storey tower.

When I worked in West Cumbria (in the UK) I got used to RAF Tornados
practicing low level flying. It took a few times to get used to seeing a
strike jet below me. Somehow, I think they conveniently forget the 500 ft
limit (or even the 100 ft one ;-) ).

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:53:39 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: BITS / Gencon UK photos

The photos from GenCon UK and GamesFest 98 are up at my site now, as are
Rob Prior's latest Mac Software.

http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/BITS.html

which links to the pictures (not direct as they may take a while to download).

Rob's material is at http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/RPS.html


Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 23:49:32 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re: BITS and Pieces

Diespamer@aol.com / Fred wrote:

>Apologies if this has been beaten to death...but are the BITS items available
>in the US of A somewhere? I'd like to get 101 Religions and the other
>publications for the (now slowly) expanding Traveller collection...

If you can use VISA or Mastercard contact Leisure Games (
http://www.btinternet.co.uk/~leisuregames ) . If that URL doesn't work
it'll be .com (I haven't got details to hand). They'll need a fax or phone
call to confirm with your first order, but other North American TML'rs have
used them with success. Angus or Mike are both helpful!

I believe Andy Lilly and Peter Newman are discussing US distribution at the
moment.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 11:53:18 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Corsairs, economic analysis (long)

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: Corsairs, economic analysis (long)
>
>I was looking over the 400tn Corsair from Supplement 4, _Citizens of 
>the Imperium_, with an eye towards economic viability - as someone
...
>MCr180, could only be sold for about one-quarter that value. If you can
>sell it for that, someone could buy it for that - we'll keep the cost
>of maintenance the same (based on the MCr180 figure), but we'll
>cost the bank payments based on a MCr45 purchase price.

  The suggestion has been made several times that 40-year old ships probably
aren't working as well as 1-year old ones. IIRC, Steve Rennell and I discussed
this and agreed that a creeping +0.1% maintenance charge (i.e., +1% of ships
original purchase price per decade) could be assessed, and that individual
components could be "reset" to new status by replacing them (per TCS); thus,
a properly maintained 40-year old merchant subjected to regular wear and tear
would be costing 4.1% of original purchase price per year in maintenance. At
this stage it would likely need to be refurbished or replaced - which could
explain why such a ship might be sold off at a _75%_ discount.

...
>400tn Corsairs bought for MCr45 will give you a 10%/year return
>on your investment - that's KCr90 profit per trip, 50 trips per year.

  IIRC, most vessels are assessed at 26 (OTU) or 35 (THUDDD?) trips/year.

        Steven Hudson

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 11:53:25 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Tech advancement
...
>All true, but it the castle force attacked you outside the castle they lost
>the benefit of the defensive position and had to attack your defesive
>postions arround the castle.  They would loose more men that the attackers
>and not have these men to defeand the walls.  I see this as a valid tactic
>only if:
>
>1)  The attacker does not have enough men to take the castle.
>2)  An outside force is attacking the attacker flank at the same time.
>3)  As a last ditch attempt to escape a castle doomed to fall.

  It would seem so, but apparently the element of tactical surprise (or
simply ripping the hell out of working parties or finished facilities)
more than made up for the risk, if the garrison was above minimal strength.
It happened occasionally, so all we can do is try to figure out how and why.

        Steven Hudson

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:37:23 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Big Brother Transponders

TravelrTNE (Gary) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You wanted a task difficulty... the only way IMO to effectively get a false
trasnponder is to do something like Hans has said and install one and tell it
a lie.  It only knows what its told.  Still, theres no way to make the
transponder lie itself and no way to convince a transponder of authentiticity
w/o a real transponder (even if its a misinformed one).  That's on a
corruption issue and not on fallability of the transponder itself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's been my position from the beginning. If there are enough
holes in the system - corruption, incompetence, overconfidence
in it causing people to become complacent about it, etc - then it
doesn't matter how uncrackable the system is. The best lock in the
world is useless if the owner leaves the keys lying around.

These exact holes are just the kind of thing to hang adventures
around. The only adventure I can come up with involving
unbeatable, 100% effective transponder systems involves the
PC's behaving themselves all the time or learning to make lots of
little rocks out of lots of great big rocks with a sledgehammer.

Walt Smith

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 13:48:48 -0500
From: Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: GT EMS Sensors

Bruce Alan Macintosh wrote:

> >Is it just me or does it seem strange that Active EMS can 'see' further
> >than Passive? Personally I think it should be the other way around.

> In FFS2, passive sensors do indeed reach farther than active sensors, which
> makes physical sense...although active sensors are harder to hide from.

In GT, though, Active Sensors appear to have a large range advantage
over Passive Sensors. that matches up with VE2, so it's not an errata.

Looking at this solely from a game play point of view, how does this
strike you? Stay passive and have a smaller area of detection. Go active
and have a larger area, but also give your own position away.  I think
it makes good *game* sense, but perhaps not good *science* sense.

Comments?

Eris

ps.  BTW, Loren could you check out the number scale used in the Space
Combat and Ship Design appendexes? It appears that we have 2 or three
different scales  for ranges, hex sizes, and so on. I'm afraid it's
somewhat confusing to me.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:55:19 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

> The burden to prove or disprove is irrelevant. A conflict in the canon
> demonstrably exists. Forgable transponders are *Official* whether you like
> it or not. The forgable transponder is presented as a given factor. How

The two transponders are not mutually exclusive in the canon storyline.
Obviously the other transponders are pre-Deyo.

> believable the Deyo chip is in itself is irrelevant (My own belief that
> the story is internally inconsistent comes not from the pseudo-science
> babble, but from my opinion about sovereign governments that allow rival
> governments to install black boxes in all their shipping, foreign and
> domestic).

They are NOT blindly putting in the danged boxes w/o a clue what's in them.
Don't be such a tight mother, Hans.  They'll do whatever the imperials require
to enter the huge imperial markets.  The Hivers and K'kree never went over to
the Deyo's domestically, according to Survival Margin.  The Aslan w/ the
multitude of clans and the fractured nature of the Hierate have a damned
serious need for a good transponder system.  The Zhos... in the end, it
doesn't matter whether they take them or not.  I say they would (w/ full specs
and info and the example of teh Solomani taking them), you say they wound'nt.
WOULD TO! WOULD NOT!  Nanee nah nee nah nah!  The Solomani... all it would
take is one SolSec coordinator to become convinced. When he discovers (through
espionage, defection, whatever) the truth of the transponders, he'd have no
reason to oppose them.  In fact, SolSec was well aware of the Cymbeline chips
as SM pg 72 shows.  

> >It is *official* (Survival Margin) whether you like it or not. I'd prefer
> >to justify everything that makes up the OTU instead of discarding things.
> 
> No you don't. You're perfectly willing to discard forgable transponders.
> You just want to keep the bits that you like and get rid of the bits you

Don't put words or intent on me, please.  You're obviously a poor judge of
such.  I absolutely accept a "configurable" transponder as the one that was
previous to the Deyo transponders.  You toss the Deyos out completely.  Just
be honest about it.

> don't like. Nothing wrong with that. I want exactly the same. What ticks

We are not the same then.  YOU want to excise the information you don't like
while I'd like to accomidate all of it.  

> me off is that you want to pretend that your version is the only possible
> one and that anyone who try to get rid of your bits is a silly fool while
> you are a selfless, pure-spirited, objective defender of the One True Way.

Funny, that's how you appear to me.

Gary

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:59:47 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

In a message dated 10/7/98 6:21:23 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz writes:

<< but the limitation on STL were 1) supplies (you still 
 have to eat) and 2) the 1000 diameter threshold for thrusters.  >>

These wouldn't apply to an STL mission:  w/ that much time on a power plant,
you could put in a huge power plant, turn the output WAY down, and everybody
jump in the low berths.  The 1000dia limit only applies to anti-grav
units...thrusters are useful always.

Dusty

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:03:32 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Corsair, economic analysis

Steve Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
..
>400tn Corsairs bought for MCr45 will give you a 10%/year return
>on your investment - that's KCr90 profit per trip, 50 trips per year.

  IIRC, most vessels are assessed at 26 (OTU) or 35 (THUDDD?) trips/year.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's what I get for running numbers at 1am after working late. I knew
that, but my brain thunked at "52 weeks in service per year, minus
two weeks for annual maintenance". Thanks Steve.

The profit and profit-after-payment calculations were on a monthly
basis, so should be OK. The annual ROI, with Steve's reminder above,
would be a little over 5%. Still not bad, and if you have a trade
specialist on board with some luck at speculative trading you'll
do even better.

Steve again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  The suggestion has been made several times that 40-year old ships probably aren't working as well as 1-year old ones. IIRC, Steve Rennell
and I discussed this and agreed that a creeping +0.1% maintenance
charge (i.e., +1% of ships original purchase price per decade) could be 
assessed, and that individual components could be "reset" to new status
by replacing them (per TCS); thus, a properly maintained 40-year old 
merchant subjected to regular wear and tear would be costing 4.1% of 
original purchase price per year in maintenance. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Jumping the annual maintenance from KCr180/year to MCr7.38
would keep your spaceways full of nice, new ships - since the
increased maintenance costs will be as much or more than the bank
payments on a brand-new starship. Since the most expensive
components (Drives, Computer) are what needs replacing, and
they will actually cost more than they would cost new (cost of
drive, plus cost to remove old drive, plus cost to install new
drive, plus possible costs to configure and modify new drive to
fit in your old hull), I don't think refurbishing a ship would be that
much less expensive than replacing it with a new one, especially
if the new ship was a standard model (with the production run
discounts).

Steve again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
At this stage it would likely need to be refurbished or replaced - 
which could explain why such a ship might be sold off at a _75%_ 
discount.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
For the reasons above, I think this is better used as an explanation
for finding lots full of scrapped starships, or salvage companies running
used Free Traders through a smelter.


One of the reasons I love this list - the way we can figure out
how one number can suggest entire dimensions to a TU - in
this case, how the annual maintenance cost of a starship
increases with age, and how that affects what kinds of starships
you see.

Walt Smith

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:12:54 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

In a message dated 10/7/98 9:48:06 AM Pacific Daylight Time, ajackson@iii.com
writes:

<< As far as realism goes...the fuel consumption for GT fusion reactors is
 somewhat low -- but most Traveller fusion reactors have insanely _high_ fuel
 consumption.  Given that you can recycle unburned fusion fuel, and that we
 assume that fusion reactors by TL 12 are fairly efficient, the fuel
requirement
 for a megawatt fusion reactor should be under a kilogram per year (in fact,
 arguably under .1 kilograms per year).
 
 In any case, by TNE, ships tended to have a year or more of power plant fuel.
>>

I guess I should have made my point a little clearer (thats what happens when
you get up at 4AM to take drugs <G>)  It is this:  w/ 200 years on the plant,
what do you use for the M-Drive?  As it stands now, the only fuel going
onboard is for jump drives, which I guess means you can now build a 200 Free
Trader with drop tanks, and allocate that pesky jump fuel tank on the ship
it'self!   Hmm...what would economic #'s for that look I wonder?

DustyLV769@aol.com

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:15:03 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Keith "Lost Supplements" Catalog...

In a message dated 10/7/98 10:11:21 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
timmon@primenet.com writes:

<<  If you ordered LOM,
 then I will automatically be sending you a copy. For those who missed out
 on LOM, and would like a copy of the catalog, please send me an email
 containing your snail-mail address. >>

Paul, please send me one of the afore-mentioned catalogs:

Ed Jenkins
5816 W Washington Ave #A
Las Vegas, NV 89107

Thanks a lot!

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 12:26:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

DustyLV769@aol.com writes:

> I guess I should have made my point a little clearer (thats what happens
> when you get up at 4AM to take drugs <G>)  It is this:  w/ 200 years on
> the plant, what do you use for the M-Drive?  As it stands now, the only fuel
> going onboard is for jump drives, which I guess means you can now build a
> 200 Free Trader with drop tanks, and allocate that pesky jump fuel tank on
> the ship it'self!   Hmm...what would economic #'s for that look I wonder?

Shrug.  I favored having the M-drive use fuel equivalent to a lightspeed
reaction engine (if you assume lightspeed exhaust, one ton of fuel is about 50
ton-weeks of thrust), but it didn't prove a popular suggestion.  In any case,
TNE/T4 starships have the same problem.

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #911
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 7 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 912



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: Transponder's true nature  (not so long)
Re: Subject: FFS/QSDS Sheets
Empty Sectors
Re: Transponder real nature
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Re: Tech advancement
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: JoT
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Re: A Proposition
Re: "Dogs" in traveller
re: JoT
Re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB
Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.
Re: GURPS Trav power plants

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 12:53:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GT EMS Sensors

Eris reddoch writes:

> In GT, though, Active Sensors appear to have a large range advantage
> over Passive Sensors. that matches up with VE2, so it's not an errata.

There are a number of things to complain about with sensors in VE2.  As it
happens, a GT PESA is actually an atmospheric real-time sensor with sensitivity
ranging from microwaves to UV, not a space-based telescope, and probably _is_
reasonably heavier than an active sensor, at least at short ranges.  Of course,
it's debatable whether it's a reasonable primary sensor for a ship...

My biggest objection to the sensors in G:Vehicles is that their weight/cost is
linear in range (and too heavy in the case of small sensors, too light for
large sensors).  They are also generally optimized towards ground sensors, and
somewhat underestimate the range of passive sensors in vacuum (if you don't
give vision the +6 bonus for a PESA in space, a magnitude-0 star is
undetectable by the naked eye; if you do it is merely difficult to detect, but
a magnitude-4 star is invisible).  I've occasionally decided that I want to fix
that, but never wound up actually doing it. 
> 
> Looking at this solely from a game play point of view, how does this
> strike you? Stay passive and have a smaller area of detection. Go active
> and have a larger area, but also give your own position away.  I think
> it makes good *game* sense, but perhaps not good *science* sense.

Not particularly good science sense, no.  Major advantage of active sensors
over passive in space is that they can determine range and speed relatively
accurately, and, because their range is limited, present a _much_ easier
filtration task for detecting things (an active sensor picking up a starship at
a light-second can probably be interpreted with a TL 7 computer, no problem.  A
passive sensor will require significant computer power to filter that starship
out from background noise).  This generally means that an active sensor is more
reliable at short range, but a passive sensor has much longer range.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 20:02:24 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature  (not so long)

>No.  You gave a by fiat "so Virus is impossible" according to Signal GK, which
>was a moronic statment.  
>

No, I did not say that.  I proposed a plausible way that the virus could
exist and propagate.  Please check the previous posts.  I stated that the
virus could not permanately effect curtain types of computers without direct
electrical conections to said computer but could effect hardware based
neural net systems and similer hardware systems that depended on self
recurcuiting tech.  The virus actually is quite plausable if you assume that
the evolution of computers leads to self recuruiting systems like hardware
basis neural nets.  

It is very dificult to change the functions of hardwired curcuits.  It's
easy to change the programing but not the circuits.  The programming can be
flushed and reloaded to disposed of any virus.  This type of system is
pretty much immune to the virus as it can be flushed and reload.  In a
hardware implimented neural net the virus can impress itself into the
hardware making it nearly unremovable.  You could toss the memory and
processor core out at air lock but that is pretty much replacing the computer.

I can only assume you missed the post.  Perhap you or I have missed some
posts and that may be the reason for the misunberstandings.

>> A little paranoia is a good thing and you are not paranoid if they really
>> are after you. (Grin)
>
>I don't believe in "they."  And if you do, i'm sorry. : )
>

There have always been conspirators.  The THEY is not the one big THEY that
is so popular in paranoids' dreams but dozens of 'they' in small letters
trying to promote there own aganda.  Look at the MOB, the TONGS, and the
Yakuza.  There are a great many groups that want to inflict their will on
you.  Pick any political group.  They have great power and lots of money.
They have access to resources that those who are not in their group do not.
Sounds like a consperacy to me or perhaps you prefer their politically
correct name, special interest groups.  Their 'orbital mind control lasers'
are infomercials and payed political ads.  Their agandas are not as far
reaching as the mythalogical big 'THEY' but they can still be an
aggravation.  How many stories have you heard of little people run down be
governments, corporations, or just people that know how to manipulate the
system?

Charles L.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:25:34 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: Re: Subject: FFS/QSDS Sheets

Dom wrote:
>
> Hey Andy,
>
> When you've done that can you put in features to convert to Full Thrust and
> 2300's Star Cruiser, and also get rid of all the multiple sheets so I can
> convert it to Clarisworks 5?

Well, not right away. The very next thing I'm going to do is write the code
so that you can export your design to a CAD/CAM system, and then a series of
production robots will actually build the craft either full size or to scale

>
> ;-)
>
> Dom (being silly)

Hey, I can do that too :)

Actually, right now I am working on:
a) Fixing FF&S sheet bugs
b) Adding BL/BR stats to FF&S sheet
c) Finishing GT sheet
d) Finishing Full Thrust Fleet Book sheet (has nothing to do with Traveller,
but I thought you might want to know).

If someone out there ever comes up with a FF&S -> Full Thrust conversion
system that is formulaic (is that a word)...I'll add it to the sheet in a
heartbeat.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                         |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/ - AOL IM: Iowa Akins |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/ - AOL IM: CMS AndyA  |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+    |
|       vi+ da+                                                        |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+      |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                             |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:36:06 EDT
From: JLAROSEE@aol.com
Subject: Empty Sectors

Hi-
   T4 reserved the Fornast, Delphi, and Zarushager sectors for GM/Player
development and promised nothing would ever be published for these areas.
While obviously under no similar obligation, will G:T and T5 hold to this? It
was a feature (one of the few) of T4 that I appriciated, as any work I put
into these sectors wouldn't be overcome by new "canon".
   If not these sectors, will any be left undeveloped? Perhaps Marc and Loren
could provide insight?
   Jay LaRosee   

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 14:37:43 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Re: Transponder real nature

When the book said "unforgable" it might be interpreted to mean that
it is a task with a level of "impossible" which is not undoable, but
requires high expertiese and enabling technology and such to bring the
possibility within range of the die-roll.
- - Joseph

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:38:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brannon Boren <brannonb@animal.blarg.net>
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Black ICE wrote:

> Best bet is to subscribe to Pyramid.  $15/year, for _much_ more content
> than a print magazine can carry (updated weekly!).  Go to:
> 
> http://www.sjgames.com

But if I only play Traveller, and not any other GURPS games, how much of
Pyramid can be of any interest to me?

Ben

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:35:56 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

It may be a bit late to get into this free-for-all, but...

Although it does not affect me (I play in a pre-Deyo milleu), I find it
difficult to believe that the Deyo chip is:

a) Unforgable.
b) All-pervasive in the Imperium, let alone the universe.

The first one is based upon the notion that given enough time and money,
anything can be forged. Sure, technology advances, making the forging harder
with old tech...but forging technology progresses as well.

I just don't see how the logistics of the second one works. To replace the
transponder in all the old ships...wow, that would be a mess.

And I certainly would not have other governments installing Deyo chips...you
state that they would want to, in order to trade with the Imperium. Well,
the argument goes both ways...would the Imperium require them, and risk
losing trade. Personally, I don't see the K'Kree buying it...and the Hivers
are clever enough that they would figure out the hidden agenda.

I respect Gary's opinion...but IMHO the Deyo chip was a plot device to
justify the widespread affect of Virus...and since I (personally) hate the
TNE era and Virus, I feel that logic outweighs the plot and I don't treat
the Deyo's the same way Gary does. IMTU, of course.

For the record, though. The Powers That Know have stated on many occasion
that the DGP material IS canon...it was all GDW approved.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                         |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/ - AOL IM: Iowa Akins |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/ - AOL IM: CMS AndyA  |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+    |
|       vi+ da+                                                        |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+      |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                             |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:44:42 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:12:54 EDT, DustyLV769@aol.com
>As it stands now, the only fuel going
>onboard is for jump drives, which I guess means you can now build a 200 Free
>Trader with drop tanks, and allocate that pesky jump fuel tank on the ship
>it'self!   Hmm...what would economic #'s for that look I wonder?

Not much of a change here.  If you can eliminate jump fuel in CT
you have a elimated most of the fuel (Esp. for high jump ships)
even if you having eliminated it all.  That is enough to bring
the problem on.  This is a problem more with drop tank than
anything else.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 01:23:21 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

At 04:52 7/10/98 -0700, Bruce Alan Macintosh wrote:

>Perhaps its just a difference in perspective between Charles and me...
>Anyone who's unwilling to admit that defence had outstripped offsense in
>(for example) the middle years of WWI must have a flexible set of 
>definitions. Similarly, in modern cryptography, if it takes weeks or months
>of effort by massively parallel large-scale government computers to brake
>encryption that runs in milliseconds on an elderly PC or workstation, I would
>say that encryption is ahead (particularly when one considers ideas such
>as rapid key changes, longer keys, etc.) It's not *perfect*, but it's
>way, way, way ahead.

I would say that from the time that triremes and other ram equipped galleys
went out of favour until the advent of the rifled gun and high explosive
shells defence has pretty much ruled naval warfare. Similarly on land IMHO
defence has generally been superior to offence through most of history.
Even in WWII, which everybody thinks proved fixed defences to be outmoded,
defensive lines were only broken by massively superior force, unless they
could be by-passed (like the Manginot Line), let alone such strongpoints as
cities. Look at Stalingrad, for example - in both the taking and retaking
of the city the defenders made the attackers pay very, very heavily even
though they were outnumbered.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 13:50:11 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

Phillip McGregor wrote:

> The strong implication is that the Terrans were swamped by the Vilani - socially
> and culturally if not racially - just like the Chinese did for their invaders.
> 
> You may disagree with this assessment (and I know a lot do!), but I think the
> evidence is certainly suggestive ... the Terrans advance (relatively speaking)
> explosively *until* they "win" the Nth Interstellar war. Or, more accurately,
> until Admiral Estigaribbia stages his coup that crushes Terran independence and
> inventiveness in favour of becoming a Vilani Cultural Puppet <grin> (yes, that
> was a *deliberate* red rag ... any bulls out there?) ... well, he certainly
> *does* crush terran independence, and, *I* think it is obvious that he crushes
> their inventiveness, too.

Fundamentally, it's harder to propagate TL changes the larger your Area
of Operations are. The Terra (pre-IW period) are able to move tech very
rapidly because they are considerably smaller. With something the size
of the 3I (or 1I or 2I) maintaining a stable technological base over the
size of the Imperium is going to slow things down considerably since the
infrastructure to support a higher TL has to propogate out from the area
of innovation. You can't simply invent a J4 drive then start shipping
them...you need to train techs, develop the spare parts factories, the
JDrive factories, the factories for the _parts_ for those factories,
etc, etc. The larger the area you need to operate in  the longer it will
take to get all of this in place.

This size also affects IN purchasing trends as well...The Navy has a
gigantic AO..they're going to be really conservative, as in the case of
a war the fleets involved are going to have to live off the local
infrastructure to a large extent. That alone will slow the advance of
technology.

Remember, for Terra, particularly in the pre-IW and IW periods, tech
advances are hugely Defense-driven (as in 'Department of'), and with an
AO it takes nearly a year to get across, they're going to standardise on
fixed designs for a long, LONG time.

Finally, also pertinent, TL, in the main, refers to long-lifespan
equipment like starships. Smaller articles may be available at higher
TLs quite quickly, a TL-15 Tamagotchi probably propagates across the 3I
in a matter of a few years, disp[lacing all those now hopelessly behing
TL-14 ones, but this is _not_ going to apply to starships, vehicles or
heavy weaponry.

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:08:34 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

Phillip McGregor writes:

><strain> <STRAIN>
> 
><No, I can't!>
>
>Oh well, I was *really* trying to ignore the semi-annual technology debate.
> 
>But I *really* can't let this one go.

Gee, Phil, I'm sorry I set you off. I didn't even know you were loaded ;-).
 
>It is made fairly plain in all the material on the Vilani that they were
>*incredibly* conservative ... worse than the Chinese, in fact, and that this was
>the reason for the slowness of their technological advance.
> 
>It is also fairly plain that the Terrans (and it was Terrans who made the
>Darrian experience possible) are *not* as hidebound.

Next time I bring this up I will remember to add: "...and since the 3rd
Imperium nevertheless manages to stay ahead of all its neighbors and
since the Solomani Confederation has not reached TL 30 yet, it is obvious
that the cause for this slow advancement is not cultural."
 
>>Mind you, no one is claiming that this is a realistic view of how things
>>will work in the Real World. But it is the way things work in the TU.
> 
>So you have to figure out why. 

I prefer to keep the lid firmly on that particular can of worms and just
say that that is the way it works. What? Can you prove how long it will
usually take to advance technology beyond TL 9? Can you even prove that
the speed with which we have advanced in the last couple of centuries is
not a freak occurrence? Nope. Let's leave well enough alone. JMO.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:13:03 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

Douglas Berry writes:
>Pocket Empires gives standard times for raising TL. 

But that is for uplifting and bootstrapping, isn't it? It's not for original
research TL advancement IIRC.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 15:14:44 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Re: JoT

>>>>
One of the pregenerated characters included had one skill, and one
skill only: Jack-of-all-Trades at level 3. 

With the "skill enabler" concept, how would such a character be
run? Would you have to give her some default skills to base her
actions off of - say handgun-0, vacc-0, grav-0 and computer-0?
>>>>
My take on the "skill enabler" concept in the situation of JoT-3 and
no other skills is that the character would have been exposed to a LOT
of things, so could effectively have skill level zero in even some
unusual things.  Most characters I have seen rolled up fairly had one
or maybe two levels of JoT.  This person probably doesn't have a gun,
but had a friend who had a gun that they took out target shooting a
few times.  This person probably has a friend who flies airplanes, and
has sat in the cockpit and actually held the stick for a few minutes
in the air.  This person probably has a friend in the Marines and was
invited to a group party where he got to put on battledress and walk
around for a few minutes.   He probably took a "Programming in
Imperial-Basic v10.5" 101 level class (ok, so he was auditing the
class, but he DID do two of the assignments).  You probably get my
meaning by now.
- - Joseph

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:17:49 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

>As far as realism goes...the fuel consumption for GT fusion reactors is
>somewhat low -- but most Traveller fusion reactors have insanely _high_ fuel
>consumption.  Given that you can recycle unburned fusion fuel, and that we
>assume that fusion reactors by TL 12 are fairly efficient, the fuel requirement
>for a megawatt fusion reactor should be under a kilogram per year (in fact,
>arguably under .1 kilograms per year).


Okay, so does someone care to put some real numbers per TL per kW/h for
GURPS Vehicles-style fusion fuel consumption?

Something in me just hates to answer a player's question like "So how much
fuel is in our fusion plant?" with "Oh, 'bout 200 years worth."

MA Lloyd's Vehicles extensions (found on GURPSnet) did not do this, and the
GURPS mailing list was less than helpful when I brought it up about a year
ago. Perhaps it was lost in the melee ... in any event, maybe the TML can
help, since GURPS has been granfathered in via GT.

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:17:47 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: A Proposition

>You mean a SJ Board, like the playtest boards?  Loren, I sure wish I
>could download those messages, read and write my replys off line and
>upload replies.  The way they are set up over there, they are a
>regular pain...so much of a pain I didn't participate much at all.
>
>Set up a real, honest to goodness, mailing list, or send them here.
>That's my suggestion.


This crystalizes my thoughts on the matter.

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 12:43:31 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: "Dogs" in traveller

Leo Hale wrote:

>      Hey Charles, do you own a book (or set of books produced by FASA
> called central casting?

 Make that Task Force Games, by Paul Jaquays, ISBN 0-922335-03-6
This is for Heros for Tomorrow, which happened to be siting right by the
keyboard.
- --
Evyn,
Warleader of the Clan MacDude
Solus Stellamilitia Ludus, 1998 Œ

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 17:28:01 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: JoT

Joseph Kimball wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>
One of the pregenerated characters included had one skill, and one
skill only: Jack-of-all-Trades at level 3. 

With the "skill enabler" concept, how would such a character be
run? Would you have to give her some default skills to base her
actions off of - say handgun-0, vacc-0, grav-0 and computer-0?
>>>>
My take on the "skill enabler" concept in the situation of JoT-3 and
no other skills is that the character would have been exposed to a LOT
of things, so could effectively have skill level zero in even some
unusual things.  
<snip>
You probably get my
meaning by now.
- - Joseph
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think I get some idea.

It was kind of funny...I prepped this adventure to run, and wrote
"resumes" for all the pre-gen characters - UPP, age, profession,
equipment qualified on (but not skill levels). You had the Ex-Marine
with qualifications in Battle Dress and Unarmed Combat. You had the
Belter with qualifications in Starship Piloting, Vacc Suit ops and
Electronics, and so on, a regular half-dozen crack operatives.
Then you had this Reporter, with an age, a UPP, and _no_ equipment
qualifications listed (she was the one with JoT-3).

I had my player group (Twilight2000/Champions/later Shadowrun)
look at just the resumes, asked them which ones they would
like to play if I ran _Tower Trouble_.

They immediately got into an argument - half of them wanted to
play the Reporter.

I was so proud of them....<sniffle>

<G>

Walt Smith

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:42:13 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: GT EMS Sensors

>Bruce Alan Macintosh wrote:
>
>> >Is it just me or does it seem strange that Active EMS can 'see' further
>> >than Passive? Personally I think it should be the other way around.
>
>> In FFS2, passive sensors do indeed reach farther than active sensors, which
>> makes physical sense...although active sensors are harder to hide from.
>
>In GT, though, Active Sensors appear to have a large range advantage
>over Passive Sensors. that matches up with VE2, so it's not an errata.
>
>Looking at this solely from a game play point of view, how does this
>strike you? Stay passive and have a smaller area of detection. Go active
>and have a larger area, but also give your own position away.  I think
>it makes good *game* sense, but perhaps not good *science* sense.
>
>Comments?

Actually, now that David Pulver has been spotted on the TML, maybe we can
have some meeting of the minds when it comes to things sensory. The
differences between Bruce's DSR and GURPS Vehicles are pretty striking (at
least to me -- but maybe I am getting confused by all the range/speed
modifiers). I have the highest respect for David's research abilities, but
an even higher respect for Bruce's professional opinion (so guess which
sensor rules I've been using). Hey Bruce, any chance of a GURPS version of
the DSR? ;-)

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:46:45 -0400
From: "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB

I'd love to help. What do you have so far?
- -----Original Message-----
From: jim clem <travmind@hotmail.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Wednesday, October 07, 1998 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB


>
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 11:53:02 -0800
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
>Subject: OFF TOPIC: SFB
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>
>>>
>>>Yep, I lost most of my old CT, along with a LARGE collection of
>>>wargames, and a nearly complete set of SFB (and you SFB players out
>>>there know, thats no small pile of stuff) in a fire.  It'll never be
>>>again I fear.
>>
>>Ouch, a full set of SFB?  That did hurt.  Get replacement will not be 
>easy.
>>I wish they'd get off there butts and get back into production.
>>
>>Charles.
>
>Since, until the tiff between ADB and TFG is resolved, there is no
>production of SFB... don't hold your breath.
>ADB writes and owns the copyrights.
>TFG publishes under exclusive liscence and sells to distributers.
>TFG has failed to pay ADB for over a year on products already sold.
>ADB won't make more til they get paid or TFG gives up the exclusive
>printing/distribution rights.
>TFG won't pay til they get more product.
>
>mexican standoff going to court. (based upon materials posted by various
>SFB staffers to newsgroups and on the SFB Web page).
>==========================================
>Aye, tis a sad state of affairs.  So in the meantime, I'm writing my own 
>version, a merging of what I feel are the best concepts of SFB, 
>StarFire, and some other things, into my own game system.  Anyone care 
>to get involved?  I'm planning to make it available for free.  And 
>trying to arrange it so it doesn't interfere with ADB and TFG's 
>copyrights.  We can discuss this between ourselves, or If there is 
>enough interest, I can set up an egroup for us.  Lemme know!
>
>
>
>Jim Clem, B.S.E.
>GM, The Scattered Worlds Traveller PbEM, Where Humaniti Carves out a New 
>Home
>http://www.geocities.com/area51/dimension/7081/trvpg1.html
>Founder and CEO, Diasporan Systems, Inc.
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 14:51:29 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.

Charles Prevatte wrote:

> Tank you also for the information.  I simple do not have the reference
> material here to look up that type of information.  It appears I was
> mistaken in several ways but then it's been a lot of year sence high school
> histoy.

yeah, I'm fortunate in that the UofA has a 'site license' with the EB to
use their online resources...make looking this kind of stuff up real
simple.

For myself I had never known that the real name of the ship was the
'Virginia'. 'Merrimack' was all that _my_ HS History had left me with.
(either that or I'd forgoten it. 'What Me forget something?' never...I
have a mind like a steel sieve...;-) 


- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 11:11:19 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

From:           	DustyLV769@aol.com
Date sent:      	Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:59:47 EDT

>In a message dated 10/7/98 6:21:23 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz writes:

><< but the limitation on STL were 1) supplies (you still 
> have to eat) and 2) the 1000 diameter threshold for thrusters.  >>

>These wouldn't apply to an STL mission:  w/ that much time on a power plant,
>you could put in a huge power plant, turn the output WAY down, and everybody
>jump in the low berths.  The 1000dia limit only applies to anti-grav
>units...thrusters are useful always.

Nope, contragrav degrades gradually and losses thrust at 10 diameters, 
Thrusters cut off abruptly at 1000 diameters. Its a change introduced in T4, 
presumably to avoid exactly that problem. Besides in all versions you could 
always do that anyway (its relatively easy to build a ship with years of fuel, 
jump fuel itself will do it).

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #912
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 7 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 913



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
Re: Piracy
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.
Request
Re: Drop Tanks. Was GURPS Trav power plants
Re: fighters
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)
Re: (was "It Isn't Traveller")
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)
T5 Tasks

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 22:15:46 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

On Wed, 7 Oct 1998 09:21:31 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 01:10:08 +1300
>From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
>Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement
>
>At 09:39 7/10/98 GMT, Phillip McGregor wrote:

>>The 3I is *certainly* stagnant *in comparative terms* to the pre-ROM terrans,
>>but better than the 1st Empire.
>
>This doesn't explain why the various Terran/Solomani states (which weren't
>swamped by Vilani, being outside the first Imperium's old borders) in the
>long night and early 3I periods didn't outstrip the Syleans and the Third
>Imperium technologically. Nor does this explain how the 3I managed to stay
>in front of the Solomani Confederation during the later part of its
>membership in the Imperium and its seperation.

Of course it does!

If you accept that the RoM was "contaminated" by the Vilani cultural ethos
against tech, then certain implications can be followed through.

1) The old 1st Empire was in turn contaminated by the Terrans (all those Naval
Officers and settlers following them) and ...

2) Who did Estigaribbia trust to rule the Solomani sphere for him? The classic
principle is *not* to use like to rule like. If you want governors who will not
hesitate to crush resistance, and troops who will not hesitate to follow orders
to do so, you ensure they are from a different ethnic and racial group than
those they are ruling.

Ergo, and following not too distorted logic ... it took 100,000 Terran Naval
Officers to rule the Vilani Imperium, people who were used to following orders
of whoever was in charge without complaint. 

How many would it have taken to rule the Solomani sphere at the time? Especially
in the face of resistance to a coup that is certainly not going to have been
universally popular? (and it is made plain that, while the colonists supported
it, not everyone else did ... and I suspect that, allowing for 3000 years of
distortions, not even all the colonists did, or could be relied on to).

So who do you use?

The Vilani, of course!

They are used to following orders.

You do a reverse swap.

The 100,000 terrans are replaced by a hell of a lot more than 100,000 Vilani and
Vilani troops to support them.

Ergo, the Solomani are still ruled by the descendants of the Vilani occupation
force ... which must have been particularly harsh to suppress all possible
opposition to the coup.

Really, nothing else explains the complete and total victory of a
militaristic/totalitatian coup against a democratic state. There must have been
resistance ... so how was it suppressed?

I really think that my solution is at least as likely as anyone else's.

It also explains why the Solomani remain behind ... the Solomani Party and
SolSec (really dominated by closet Vilani who hid their identities during the
Long Night, and suppress the truth) have a much tighter control over the people
of the Solomani sphere, and *continue* to effectively (if not necessarily
intentionally) and viciously suppress technological development.

The Terrans running the 2I broke down Vilani conservatism *just* enough to allow
*some* advancement ... at slightly more than the snail's pace the Vilani were
used to, and slightly faster than the repressive Solomani regime allows the true
Terrans.

Well, it *makes sense* ... is it true? How otherwise do you explain the lack of
Terran revolts against the RoM?

Phil


- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 17:12:57 -0500
From: Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.

Bruce Johnson wrote:

> For myself I had never known that the real name of the ship was the
> 'Virginia'. 'Merrimack' was all that _my_ HS History had left me with.

Bruce, as a "good old boy",  you could have asked me and I'd have set
you straight. ;->  The unionists never accepted the name 'Virginia',
preferring to continue calling the cut-down and rebuilt ship the
'Merrimack.'  Seeing as the Yankees won, they get to call the shots on
the names...except for Bull Run, that is, for some reason the Southern
name for the first of those battles has stuck. ;->

Besides, the battle between 'The Monitor' and 'The Merrimack' has more
panache, than 'Montior' vs 'Virginia', don't you think? It's not the
first time the name of battle has been what people decided to call it,
not where it really happened, or who was actually in it. I guess, you
knew that The Battle of Bunker Hill was fought mainly on Breed's Hill,
right? ;->

Eris

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 17:30:34 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

Brannon Boren wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Black ICE wrote:
> 
> > Best bet is to subscribe to Pyramid.  $15/year, for _much_ more content
> > than a print magazine can carry (updated weekly!).  Go to:
> >
> > http://www.sjgames.com
> 
> But if I only play Traveller, and not any other GURPS games, how much of
> Pyramid can be of any interest to me?
> 
> Ben

Much of it.  First, Pyramid is not, strictly speaking, a "house organ",
which means they publish non-GURPS material as well.  Second, given that
GURPS _is_ "Generic", a lot of the SF gaming material (G:T or other) can
be ported into your game.  Third, subscribing to Pyramid gives you
access to the play-testing material (thus a sneak peek at whatever G:T
stuff they plan to release).

Besides, they still carry "Murphy's Rules."  ;-)

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 08:41:07
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>At 08:22 AM 10/7/98, you wrote:
>>
>I was thinking Vargr pirates.  You are right about unsupported pirates being
>good target pratic for the local navy.  They can only run so far so fast but
>with a border to cross...

The Imperium has noted this, and there is a *lot* of fleet near to the
Vargr Extents. I suspect that, given any sort of commitment by the IN to
suppressing Vargr, you would have enough IN ships on 'routine patrols' to
make piracy unhealthy.

Now, if the Fleet is busy, or away, or blown up in the Civil War, it's a
different story.

>How many loads of say a 4000 ton freighter filled with computer chips would
>it take?  ONE!  Part of being a sucessfull pirate is intel on the goods.
>Spies in ships departments ect.  Vargr are known for this.  See the
>Traveller adventure.  A pirate is a great cover for an inside job.

The problem is that the insurers know this, and will probably use a heavily
armed fast trader for this job. Check out the Elisabeth class Exploratory
Trader in the THUDDD archives (it's on Craig Berry's page. Do a Lycos
search for THUDDD). It has 2.1 gigajoules of laser output (probably 3 600
megajoule lasers, and three 100 mejajoule lasres for missile defense. One
of those 600 megajoule lasers can ruin most pirates days).

The other options are to escort the ship, or to build a 'fast trader' with
many external grapples for 20 dton launches - fighters in high risk
environments, cargo shuttles in low risk environments.

>
>As for how many ships are lost in a sector before problems begin?  That
>depends on traffic.  In the city near where I work there are fatal criminal
>attacks on a weekly basis.  It 'par' for this city.  Have they insituted
>martial law?  No.  The insurence rates have gone up but thats about it.  In
>most places where there are insurence companies they are required to offer
>insurence to all.  It's the rates that change and even those have caps set
>by law.

The analogy isnt muggings, and murders by and of members of the criminal
class. The analogy would be truck hijackings. If I remember correctly, one
of the law-enforcement types on the list pointed out that the 70s rash of
'truck hijackings' were actually inside jobs. Barratry - theft of the ship
by the crew - is easier than piracy, because you already have in effect
already boarded the ship and captured it.

>
>>Imperial attention is worse. Hunting down pirates is (in my opinion)
>>excellent practice for the wartime duty of hunting down commerce raiders,
>>so it's a great way to hold an impromptu fleet excersise.
>>
>
>Very true.  'YIPE! Imps!  Jump for the border boys! Fast!'
>
>A pirate inside 100 dia. is toast.  A pirate that has not got his H2 tanks
>full and a ploted jump deserves to be toast.

Yes, but the problem is inside 100 diameters is where the interstellar
traders are. 'Chicken stealing' in the outsystem - raiding isolated belter
colonies, stealing sublight cargo shuttles and so on - is a different
matter. Much lower risk, much lower reward ... 'There are old pirates, and
there are bold pirates, but there are very few old, bold pirates'.

>
>>Pirating ships on outbound legs is difficult, as they may choose to risk
>>misjump by jumping within 100 diameters, and traffic control presumably
>>routes outbound ships well apart. Pirating ships on inbound legs requires
>>hanging around within sensor ranges of the planet. This tends to make
>>people curious, especially if you dont have a valid sensor signal, and
>>arent prepared to answer signals.
>>
>
>You need spies and inside help.  That what you use to make it profitable and
>lower the risk.  See TA.  Also you use astological bodies to hide behind.

Astrological bodies tend to be small, guarded (or at least monitored by a
cheap sensor array) or both. Sensible captains also route their exit away
from these bodies.

Also, any intelligence that can by done by and for pirate rings can be done
better by professional agents of Enemy Powers. INI et al (you know there
are 7 different branches of the IISS that deal with Intel matters, and not
all of them report thru Operational Control ?) should be worried by this
sort of Intel gathering - they may not care about pirates per se, but what
if the pirate ring is in fact a front for an Enemy Power ?

>
>>If the planet cant afford SDBs, they can either make a deal with a friendly
>>neighbourhood megacorp (trading rights to customs revenue and starship
>>operation for an agreed level of military protection), or find some IISS
>>Detatched Duty Scout, spend a couple of megacredits up-arming her Type S,
>>and *voila* ... instant Customs Patrol. Heck, they'll probably take local
>>kids up for the ride, show em what they know, and write a nice letter of
>>reference for the IISS recruiters. It's a good way off a iceball ...
>>
>
>Great idea!!!  I love this!  Why didn't I think of this?!?!  Great thing to
>use for my group.  It's a totally new idea for a campain!  Free lance space
>cops!
>

Thank you.

>The legal ship cross the border.  As for always selling that would be a dead
>give away.  The legal ship does bussiness a usual...he just supliment his
>cargo with stollen goods and sell them far from the attack.  One ship would
>be hard press to do this for one successful pirate but 10 merchants...  Have
>you ever heard of organised crime.  One military transponder and the pirate
>can disappear and move far away as the SS Gaurdian defender of the Vargr
>Express Trading Co.  While the merchant ship take the boot back to the
Extences.
>

Orginised crime has it's own disadvantages - a pirate support crew that
commits barratry can presumably expect free pardons from the Imperial
authorities, plus a substantial reward - perhaps even as much as 10% of the
value of the ship they bring back.

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: Corsairs, economic analysis (long)
>
>However, _Citizens of the Imperium_ does mention that this ship
>(due to age and pedigree), though having an original value of
>MCr180, could only be sold for about one-quarter that value. If you can
>sell it for that, someone could buy it for that - we'll keep the cost
>of maintenance the same (based on the MCr180 figure), but we'll
>cost the bank payments based on a MCr45 purchase price.

I dont know how the numbrs would crunch, but if you assume that skill use
on a brand-new ship is at standard, but for every 5 (Gurps, MT, T4) or 10
(CT) years of ship age, the crews appropriate skills fall by one, then old
ships become more viable, without imposing higher cash maintainence costs.

One thing I suspect is that highly skilled crew can demand *very* high
salaries, if crew skill affects ship performance (as it should). If a
captain with Pilot-4, Ship Tactics-4 in CT terms is the equivalent of a
ship 1 G more agile and 50% more heavily armed, then that individual is
going to be in an excellent position to argue for a top-of-the-line salary.

>
>Your bank payment drops to Cr93750 a month - running other
>people's cargo and passengers, you only lose Cr7500 a month...
>a better business proposition than a Far Trader, and your ship
>(though older and perhaps less reliable) is more capable than
>the Far Trader in every respect except passenger capacity.

The caveat is that if you can have 40 year old Corsairs acting as traders,
then you can do the same thing with 40 year old Far Traders.

Once you crunch in currency exchange rates for ships built with 'obsolete'
technology, then ship prices fall further. A TL12 merchant ship in a TL15
Imperium should sell for a substantial discount, but have comparable
performance to a TL15 ship of the same jump rating (probably 90% as
effective, but I havent built any TL15 merchant ships to the template of a
Recollet or similar).

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 22:48:13 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

On Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:11:32 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 13:50:11 -0700
>From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
>Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement
>
>Phillip McGregor wrote:
>
>> The strong implication is that the Terrans were swamped by the Vilani - socially
>> and culturally if not racially - just like the Chinese did for their invaders.
>> 
>> You may disagree with this assessment (and I know a lot do!), but I think the
>> evidence is certainly suggestive ... the Terrans advance (relatively speaking)
>> explosively *until* they "win" the Nth Interstellar war. Or, more accurately,
>> until Admiral Estigaribbia stages his coup that crushes Terran independence and
>> inventiveness in favour of becoming a Vilani Cultural Puppet <grin> (yes, that
>> was a *deliberate* red rag ... any bulls out there?) ... well, he certainly
>> *does* crush terran independence, and, *I* think it is obvious that he crushes
>> their inventiveness, too.
>
>Fundamentally, it's harder to propagate TL changes the larger your Area
>of Operations are. The Terra (pre-IW period) are able to move tech very

Well, yes, propogation may be more difficult.

So what?

This does not in any way affect an individual world's ability to advance. This
is, after all, what happens in the "canon" of the 3I.

>rapidly because they are considerably smaller. With something the size
>of the 3I (or 1I or 2I) maintaining a stable technological base over the
>size of the Imperium is going to slow things down considerably since the
>infrastructure to support a higher TL has to propogate out from the area

Sorry, this is handwaving. The 3I has worlds that are at TL15 and above. Most
are not. This in no way changes the fact that the 3I has TL15 worlds.

This is not what I am talking about at all.

For the sake of argument, I'll even accept it is true.

Still, it doesn't change the *fact* that it doesn't prevent individual worlds
from reaching TL15+.

>of innovation. You can't simply invent a J4 drive then start shipping
>them...you need to train techs, develop the spare parts factories, the
>JDrive factories, the factories for the _parts_ for those factories,
>etc, etc. The larger the area you need to operate in  the longer it will
>take to get all of this in place.

All true, but so what? It isn't the argument.

>This size also affects IN purchasing trends as well...The Navy has a
>gigantic AO..they're going to be really conservative, as in the case of

Make that the *IMPERIAL* Navy and I'll agree, to an extent.

The Terran Navy? In the Nth Interstellar War? Nope, it didn't ... otherwise it
wouldn't have won.

Difficult is *not* the same as impossible. It is *difficult* for a Navy to do
what you say, bot impossible for it to do that.

>a war the fleets involved are going to have to live off the local
>infrastructure to a large extent. That alone will slow the advance of
>technology.

Why? Difficult does *not* equal impossible. This is a Vilani attitude! "Don't
disturb the local TL with our high TL stuff"

>Remember, for Terra, particularly in the pre-IW and IW periods, tech
>advances are hugely Defense-driven (as in 'Department of'), and with an
>AO it takes nearly a year to get across, they're going to standardise on
>fixed designs for a long, LONG time.

Not necessarily the case. Computers are beyond that, even now. A lot of
electronics and (say) genetic research is *consumer* driven.

>Finally, also pertinent, TL, in the main, refers to long-lifespan
>equipment like starships. Smaller articles may be available at higher
>TLs quite quickly, a TL-15 Tamagotchi probably propagates across the 3I
>in a matter of a few years, disp[lacing all those now hopelessly behing
>TL-14 ones, but this is _not_ going to apply to starships, vehicles or
>heavy weaponry.

True, but so what? It doesn't change the fact that the Imperium has TL15. And,
if it had been conquered *properly* by the Terrans (if Grandfather and his
Estigaribbia robot clone hadn't stepped in <grin>) then it would probably be
TL20+ even allowing for the Long Night.

That's my opinion, FWIW.

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 22:51:31 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

On Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:11:32 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:08:34 +0200 (METDST)
>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
>Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement
>
>Phillip McGregor writes:
>
>><strain> <STRAIN>
>> 
>><No, I can't!>
>>
>>Oh well, I was *really* trying to ignore the semi-annual technology debate.
>> 
>>But I *really* can't let this one go.
>
>Gee, Phil, I'm sorry I set you off. I didn't even know you were loaded ;-).

I'm *always* loaded ... you just caught me with the "safety" off!

>>It is made fairly plain in all the material on the Vilani that they were
>>*incredibly* conservative ... worse than the Chinese, in fact, and that this was
>>the reason for the slowness of their technological advance.
>> 
>>It is also fairly plain that the Terrans (and it was Terrans who made the
>>Darrian experience possible) are *not* as hidebound.
>
>Next time I bring this up I will remember to add: "...and since the 3rd
>Imperium nevertheless manages to stay ahead of all its neighbors and
>since the Solomani Confederation has not reached TL 30 yet, it is obvious
>that the cause for this slow advancement is not cultural."

Well, no, it isn't obvious ... for reasons I explained in a post that should be
in this or the next digest.

The Vilani stuffed up the Solomani while the Terrans freed up the Vilani. That's
the reason, basically.

>>>Mind you, no one is claiming that this is a realistic view of how things
>>>will work in the Real World. But it is the way things work in the TU.
>> 
>>So you have to figure out why. 
>
>I prefer to keep the lid firmly on that particular can of worms and just
>say that that is the way it works. What? Can you prove how long it will
>usually take to advance technology beyond TL 9? Can you even prove that
>the speed with which we have advanced in the last couple of centuries is
>not a freak occurrence? Nope. Let's leave well enough alone. JMO.

No, but the speed of advance is indicative ... as are the cultural reasons for
it. There would have to be some huge disaster to change this ... like being
conquered by the Vilani (which I would say the Terrans actually were once
Estigaribbia staged his coup).

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 17:51:19 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.

Eris reddoch wrote:
> 
> Bruce Johnson wrote:
> 
> > For myself I had never known that the real name of the ship was the
> > 'Virginia'. 'Merrimack' was all that _my_ HS History had left me with.
> 
> Bruce, as a "good old boy",  you could have asked me and I'd have set
> you straight. ;->  The unionists never accepted the name 'Virginia',
> preferring to continue calling the cut-down and rebuilt ship the
> 'Merrimack.'  Seeing as the Yankees won, they get to call the shots on
> the names...except for Bull Run, that is, for some reason the Southern
> name for the first of those battles has stuck. ;->
> 
Some National Guard units that trace their ancestry to Confederate units
have the Confederate battle names on their campaign/battle streamers
(e.g., "Sharpsburg" in lieu of "Antietam").  <plug for LAARNG unit>In
fact, IIRC, 1st Battalion, 141st Field Artillery ("Washington
Artillery") carries such battle streamers.</plug for LAARNG unit>

ObTrav:  IYTUs, how far back do your oldest military units trace
lineage?  F'r instance, is there a jump troop unit that traces its
history back to the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment of World War II? 
How 'bout the Glosters?

<<snip>>
- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 08:47:42
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Request

Some time ago, I posted a couple of articles that people seemed to like -
'Small Scale Colonisation in Traveller'.

I have since had my hard drive crash, and I'd like copies (if just to pitch
to SJG to put in something ... at least they *pay* their authors).

Can someone send them to me ? Please dont post them to the list - if you'd
like copies, email me seperatly. If i get more than 5 requests, I'll repost
them, and let people cut and paste.

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 08:56:04
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Drop Tanks. Was GURPS Trav power plants

>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants
>
>In a message dated 10/7/98 9:48:06 AM Pacific Daylight Time, ajackson@iii.com
>writes:
>
>I guess I should have made my point a little clearer (thats what happens when
>you get up at 4AM to take drugs <G>)  It is this:  w/ 200 years on the plant,
>what do you use for the M-Drive?  As it stands now, the only fuel going
>onboard is for jump drives, which I guess means you can now build a 200 Free
>Trader with drop tanks, and allocate that pesky jump fuel tank on the ship
>it'self!   Hmm...what would economic #'s for that look I wonder?

Utterly horrific.

Hans did the numbers a while ago. Trade becomes dominated by jump-5
completely drop-tank equipped ships, and starports become filling stations.

The feel (IMO) turns from Traveller into Bab 5.

My preferred solution is to allow drop tanks, but rule they increase the
chance of misjump to 1/36. This means that a ship using drop tanks will, on
average, be lost after about 70 jumps, or about 3 years operation. This
completely stuffs their required rate of return, but still allows use of
drop tanks on military ships, especially for deep penetration raids (2%
losses getting there will be lost in rounding error as far as  Fleet HQ is
concerned for deep penetration raids).

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:54:17 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: fighters

 "Chauncey Smith" <csmith@ICDC.com> wrote:

>Ok.. ok.. this is the deal... I have on the HIWG cd rom the Ahl stats for
>the BR.  Any way the stats was in a news group post that 7 auroua class
>clippers. and the clippers won.. the point that I find interesting is the
>fighters wheren't used.
>I wonder what the result would be if they used the fighters.

Also, if the AHL could be allowed some pocket meson guns/PAs like those on
the Clippers?

 The fundamental point is that the AHL is a High Guard design, and the
Aurora a FFS1 design.

I suspect that all versions of the Traveller rules for ships have allowed
later designs to out perform early design sequence ships.

If it was under High Guard Rules the battle may have been closer, but it
depends on the Clipper's spinal mount performance - they can make 7 shots
to one from the AHL.

I ran a FT conversion using 15kT Zho battleriders (eggshells with big
honking meson guns) and an AHL, and the Zho's lost two out of three but
made a mission kill. So I can believe the results.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:33:33 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor) wrote:

>We all use CTrav/High Guard or homebrew variations. None of us use MTrav
>or TNE.
>Not one.

YES!

Backfit HEPLaR if you want, and knock out the artifical acceleration
limits, but I would love to see something as simple as HG, even if it is an
abstract re-write of QSDS.

I don't necessarily want HG style combat (although I do want descriptive
abstract non-hex map combat as an option as hex stuff turns some of my
players off).

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:40:25 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: (was "It Isn't Traveller")

Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net> wrote:

>Could be the Darrians testing their Star Trigger 'Lite', the 'Gas Giant
>Trigger'

Nah! That was the Darrians using the Star Trigger to try and *light* the
gas giant....

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:51:35 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> 4. The combat system needs a bit of reworking.
>
>The combat system will be re-worked and be essentially task based. Extensive
>task examples will be provided. I am working on interrupts and initiative.

This was one of the few areas of T4 I (and my group) liked a lot - it is
fast, lethal and the armour rules work. Not to mention the best autofire
rules so fire (IMO). Please don't change it too much ;-)


> 9. A few pages devoted to the history and structure of the Imperium,
> perhaps the map of Charted Space, and a map of the Core Subsector circa
> year 0 and the Regina subsector circa 1100.
>
>OK. Probably yes.

Some library data would be useful *or* a general timeline for the Imperium
in about the same level of detail as the timeline in the M0 Campaign. Or
just use Clayton's?  "A concise history of the Imperium' if he'll let you.
It is an excellent background work and was in an old Digest IIRC.

This is key. The background sells games today - pick up any of the systems
out now (Faded Suns , GT etc) and look at the background levels.

Sidebars are excellent too. Examples I would cite as good quality books
include Legend of the 5 Rings, Faded Suns, SLA Industries, Elric!, In
Nomine and MT).

Add in good art (if only line art) and typesetting and you've got something
excellent.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:42:50 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: T5 Tasks

Marc Miller wrote:

>There was a prolonged discussion of tasks some time back, and a draft of that
>chapter was posted/ made available. It (unfortunately for some) retained 2.5D
>for some tasks. It introduces a variety of task types for various situations
>and has examples. My goal is to establish strong standards for task use and
>make sure they are understandable.

The T5 system for tasks was well accepted at all the events I've demo'd at
for BITS, and went smoothly in the Tournaments.

My own group were sceptical for the first session then adopted the 1/2 dice
and forgot about it's controversy.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #913
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 7 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 914



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: "It Isn't Traveller" 
Thrusters
Re: Brilliant Lances Movement (was: What I would like to see in T5)
Re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: Tech advancement
Military History (was re: Ironclads)
A Way Out? [was: Re: Transponder's true nature]
Re: A Proposition
Re: Tech advancement
Re: Archbishop Snerd
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)
Re: Monitor & Merrimack (Was: Tech advancement)
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Addaxur data (was Re: Addaxur)
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Marc T5 question
re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:19:27 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: "It Isn't Traveller" 

 "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net> wrote:

>Whew! And I thought I was the only one in the world that liked the
>Rebellion! IMO, the best thing about the 3rd Imperium was the way it fell
>apart (from my standpoint as a referee).

Make that three of use then.. Anyway - IMO the CT/MT background is a great
one to play in. I tend to start groups around 1115 to let them see it all
fall apart. It can be amusing when they end up running from ihatei ships
which jump in.

>I sure wished they could have come up with a better way than Virus to end it
>though. *That* seemed to me to be one big cop-out. I would much preferred to
>have a Hard Times-style slow burnout and another Long Night. It seems to me
>that you could get rid of Virus completely and have virtually the same
>intersteller situation as presented in TNE by just using a Hard Times-esque
>collapse. Replace vampire ships with ruthless TED raider fleets, and
>thereyago.

Hard Times is IMO the best ever Traveller supplement. I loved it. It is
what I hated about Virus. All those worlds, truggling to recover to the
heights from which they had fallen being snuffed out. And the whole thing
spreading like ripples in a pond beyond the Imperial borders. It still
sends a shiver through me.

>Hated HEPLARs though ...

I had no problem with them, but I hated the T-Plate being dropped. If you
can handwave grav focussing for lasers I don't have a problem with T-Plates
;-)

>Oh, and for those taking surveys:
>I'll buy all the G:T stuff. I'll read it for fun, and probably never use it
>except as background material (Rebellion Forever!!! :-)

I agree - I've seen the draft we had at GenCon, and I'll be buying the
hardback, but I don't like GURPS much. I still like T4.1's basics.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 10:06:19 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Thrusters

At 02:14 8/10/98 +1300, Andrew Moffatt-Vallanceu wrote:

>Its from GURPS Vehicles. To me its annoying and would probably change a 
>few minor points in the background as well; but its not that serious. In
TNE and 
>T4 most fusion plants carried 1 years fuel (the fuel glupping fusion
plants of CT 
>and MT are just plain silly), but the limitation on STL were 1) supplies
(you still 
>have to eat) and 2) the 1000 diameter threshold for thrusters. As long as
these 
>factors have are still constant there's no real change to the background. No 
>more annoying than the loss of fusion guns and repulsors.

While doing some studies for the last (or was it last but one?) round of
the piracy fl...debate I found that if you start and finish in a GV type
star's system you can actually get quite a nice velocity (as far as
non-relativistic velocities go, at any rate).

Time across Sol's 1000 D limit						
Gravities	1	2	3	4	5	6	
Days		6.9d	4.9d	4.0d	3.5d	3.1d	2.8d
v (m/s)	6.0E6	8.5E6	1.0E7	1.2E7	1.3E7	1.5E7
v (% of C)	1.99	2.82	3.45	3.98	4.45	4.88
Tau		1.000	1.000	1.001	1.001	1.001	1.001

		A/P Cent	Barnard's Star	Tau Ceti
Dist (LY)	4.3		5.9			11.7
Time (Years)
1G		216		296			587
2G		153		209			415
3G		125		171			339
4G		108		148			294
5G		97		132			263
6G		88		121			240

These velocities were gained by starting at one edge of Sol's 100 dia limit
and accelerating all the way to the other edge. Naturally in order to stop
you'll either need a star just as big at the other end, or some other way
of supplementing your deacceleration.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 11:53:20 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Brilliant Lances Movement (was: What I would like to see in T5)

At 11:59 7/10/98 -0600, Merrick Burkhardt wrote:

>I've come to find that facing is a lot less important than BL states
>(IMHO, of course). I'd actually prefer a system of facing somewhere
>between "Batteries Bearing" (HG/MT) and BL. Just having front and
>rear facings, and calling front the direction you're changing the
>vector would be fine (as long as you use a majority of maneuver on
>that movement).

IMO something like if you have 50% or of your acceleration unused you can
face any diriection you like, over 50% on vector change and you face in the
direction of thrust, over 50% in evasion gives a random facing (with an
optional task to be able to choose, I suppose) would work fine.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 12:07:53 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: GT EMS Sensors

At 12:53 7/10/98 -0700, Anthony Jackson wrote:

>Not particularly good science sense, no.  Major advantage of active sensors
>over passive in space is that they can determine range and speed relatively
>accurately, and, because their range is limited, present a _much_ easier
>filtration task for detecting things (an active sensor picking up a
starship at
>a light-second can probably be interpreted with a TL 7 computer, no
problem.  A
>passive sensor will require significant computer power to filter that
starship
>out from background noise).  This generally means that an active sensor is
more
>reliable at short range, but a passive sensor has much longer range.

Would a reasonable reflect of this in game terms be to give passive sensors
much longer range than active sensors, but only require one detection task
for an active sensors while requiring multiple tasks (at say, one task per
turn) to build up a targetting solution with a passive sensor?

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 10:16:14 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

At 15:38 7/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:

>All true, but it the castle force attacked you outside the castle they lost
>the benefit of the defensive position and had to attack your defesive
>postions arround the castle.  They would loose more men that the attackers
>and not have these men to defeand the walls.  I see this as a valid tactic
>only if:
>
>1)  The attacker does not have enough men to take the castle.

If the attacker did he wouldn't be trying to starve you out and/or reduce
your defences.

>2)  An outside force is attacking the attacker flank at the same time.
>
>3)  As a last ditch attempt to escape a castle doomed to fall.

There were many other good reasons to attack the beseiger, such as to
achieve a breakout for some of your force so that they could go for help or
attack the enemy's foraging parties, etc, or you might sally forth in order
to destroy the beseiger's seige engines, or to destroy their camp and
attempt to damage morale.

These sallys had the advantage that because of your walls the beseiger
couldn't see the preperations, and often wouldn't know exactly where all
the sally ports were.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 19:11:04 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Military History (was re: Ironclads)

Black Ice wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ObTrav:  IYTUs, how far back do your oldest military units trace
lineage?  F'r instance, is there a jump troop unit that traces its
history back to the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment of World War II? 
How 'bout the Glosters?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Seventh Cavalry (Solomani Grav Infantry, "Boots & Saddles") claims to 
trace it's history back to pre-American Civil War Terra, but their lineage
has been challenged by some post-Invasion-Earth Solomani units. This 
makes for a good intra or inter-service barfight excuse. 

There are Aslani ceremonial units that are older, but they don't really
have the continuous existance we're talking about here - they may
use the same flag and ceremonial weaponry, that's about it.
Aslan military organization IMTU does not outlive the (male) commander
in charge of the unit, at least not in a tradition sense.

Everything Vilani is older than everything Terran, so it seems. Many
units exist that trace traditions back into the mists of history, and
argue with each other and historians (or even archaeologists!) as
to which unit is older. IMTU, the Vilani have a practice of "retiring"
a military unit to a newly (or thinly) settled world, to boost colonization
and form the cadre of local security and police forces. Once the colony
has grown large enough, the retired unit may be reactivated, often
decades or centuries later, with new recruits from that planet...so the
unit disappears for long periods, though the reborn unit may claim
the heritage of the old and try and recreate it's traditions.

Hiver, K'Kree, etc. I haven't thought of much. Vargr, obviously, won't
have many military units last very long.

Walt Smith

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 18:28:52 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: A Way Out? [was: Re: Transponder's true nature]

TravelrTNE@aol.com wrote:
> 
<<snip>>
> 
> > >Seeing how the Spinward Marches is a backwater, it's more than acceptable
> > >a ship or hundred fell through the cracks...
> >
> > It surprises me not at all that it is acceptable to you. But it is not what
> > Survival Margin states: "...over the course of a 12-year phase-in period,
> > were retrofitted to all existing vessels..." (SM, p. 71). All existing
> > vessels, it says. The 12 year grace period is what it takes to get all the
> > way out into the uttermost edges of the Imperium. Including the Spinward
> > Marches.
> 
> So change the date to 1100 w/ a 12 year phase in period.  My desire is to do
> reconciliaton of all the data (while excising none).
> 
Seems to me that this is a minimalist change that enables a TU to adopt
the Deyo transponder without throwing out all the CT canon indicating
that transponders can have variable settings, etc.  (This may be
important in a generational-length Traveller campaign, in transition
from CT, through the MT Rebellion/Hard Times, and on into the Collapse
and the New Era.)

If I were implementing it, though, I'd begin implementing the switch in
1106, with a 10-12 year grace period.  That would help in several ways:

1.  It gets you entirely through the CT setting without Deyos being
mandatory;

2.  It's a logical response to the beginning of the Fifth Frontier War;
and

3.  It allows you to get around such temporal anomalies such as
_Knightfall_ occurring in 1120, some 20 years after the end of the
Survival Margin grace period (if you assume that the Rebellion disrupted
enforcement of the Deyo transponder deadline).

<<snip>>

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 17:12:25 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: A Proposition

At 08:36 am 10/7/98, you wrote:
>
>>From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com>
>>Subject: A Proposition
>>
>>Gentlebeings:
>>
>>We had someone try to post some general discussion to the TNS
mailing list,
>>and naturally it bounced, but it brings up the question: Where
should we
>>(SJ Games) send people who want to talk about GURPS Traveller. I
think a
>>GURPS Traveller specific board might be a good idea as a single
place to
>>talk specific rules mechanics and the like, however...
>
>People have talked about CT rules, MT rules, TNE rules, T4 rules and
T5
>rules. I really dont think talking G:T rules will disrupt things
that much.

	Not to mention my rules, your rules, his rules, her rules, their
rules, and that heretic overseas' rules ... hybrid vigor is usually a
GOOD thing ...

>The occasional economics debates are needed IMO - the economics and
trade
>rules in most of Traveller are very, very badly broken, and this
annoys me
>at least - I think Trav should be not only have a hard(ish) science
>background, but also hard(ish) social science background.

	My handwave for that ... the trade rules were DESIGNED to be hard to
live with. They were aimed at the very narrow CHARACTERS trading
region--small tramp ships off the main lines, usually, not to govern
MegaCorp interactions. It's *supposed* to be hard--that's the
motivation for the players to take chances, speculate, accept shady
or uncertain patrons ...
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 17:27:25 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

At 07:22 am 10/7/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>It's possible, of course, that we're arguing at cross purposes to
Charles.
>None of us are attempting to assert that there were periods in which
there
>were perfect defences that couldn't be beaten by any imaginable
force under
>any imaginable circumstances - just that there were periods in which

>defence was (significantly) ahead, so that given balanced
cost/resources/
>forces/etc. attacks would have little effect (infantry in WWI, 
>guns vs ironclads, NSA vs PGP) unless the attacker could expend 
>significantly higher resources. 

	Furthermore, consider the average TL, especially around the
canonical setting of the Spinward Marches vs the TL available to the
Imperium to create the cryptosystem. There's no way the Germans in
WWI could have had a snowball's chance in hell of breaking a modern
cryptosystem. Likewise, TL12-14 worlds probably will be behind the
powercurve in dealing with a TL15-16 black box ...
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 17:34:15 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: Archbishop Snerd

At 03:47 pm 10/7/98 +0100, you wrote:
>For those who've *not* rushed out and bought this yet, I finally
laid eyes

	You mean those of us who live in the US where it's not yet
available? (And haven't had the time to make an overseas phone call
during English working hours ...)
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 17:31:34 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)

At 11:58 am 10/7/98 -0400, you wrote:
>><< 
>> Very fine idea, I recognise the p[roblem.  Some sort of ON THE
BRIDGE
>>rules
>> to keep people involved, otherwise a small ship has little to
offer a
>>group
>> of adventurers in combat.  Maybe it shouldn't (BL is very much a
wargame,
>> howvere good it is), but some more detauil fdor this might be good
or
>>make
>> it impossible.
>> 
>>  >>
>>This is an excellent suggestion.
>>
>>Marc Miller
>
>Ah, good. Marc, I like this idea too. The "Bridge" system should be:
>
>1) task-based
>2) have decision-making roles for the entire bridge crew, not just
>dice-rolling for everyone but the captain
>3) give the same results as the wargame-style combat system
>4) clearly state any assumptions and limitations

	The original Star Trek roleplaying game had a fairly interesting
system that involved the *entire* bridge crew to some extent or the
other. 
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 23:38:21 GMT
From: johnl@vnet.net (John Lansford)
Subject: Re: Monitor & Merrimack (Was: Tech advancement)

On Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:20:16 +1300, you wrote:


>Okay now Im not disputing you on encryption, but there has to be two very 
>important cavets to the action off Hampton Roads. Firstly the Monitor's guns 
>were totally untested and she was only allowed to use 15 pounds of powder per 
>shot (this is a _very_ light charge for her 11 inch SB guns).

Later field tests showed the 11" guns could safely fire at their full
alloted charge without damage. Had this happened, it is probable that
Virginia would have been heavily damaged. During the battle, Monitor
was able to pound away on one corner of Virginia's casemate when the
latter ship grounded on a sandbar. Even though Monitor fired for at
least half an hour, the armor wasn't penetrated. Hard to believe that
heavier charges wouldn't have penetrated the armor after a
concentrated firing like that.

> Secondly the 
>Virgina (ex-Merrimack) only fired shell throughout the engagement. It is quite 
>likely that there would have been a very different result if either of these factors 
>had been different.

Virginia's AP rounds for the 9" rifled guns were left on the dock in
the haste to leave. Had they been on board, it is possible that they
could have damaged Monitor. Not sure about this, though; Monitor's
armor was fairly thick.

John Lansford



The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage:
http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 12:30:49 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

At 22:51 7/10/98 GMT, Phillip McGregor wrote:

>The Vilani stuffed up the Solomani while the Terrans freed up the Vilani.
That's
>the reason, basically.

However this requires the Vilani to have stuffed up the Terrans at least as
much as the Terrans freed up the Vilani. And, IMO, it still doesn't explain
the lack of rapid advancement in the rimward areas of what bacame the
Solomani Confederation. Remember that in many ways the Confederation had
less control over its member states than the 3I did, and IMO anyway a
goodly number of the PEs that sprung up in the rimward areas during and
after the long night were from the Terrans 'insurance policy' colonies, and
therefore would've had little or no contact with your contaminated Rule of
Man.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:47:01 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Addaxur data (was Re: Addaxur)

Leo asks:

>>...but I still don't know what they look like. I was sort of aiming
>>at a multi-legged reptiloid hyena, but the concept faded. I maintain
>>that the vast majority are low-slung and positively cheerful.
>>"Happy carnivores."
>>
>>GypsyComet
>
>      What about some type of arachnid type creature?
>
>
>Leo

  The arachnid leg structure is not well suited to high-G, IIRC.
I also have a bias against sentient spiders in the region thanks
to Chuck Kallenbach, with the Sred'ni in The Beyond. Someone
suggested to me the last time this came up that the Addaxur
might be rather turtle-like and be scavengers. The idea has more
appeal to me than yet another lizard-man. If GTs Addaxur are
proportioned like your typical Tolkien Dwarf (ie. short and WIDE),
I can probably cope, but heavy gravity and bipedal forms just don't
mix well...



      What about something similar to David Webber's Tree Cats only maybe
      weasle or ferrit like instead of cat like.



Leo

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:57:45 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

     TNE powerplants always had enough fuel for one years operation.  It
has been so long I would be hard pressed to remember the amount of fuel for
MT or CT.  If you want to compete with everyone else in the traveller
universe, you will have to use jump engines.

Leo




DustyLV769@aol.com on 10/07/98 05:48:30 AM

Please respond to traveller@MPGN.COM

To:   Traveller@MPGN.COM
cc:    (bcc: Leo Hale/Panlabs)
Subject:  GURPS Trav power plants




  After carefully perusing the Starship design system for GT, I discovered
a
paragraph on pg 162 which states that a power plant has sufficient internal
fuel for 200 years!  Is this a typo, or just a complete abandonment of one
of
the important aspects of every prev version of Traveller?   With 200 years
to
operate the M-drive, jump drives are not necessarily needed (if your
patient,
that is).  Fuel amounts changed w/ each version, granted; but all the prev
systems had about a 4-week limit to the power fuel (give or take).

Can anyone enlighten me (or care to comment?)

DustyLV769@aol.com

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 19:55:27 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@citnet.com>
Subject: Marc T5 question

Marc,

I realize T5 is still a work in progress and that you have already posted a
LOT of information on it to this list, however I would like to ask a
question. Are the sensor rules that will be included (I assume ;>) in T5
changed radically from T4 ? I'm playing with the RPG ship combat kludges I
use as house rules (which currently use T4 sensors) and I'm curious as to
how different, if at all, T5 is likely to be.

Thanks

Mike Peters, Letterworks@CITnet.com
"For my part, I travel not to go anywhere, but to go. I travel for travel's
sake. The great affair is to move."
Robert Louis Stevenson

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 17:27:06 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: GT EMS Sensors

>In GT, though, Active Sensors appear to have a large range advantage
>over Passive Sensors. that matches up with VE2, so it's not an errata.

>Looking at this solely from a game play point of view, how does this
>strike you? Stay passive and have a smaller area of detection. Go active
>and have a larger area, but also give your own position away.  I think
>it makes good *game* sense, but perhaps not good *science* sense.

It depends on how weapon ranges compare to sensor ranges, of course.
If weapon ranges are longer combat is sensor-dominated and these questions
are relevant; if active sensor ranges are much longer than weapon ranges
(like in TNE), there's no reason not to run your active sensor all the
time, especially if it gives you much longer range than passive under 
all conditions. I generally like submarine-like sensor capabilities - 
active sesnros are shorter ranged but guaranteed to detect everything within
their range, passive sensors are longer ranged but only ves "noisy" targets.

Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 17:30:03 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: GT EMS Sensors

 
>My biggest objection to the sensors in G:Vehicles is that their weight/cost is
>linear in range (and too heavy in the case of small sensors, too light for
>large sensors).

This is seriously weird; it's hard to imagine the justification (except for
small/short ranged sensors.)

Good to know there's still some things FFS2 gets better than GURPS.

Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 17:30:53 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: GT EMS Sensors

 
>Hey Bruce, any chance of a GURPS version of
>the DSR? ;-)

Maybe if I get a free copy of GT and GV2...

Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 17:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GT EMS Sensors

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:
>  
> >Hey Bruce, any chance of a GURPS version of
> >the DSR? ;-)
> 
> Maybe if I get a free copy of GT and GV2...

Heh.  It actually isn't that hard.  In order to convert, you just need to know
the following things:
1)  GURPS uses range penalties of 6 * log10(distance) -- as a rule, to convert
a DSR range band to a gurps range penalty, multiply by 6 and subtract 15.
2)  GURPS 'signatures' are normed for a human being +0.  A 100 dt ship has a
base signature of +8
3)  GURPS 'scan' is normed so that when scan is equal to range, you will on
average detect a man-sized object (sig of about -2.5 passive/-1 active),
implying a diff of 3.5 between sensitivity and range.  Thus, to convert
sensitivity to scan, multiply by 6 and subtract 36 (passive) or 27 (active). 
Obviously, this can be reversed -- so the basic bridge PESA (scan 38 at TL 10)
would be a rating-12.3 by DSR, the command bridge would be about 12.8 (TL 10)
or 13 (TL 12).

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 20:09:53 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

Douglas E. Berry wrote:

>At 11:44 PM 10/7/98 +0100, you wrote:
>>Charles R Hensley wrote:
>>
>>> Nice clear INACCURATE info.   I.e. aircraft and helocopters that can

>>
>>OK so I've only flicked through Vehicles and not read it closely :-)
But I
>>very nearly bought it as it looked up to the same standard as Arsenal.
There
>>were a few typos in that too but I still consider it a good book.
>
>To be honest, Emperor's Vehicles was one of the biggest failures of T4.

>The lack of Tech Levels for each vehicle was a killer.

My being a Gearhead, the first thing I noticed was the atmosphere
problems.  I did not notice the missing TL until you mentioned it.

Charles

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #914
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Thursday, October 8 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 915



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: T5 Tasks
Re: Marc T5 question
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)
Re: A Proposition
Re: GT book
RE GT & POWER PLANTS
Re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
re: Big Brother Transponders
Re: Tech advancement
Re: Corsairs, economic analysis (long)
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
GT EMS Sensors
GT EMS Sensors
Re: Marc T5 question
Re: A Way Out? [was: Re: Transponder's true nature]
Re: fighters
Re: Transponder's true nature  (not long at all)
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: A Proposition
re: GT EMS Sensors

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:09:57 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T5 Tasks

In a message dated 10/7/98 6:07:16 PM Central Daylight Time, dom@cybergoths.u-
net.com writes:

<< 
 My own group were sceptical for the first session then adopted the 1/2 dice
 and forgot about it's controversy.
 
  >>
Thanks for the vote of confidence.

Marc

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:11:18 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Marc T5 question

In a message dated 10/7/98 7:23:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
Letterworks@CITNET.com writes:

<< Are the sensor rules that will be included (I assume ;>) in T5
 changed radically from T4 ? I'm playing with the RPG ship combat kludges I
 use as house rules (which currently use T4 sensors) and I'm curious as to
 how different, if at all, T5 is likely to be. >>

Specifically, I am undecided.
I want to divide space combat into search and combat, so sensors will play a
powerful role. But I have not yet dealt with the matter.

Marc

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 20:56:54 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@citnet.com>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)

- -----Original Message-----
From: David J. Golden <goldendj@pcisys.net>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Wednesday, October 07, 1998 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)


>>
>>Ah, good. Marc, I like this idea too. The "Bridge" system should be:
>>
>>1) task-based
>>2) have decision-making roles for the entire bridge crew, not just
>>dice-rolling for everyone but the captain
>>3) give the same results as the wargame-style combat system
>>4) clearly state any assumptions and limitations
>
> The original Star Trek roleplaying game had a fairly interesting
>system that involved the *entire* bridge crew to some extent or the
>other.


Dave,

That's exactly the place I got the original idea from. I played it several
time and found some rough spots but really liked the idea. One major
addition I made was a "sensor screen" a hex map showing the location of
other ships, like a radar screen. The sensor ops. tasks are involved in
locating ships. identification and extrapolation of course and the "screen"
reflects the information. Piloting reacts to the screen. Gunners operate
from the screen . Tactics are based on the screen. Effects are based on the
outcome of task rolls by the players and work from effects tables. The sceen
gives the same visual effect as a war game map but is much more subjective,
since it "revolves" around the PC' ship, which is always the center.

That's also where I came up with the "Scotty task" which is my groups name
for "doing the impossible" such as squeking a tad more than rated thrust,
"over turning" or over stressing the hull rating, or getting just a tad more
damage than usual from a weapons hit.

Mike Peters, Letterworks@CITnet.com
"For my part, I travel not to go anywhere, but to go. I travel for travel's
sake. The great affair is to move."
Robert Louis Stevenson

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:13:25 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: A Proposition

In a message dated 10/7/98 6:43:22 PM Central Daylight Time, lkw@io.com
writes.... goldendj@pcisys.net writes:

<<  the economics and trade
 >rules in most of Traveller are very, very badly broken, and this
 annoys me at least - >>

My handwave is that if the process automatically generated money, then
everyone would set it on autopilot and come back to collect some time later.
Kinda like your handwave.

Marc

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

Date: Wed,  7 Oct 98 21:17:04 EDT
From: carioca@stratos.net (Aerron Winsor)
Subject: Re: GT book

At 01:40 PM 10/7/98 -0400, "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>
>>My copy of GT came today....Anyone want to play TCS with the GT rules?  I
>>volunteer to be the ref....
>>
>
>Do you mean space combat from G:T? E-mail or what? I may be interested.
>
yes and yes.

practice scenario will be Vargr Privateers vs. a convoy and SDBs
**-----------------------------------------------------------**
"People think that professional soldiers think a lot about fighting,
but SERIOUS professional soldiers think a lot more about food and a
warm place to sleep, because these are two things that are generally
hard to get, whereas fighting tends to turn up all the time."
                 -T.Pratchett, SMALL GODS

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:10:03 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: RE GT & POWER PLANTS

>  After carefully perusing the Starship design system for GT, I discovered a
>paragraph on pg 162 which states that a power plant has sufficient internal
>fuel for 200 years!  Is this a typo, or just a complete abandonment of one of
>the important aspects of every prev version of Traveller?   With 200 years to
>operate the M-drive, jump drives are not necessarily needed (if your patient,
>that is).  Fuel amounts changed w/ each version, granted; but all the prev
>systems had about a 4-week limit to the power fuel (give or take).
>
>Can anyone enlighten me (or care to comment?)
>
probably NOT a typo. In GURPS, fusion plants are sealed units with all the
fuel they will ever need for any reasonable lifespan.

In TNE, PP fuel was per year.
in CT, PP fuel was large and monthly.
In MT, PP fuel was pretty close but slightly less than in CT in MOST CASES.

In Imperium and Dark Nebula, ships can free acccellerate for months to
cross one   space hex per 6 month turn. Hexes which would seem to be 1/2
parsec (1.63 LY) across... but they don't need fuel except to jump!

Canon is thus inconsistant.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:27:40 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: GT EMS Sensors

>Would a reasonable reflect of this in game terms be to give passive sensors
>much longer range than active sensors, but only require one detection task
>for an active sensors while requiring multiple tasks (at say, one task per
>turn) to build up a targetting solution with a passive sensor?

One rule I use is that weapons fire with a passive-only detection is 2 DMs
harder, unless
(a) the ship has been firing at the target for more than one turn
(b) two ships have seperate passive detections of the target
(c) the sesnror operator makes a Difficult sensor role

to represent the problem with getting good range info.

Also, in the DSR, active sensors go from "no detection" to "automatic
detection" very quickly as range decreases, while passive sensors have a
shallow curve.

Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:41:22 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

In a message dated 10/7/98 15:19:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz writes:

<< Thrusters cut off abruptly at 1000 diameters. Its a change introduced in
T4, 
 presumably to avoid exactly that problem.  >>

Are you sure of this?  I can't seem to either find or recall any info on this
in T4.  I am going by the last edition I know of that mentioned it
specifically, which was MT.

In MT, anti-grav was avail at TL9, along w/ Fusion Rockets.  At TL 11 came
Newton's Nightmare.  Hard Times mentions that Fusion rockets remain viable
till the reactionless thrusters came along, since they had no range limit
except the power plant duration.  

On a similar note...do anti-grav thrusters mangle physics as we know it (other
than not being possible w/ our current tech?)  I would be much more comfy
using something that is at least possible, as opposed to reactionless drives
(which always cause my players to snicker).

DustyLV769@aol.com

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 19:22:14 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

...
>But if I only play Traveller, and not any other GURPS games, how much of
>Pyramid can be of any interest to me?

  Besides the Traveller adventures and source material posted there, many
GURPS subjects are usable (High-Tech gear, special ops type missions, etc).
While not as focussed as Challenge was (and you don't get a hardcopy w/o
printing it yourself) it does work out to $1.25 US / month - if you don't
like some of what you see in their samples section (URL?) don't buy it.

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 19:50:36 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: re: Big Brother Transponders

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: re: Big Brother Transponders
...
>These exact holes are just the kind of thing to hang adventures
>around. The only adventure I can come up with involving
>unbeatable, 100% effective transponder systems involves the
>PC's behaving themselves all the time or learning to make lots of
>little rocks out of lots of great big rocks with a sledgehammer.

  Making lots of little rocks out of lots of great big rocks with a
sledgehammer builds character, or so I'm told.

  Even under those circumstances there should still be a great deal of
mischief that the players could get up to, although it might stretch
them a bit; OTOH, if the players don't want to make the effort then
maybe A:8 could inspire them a bit :)

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 19:50:38 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

>From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
>Subject: Re: Tech advancement
...
>I would say that from the time that triremes and other ram equipped galleys
>went out of favour until the advent of the rifled gun and high explosive
>shells defence has pretty much ruled naval warfare. Similarly on land IMHO
>defence has generally been superior to offence through most of history.
>Even in WWII, which everybody thinks proved fixed defences to be outmoded,
>defensive lines were only broken by massively superior force, unless they
>could be by-passed (like the Manginot Line), let alone such strongpoints as
>cities. Look at Stalingrad, for example - in both the taking and retaking
>of the city the defenders made the attackers pay very, very heavily even
>though they were outnumbered.

  The only qualification I would suggest to the above is that on land there
was a switch of an advantage from the _strategic_ defensive (the glacis of
star fortresses covering NE France) to the _tactical_ (breach-loading rifles,
machine-guns) defensive. Conversely, while the horse & musket era battlefield
was probably offense/defense neutral, more modern warfare became advantageous
to the strategic offensive with improved infrastructure and organizational
support.

  Mind you, both the extension of "battlefield" ranges in this century and
the mechanization of combatants muddies the current state of affairs. IMHO :)

        Steven Hudson

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 22:17:20 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Corsairs, economic analysis (long)

...
>>400tn Corsairs bought for MCr45 will give you a 10%/year return
>>on your investment - that's KCr90 profit per trip, 50 trips per year.
>
>  IIRC, most vessels are assessed at 26 (OTU) or 35 (THUDDD?)
trips/year.

one of the benifits of Megacorp run ships is th efast turn-around, this
is approx. 35 /year,  tramp traders would use 26 / year.

Charles

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 22:23:16 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

Dusty wrote:

>In a message dated 10/7/98 6:21:23 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz writes:
>
><< but the limitation on STL were 1) supplies (you still
>have to eat) and 2) the 1000 diameter threshold for thrusters.  >>
>
>These wouldn't apply to an STL mission:  w/ that much time on a power
plant,
>you could put in a huge power plant, turn the output WAY down, and
everybody
>jump in the low berths.  The 1000dia limit only applies to anti-grav
>units...thrusters are useful always.

anti-grav is limited to 100dia IIRC,  thrusters ARE limited to 1000dia.
I read this rules and worked up a chart based on the gravity gradient
for all star classes.

Charles

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 22:05:58 -0500
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

On this note, I was fairly suspcious of Pyramid, but once I subscribed, I
loved what I found.
No, it doesn't all fit my main system of 2300 AD, but a lot of things can be
converted.

Also, I wanted to get some feedback from this list on an idea I am working
on.
While hunting down authors of 2300 AD articles that appeared in Challenge,
someone asked why I didn't try and find all the authors and post their
articles on a non-2300 website.

I have begun this process, contacted Michael Stackpole and a few others.
The feedback from the authors I have found so far seem to be positive.

Is this something folks here would like to see?

TV

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:43:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: GT EMS Sensors

yOn Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest wrote:

> From: Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
> Subject: GT EMS Sensors
> 
> Bruce Alan Macintosh wrote:
> 
> > >Is it just me or does it seem strange that Active EMS can 'see' further
> > >than Passive? Personally I think it should be the other way around.
> 
> > In FFS2, passive sensors do indeed reach farther than active sensors, which
> > makes physical sense...although active sensors are harder to hide from.
> 
> In GT, though, Active Sensors appear to have a large range advantage
> over Passive Sensors. that matches up with VE2, so it's not an errata.
> 
> Looking at this solely from a game play point of view, how does this
> strike you? Stay passive and have a smaller area of detection. Go active
> and have a larger area, but also give your own position away.  I think
> it makes good *game* sense, but perhaps not good *science* sense.
> 
> Comments?

That was my intention, certainly. Frankly if active sensors aren't much
use, no one will go active....

This is what GDW did with Traveller 2300.

To some extent, one can rationalize depending on what you mean by
"detect".

> ps.  BTW, Loren could you check out the number scale used in the Space
> Combat and Ship Design appendexes? It appears that we have 2 or three
> different scales  for ranges, hex sizes, and so on. I'm afraid it's
> somewhat confusing to me.

The hex scale should be 10,000 miles per hex. The 2,000 miles per hex
table is in error. Divide the numbers on it by 5 or use the numbers on p.
158, divide by 10, and round off.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:43:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: GT EMS Sensors

yOn Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest wrote:

> From: Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
> Subject: GT EMS Sensors
> 
> Bruce Alan Macintosh wrote:
> 
> > >Is it just me or does it seem strange that Active EMS can 'see' further
> > >than Passive? Personally I think it should be the other way around.
> 
> > In FFS2, passive sensors do indeed reach farther than active sensors, which
> > makes physical sense...although active sensors are harder to hide from.
> 
> In GT, though, Active Sensors appear to have a large range advantage
> over Passive Sensors. that matches up with VE2, so it's not an errata.
> 
> Looking at this solely from a game play point of view, how does this
> strike you? Stay passive and have a smaller area of detection. Go active
> and have a larger area, but also give your own position away.  I think
> it makes good *game* sense, but perhaps not good *science* sense.
> 
> Comments?

That was my intention, certainly. Frankly if active sensors aren't much
use, no one will go active....

This is what GDW did with Traveller 2300.

To some extent, one can rationalize depending on what you mean by
"detect".

> ps.  BTW, Loren could you check out the number scale used in the Space
> Combat and Ship Design appendexes? It appears that we have 2 or three
> different scales  for ranges, hex sizes, and so on. I'm afraid it's
> somewhat confusing to me.

The hex scale should be 10,000 miles per hex. The 2,000 miles per hex
table is in error. Divide the numbers on it by 5 or use the numbers on p.
158, divide by 10, and round off.

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 11:34:46 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Marc T5 question

>Specifically, I am undecided.
>I want to divide space combat into search and combat, so sensors will play a
>powerful role. But I have not yet dealt with the matter.
>
>Marc
>
I would like to put in a vote for wholesale adoption of Bruce's DSR,
possibly with more tasks for Roleplaying space combat.
Colin

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:57:20 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: A Way Out? [was: Re: Transponder's true nature]

> > So change the date to 1100 w/ a 12 year phase in period.  My desire is to
do
> > reconciliaton of all the data (while excising none).
> >
> Seems to me that this is a minimalist change that enables a TU to adopt
> the Deyo transponder without throwing out all the CT canon indicating
> that transponders can have variable settings, etc.  (This may be
> important in a generational-length Traveller campaign, in transition
> from CT, through the MT Rebellion/Hard Times, and on into the Collapse
> and the New Era.)

That's the kind I've been contemplating running, too...  Maybe just pre
Assasination, as I was thinking I wanted the PCs in the Throne Room (getting
knighted or something maybe) for the Big Bangs. Maybe one of my poor players
will be the one who "screamed and lunged out from the crowd" as Dulinor goes
to grab Strephon's crown.  : )  Especially as my RC campaign is petering out
due to my players going hither and yon (permanently) : (

> If I were implementing it, though, I'd begin implementing the switch in
> 1106, with a 10-12 year grace period.  That would help in several ways:
<snip>

That would work quite well.  : )

Gary

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:57:19 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: fighters

>  The fundamental point is that the AHL is a High Guard design, and the
> Aurora a FFS1 design.

Also note that the AHL is TL14/15 and 60,000 dt, while the Auroras are TL12
and 2080dt (fully loaded).  TL14 and 15 spoils one w/ high acceleration and
alot of power.
It did me, and I noticed big time when i went to design the RCS Belladonna.

Gary

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:57:15 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature  (not long at all)

> I can only assume you missed the post.  Perhap you or I have missed some
> posts and that may be the reason for the misunberstandings.

Must have.  Maybe a lil cognitive dissonance, too? ; )

> >I don't believe in "they."  And if you do, i'm sorry. : )
> 
> There have always been conspirators.  The THEY is not the one big THEY that

Yeah, I know.  Just yanking your chain a lil. : )  I'm just not a big
consipiracy buff.

Gary

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:57:18 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

> It may be a bit late to get into this free-for-all, but...

Nah.  Dive right in! ; )

> a) Unforgable.
> b) All-pervasive in the Imperium, let alone the universe.
> 
> The first one is based upon the notion that given enough time and money,
> anything can be forged. Sure, technology advances, making the forging harder
> with old tech...but forging technology progresses as well.

That's what the tech advancement thread has been about.  : ) 

> I just don't see how the logistics of the second one works. To replace the
> transponder in all the old ships...wow, that would be a mess.

That's why they gave a 12 year grace period, to be retrofitted during annual
maintence and relicensing procedures.  All new construction was required to
have the new transponders immediately.  The Vilani adopted an entirely new
system during the Rebellion.  Yes much smaller territory but far far smaller
changeover period (not just during annual maintenence but ASAP if not
immediately).

> And I certainly would not have other governments installing Deyo chips...you
> state that they would want to, in order to trade with the Imperium. Well,
> the argument goes both ways...would the Imperium require them, and risk
> losing trade. Personally, I don't see the K'Kree buying it...and the Hivers
> are clever enough that they would figure out the hidden agenda.

No, they say, "If you want your ships to enter our space, you put this new
transponder system."  No doubt, specs are provided, etc etc.

The Imperial markets are *huge* and remember the Imperium mostly exists to
foster *internal* trade.  The same may or may not hold true for the other
polities, but my bet is that the others lose more than the Imperials do to
losing the trade.  In any case, it's more than reasonable (to me anyways) to
adopt the IFF system of of a foreign govt if you wish do business in their
territory.

> I respect Gary's opinion...but IMHO the Deyo chip was a plot device to
> justify the widespread affect of Virus...and since I (personally) hate the

Partially...  but it's explicitly mentioned that that was just the easiest
vector of infection.  Even if we limit the foreign govts' putting them only on
ships trading in the Imperium (which is reasonable, if uncanonical), Virus
still learns how the other races computers operate and adapts.  Infection was
also made easy by computer control of tight-beam commo.  "Encoding and
decoding, correcting for the doppler shifting in messages sent between ships
with tremendous crossing vectors, keeping tight-beam antennae on targets with
accuracies measured in attoradians, all of these tasks were taken by the
computer to simplify the task of small multi-tasked crews.  Incoming and
outgoing messages were not sent or received by human hands, they were mediated
by the ship's computer- its central nervous system.  By tacking its invasive
code onto these messages, a virus could ensure that its infection would pass
directly through the target's central computer system."  SM pg 77.

There were also "the human vector" (threatening or deceiving crews, etc etc),
small craft (computer connections and diagnostics), and creation of "commando
chips" (like their original Cymbeline forebears).

> TNE era and Virus, I feel that logic outweighs the plot and I don't treat
> the Deyo's the same way Gary does. IMTU, of course.

I respect your right to do whatever you want IYTU (as if i can do anything
about it, in any case <g>). I most likely would even enjoy hearing about it.
I just don't think the OTU should pretend TNE never happened.  I love the
sense of loss that strikes me from reading Survival Margin.

> For the record, though. The Powers That Know have stated on many occasion
> that the DGP material IS canon...it was all GDW approved.

It's also been stated that DGP went beyond what was intended.  How do you
interpret G:T Aliens I being explicity instructed by "Miller and Wiseman" not
to use anything DGP?

I like the DPG stuff, for the most part.  It's only the bits like lathanum
hull grids and the half-Vilani Cleon that are an itch that can't be scratched.
The Vilani, Vargr subraces, Solomani Gene War and Confederation, etc etc are
all quite good, as is the World Builders Handbook (my latest acquisition<g>).

Gary

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 23:18:38 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: A Proposition

Dave Golden wrote:

>>The occasional economics debates are needed IMO - the economics and
>trade
>>rules in most of Traveller are very, very badly broken, and this
>annoys me
>>at least - I think Trav should be not only have a hard(ish) science
>>background, but also hard(ish) social science background.
>
>        My handwave for that ... the trade rules were DESIGNED to be
hard to
>live with. They were aimed at the very narrow CHARACTERS trading
>region--small tramp ships off the main lines, usually, not to govern
>MegaCorp interactions. It's *supposed* to be hard--that's the
>motivation for the players to take chances, speculate, accept shady
>or uncertain patrons ...

Megacorps have salaried brokers at every port that they visit and buy
products (as far in advance as economically feasable) for shipment to
the next system.  Therefore the Megacorps take maximum advantage of the
speculative trade, leaving the poor speculative trade for the free
traders (tramp traders).  the rules in the books are what is left after
the megacorps are finished with the market.

Charles

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 00:33:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: re: GT EMS Sensors

On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest wrote:

> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 17:27:06 -0700
> From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
> Subject: re: GT EMS Sensors

> It depends on how weapon ranges compare to sensor ranges, of course.
> If weapon ranges are longer combat is sensor-dominated and these questions
> are relevant; if active sensor ranges are much longer than weapon ranges
> (like in TNE), there's no reason not to run your active sensor all the
> time, especially if it gives you much longer range than passive under 
> all conditions. I generally like submarine-like sensor capabilities - 
> active sesnros are shorter ranged but guaranteed to detect everything within
> their range, passive sensors are longer ranged but only ves "noisy" targets.

It seems like a good approach. Vehicles sensor rules are considerably
simpler, in that they equate range and detection chance as a single value.
Obviously, this is a considerable over-simplification. Were I redoing the
rules from scratch, I would adopt a different system, but then I am never
satisfied. VE2 represents various compromises and systems as of my
thinking circa 1994-5, when it was mostly written. My views on many
aspects of the design system have changed considerably since then.

GT's systems are simply intended to model a synthesis of Classic Traveller
as much as possible without extensive changes to the Vehicles system,
while presenting rules that permit playable space combat with a reasonably
realistic feel, and to design everything from 10 ton fighters to 100,000
ton heavy cruisers, and to fit the entire thing into 20 pages, and to
produce ship designs that were fully realized but could fit on a 3"x5"
card like those of Classic Traveller (not quite as tiny as HG, but...).

Yes, it is possible to "break" the system on various grounds, and there
are realism issues. But such has also been the case with Traveller. I
doubt x-ray lasers would function as traditionally described in CT/MT,
but they are there anyway because that is the background being simulated.

> This is seriously weird; it's hard to imagine the justification (except for
> small/short ranged sensors.)

It depends on what you mean by "two heavy." The numbers tend to scale
fairly well with real-world systems, at least on ground vehicles.

> 
> Good to know there's still some things FFS2 gets better than GURPS.

Since FFS2 is quite a mature design, I'm sure it would. These things tend
to improve over generations: Book 2 -> High Guard -> Striker -> MegaTrav
- -> FFS1 -> FFS2, making FFS2 the sixth generation.

So far, SJG's pedigree looks something like:

Space  -> Vehicles 1 - > Vehicles 2

Note that Vehicles 1 did not cover starship designs, just as Striker did
not; Robots and Mecha are basically "modular design" books for VE2; GT is 
the equivelent of the Quick Starship Design System for GURPS. THus, VE2 is
really only the second attempt at a space design system... I'm sure we'll
get things right eventually!
 
Anyway, if Vehicles ever makes it into its fourth generation (VE3) then it
will be able to benefit from all the excellent criticism of Anthony, MA
Loyd, and the other GURPS commentators, and I am sure, will probably
recieve some cross polination from Traveller (VE1's major
influence was Striker) and quite possible from the interesting BTRC's VDS.

- -David

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #915
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Thursday, October 8 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 916



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: Marc T5 question
Re: (was "It Isn't Traveller")
A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Marc T5 question
Half Dice
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Transponders
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
Re: Transponder's true nature
re: Corsair, economic analysis
re: GT EMS Sensors
re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: GURPS Trav CGen
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Trade and Economics (sorry Loren)
UNCLE
Re: GURPS Trav power plants, etc.
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Corsairs, economic analysis
Thruster cut off limits

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 22:27:53 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

At 09:41 pm 10/7/98 EDT, you wrote:
>In a message dated 10/7/98 15:19:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz writes:
>
><< Thrusters cut off abruptly at 1000 diameters. Its a change
introduced in
>T4, 
> presumably to avoid exactly that problem.  >>
>
>Are you sure of this?  I can't seem to either find or recall any
info on this
>in T4.  I am going by the last edition I know of that mentioned it
>specifically, which was MT.

	Actually, they were SUPPOSED to cut off at 1000 (or 2000?) AU, not
diameters. It was a rushed attempt in SSDS to justify why invading
fleets go for the gas giant to refuel (which is canonical), rather
than jumping into the Kuiper belt.

>On a similar note...do anti-grav thrusters mangle physics as we know
it (other
>than not being possible w/ our current tech?)  I would be much more
comfy
>using something that is at least possible, as opposed to
reactionless drives
>(which always cause my players to snicker).

	Sure enough, they do ... constant power input for constant thrust
(i.e. constant acceleration), therefore the total energy input is
proportional to time. 
	Thrust leads to a change in velocity, therefore a change in kinetic
energy. Change in velocity is proportional to the time you thrust ...
but the change in KE is proportional to the change in velocity
squared so the input energy is proportional to time, but the
resulting change in KE is proportional to time squared--so energy is
being created out of nothing.
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 21:35:19 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: GT EMS Sensors

Eris reddoch wrote:
> 
> Bruce Alan Macintosh wrote:
> 
> > >Is it just me or does it seem strange that Active EMS can 'see' further
> > >than Passive? Personally I think it should be the other way around.
> 
> > In FFS2, passive sensors do indeed reach farther than active sensors, which
> > makes physical sense...although active sensors are harder to hide from.
> 
> In GT, though, Active Sensors appear to have a large range advantage
> over Passive Sensors. that matches up with VE2, so it's not an errata.
> 
> Looking at this solely from a game play point of view, how does this
> strike you? Stay passive and have a smaller area of detection. Go active
> and have a larger area, but also give your own position away.  I think
> it makes good *game* sense, but perhaps not good *science* sense.
> 

Perhaps, (and I'm just WAG'ing here) G:T PEMS range is based on 'instant-look'
usage, rather than integrating the observations over a long time period. I've
always sort of pictures PEMS as seeing farther and better the longer you spend
on it, and the stuff in G:T is for combat time frames.

Weak, I know...

Maybe SJG needs some sensors gurus...;-)

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 00:19:28 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@citnet.com>
Subject: Re: Marc T5 question

I have parts 3-5 of Bruce's DSR, but I missed/lost parts 1 and 2. Are they
up on the web anywhere?

Mike Peters, Letterworks@CITnet.com
"For my part, I travel not to go anywhere, but to go. I travel for travel's
sake. The great affair is to move."
Robert Louis Stevenson

- -----Original Message-----
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Thursday, October 08, 1998 12:06 AM
Subject: Re: Marc T5 question


>>Specifically, I am undecided.
>>I want to divide space combat into search and combat, so sensors will play
a
>>powerful role. But I have not yet dealt with the matter.
>>
>>Marc
>>
>I would like to put in a vote for wholesale adoption of Bruce's DSR,
>possibly with more tasks for Roleplaying space combat.
>Colin
>
>
>

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 22:01:35 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: (was "It Isn't Traveller")

SD Mooney wrote:
> 
> Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net> wrote:
> 
> >Could be the Darrians testing their Star Trigger 'Lite', the 'Gas Giant
> >Trigger'
> 
> Nah! That was the Darrians using the Star Trigger to try and *light* the
> gas giant....
> 

One darrian turns to the other in a bar on the moon involved and says "I said
a _BUD_ Lite!!!"

Ok ok it's late, I'm running a fever, and feeling silly.

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:36:57 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: A modification for the T4/5 task system

The recent discussion on wishes for T5 and JoT skill has prompted me to post 
my house rules modifying the basic T4 task system.

A)  Skill prerequisites: To avoid the problem of the high characteristic low skill
    character dominating play I introduced the concepts of skill prerequisites to
    tasks. Every task requires a certain level of skill. This represents that
    some skills require greater knowlede of a task than others. Some tasks may
    have prerequisites in more than one skill, some may have characteristic
    prerequisites (eg altering a pre-deyo transponder has prerequisites of:
    elect-3, comp-4, Naval Architect-0 and int 5)

B)  Jack of All Trades 1: Jack of All Trades skill allows these prerequisites to
    be bypassed. If the sum of JoT and skill is equal to or greater than the
    required then the task may be attempted. However the JoT skill does not
    contribute towards the success of the attempt.

C)  Jack of All Trades 2: Jack of All Trades skill also allows unfavourable task
    modifiers due to environmental factors (lack of required tools) to be negated
    However the JoT skill can only negate unfavourable modifiers, it never acts
    as a favourable modifier.

D)  Task attempts without the required prerequistes: It is possible to attempt
    a task with insufficent skill (though a minimum of skill-0 is always required)
    but for every skill level below the prerequisite the task difficulty is increased
    by one level.

I would be very interested in peoples comments on my house rules.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 13:40:52 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Marc T5 question

It is on the Missouri
archive.,(http://www.missouri.edu/~ccjoe/traveller/house/) and there are a
few other bits that Bruce has done.

At 00:19 8/10/98 -0400, you wrote:
>I have parts 3-5 of Bruce's DSR, but I missed/lost parts 1 and 2. Are they
>up on the web anywhere?
>
>Mike Peters, Letterworks@CITnet.com

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 06:57:51 +0100
From: "MJ Dougherty" <martinjd@globalnet.co.uk>
Subject: Half Dice

The T4 system worked OK for me. 

I read it, thought 'half dice, how odd' and used it.

It worked fine and were were all quite happy with it. Dice only generate
random numbers (the WRONG random numbers in my case), after all. 

Works for me....

MJD

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 14:14:28 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

The only problems might be the cumbersome nature of some tasks, the
difficulty in justifying the pre-requisties in what is already a task based
system (Shouldnt it just be a level harder for some lacking skill).
Problems of consistency (last week...) It looks okay to me (for what  thats
worth) but i would want to use it quite sparingly.  If it works for you -
fine.

Cheers
Colin

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 23:35:31 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Transponders

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Transponders
...
>I have no dought that these thing are true today in a world where the
>greatess distance travellable can have records sent in minutes.  What happen
>when getting a record from 'next door' takes two week?  What about a
>wandering ship that is from two sector away?  It may take a year to get any
>responce and two or three years to get a complete responce.

  Wait a month until all of the paperwork arrives - it's the most cost-
efficient way and still effective for most purposes. With a constant
flow of info any merchant ship that outruns its' reports is suspicious
by definition.

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 23:35:36 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

>From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
>Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
...
>While hunting down authors of 2300 AD articles that appeared in Challenge,
>someone asked why I didn't try and find all the authors and post their
>articles on a non-2300 website.

  Try the 2300 AD list - the process has been virtually completed (IIRC) 
by some outstanding efforts made there.

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

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 23:35:40 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

>From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature
...
>Partially...  but it's explicitly mentioned that that was just the easiest
>vector of infection.  Even if we limit the foreign govts' putting them only on
>ships trading in the Imperium (which is reasonable, if uncanonical), Virus
...

  Are you sure that universal adoption by bordering foreign states was
explicitly stated? I only got SM within the last year, and thought that
only vessels crossing the border were required to upgrade (and presumably
were thus the only ones to do so).

        Steven Hudson

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 00:06:51 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: re: Corsair, economic analysis

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: re: Corsair, economic analysis
...
>>assessed, and that individual components could be "reset" to new status
>>by replacing them (per TCS); thus, a properly maintained 40-year old 
>>merchant subjected to regular wear and tear would be costing 4.1% of 
>>original purchase price per year in maintenance. 
...
>Jumping the annual maintenance from KCr180/year to MCr7.38
>would keep your spaceways full of nice, new ships - since the
>increased maintenance costs will be as much or more than the bank
>payments on a brand-new starship. Since the most expensive
>components (Drives, Computer) are what needs replacing, and
>they will actually cost more than they would cost new (cost of
>drive, plus cost to remove old drive, plus cost to install new
>drive, plus possible costs to configure and modify new drive to
>fit in your old hull), I don't think refurbishing a ship would be that
>much less expensive than replacing it with a new one, especially
>if the new ship was a standard model (with the production run
>discounts).

  A accountant should be able to name the year when the age of the ship
will become a fiscal liability outweighing the opportunity costs of
re-capitalizing the asset. As TCS allows _replacement_ (not upgrading)
of drives at cost (possibly with the scrap value of the removed slag
covering installation) for destroyed systems, then selling the old
unit and replacing (or refurbishing - something not covered in CT,
AFAIK) that drive.

  Also, while the major cost elements are the drives and comp, the crew
(i.e., the PC's) live in the hull/quarters, which although subject to
annual maintenance may not be seen as a component to refit in the view
of the company business office ("You say there's blue fuzz growing in the
air ducts and the plumbing broke down again? - sorry, we haven't heard/
listened to any customer complaints; try your ships discretionary funds").

  Push: players replace their Far Traders run-down 1000 MW TL 13 fusion
plant with a couple of newer, refurbished 500 MW TL 15 units (and adding
several tons of shop/locker space in engineering). They expect to deal
with 5 years of wear (0.6% on MCr 12 = KCr 72 p.a.), and soon discover
to their horror that the real wear value is a good deal greater...

  In any event, as you mention the rules adopted on ship age and negative
impacts in a given campaign will determine the composition of traffic.

        Steven Hudson

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 00:09:32 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: GT EMS Sensors

David Pulver writes
>> This is seriously weird; it's hard to imagine the justification (except for
>>> small/short ranged sensors.)
>It depends on what you mean by "two heavy." The numbers tend to scale
>fairly well with real-world systems, at least on ground vehicles.

If (as others have mentioned) range is linear with size, the scaling 
will break down as you extrapolate to the sorts
of big telescope-like sensors that a starship would use. To first order the
size of the aperture/mirror/antenna/whatever of a sensor will scale as the
square of the range for the background-limited case, and the a/m/a/w will
tend to be the biggest component. 

>Since FFS2 is quite a mature design, I'm sure it would.
Actually, the FFS2 sensors don't owe a lot to previous generations - they
kind of sprung fully formed based on some modelling and ideas from various
people (Anders, for example.) 

(Of course, like everything in FFS2, it suffered from inadequate
playtesting and terrible proofreading.)

Bruce

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 00:10:39 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: GT EMS Sensors

A footnote about FFS2 sensors is that while I'm very happy with their
scaling for spacecraft-sized systems, the small/vehicular and low-tech
parts are pretty rough - which I guess is the opposite of GURPS VE2, 
which sounds pretty good for vehicles.

Bruce

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:14:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Scott Taylor <izzylobo@faerealm.faerealm.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav CGen

Phillip McGregor wrote;
>>From: Scott Taylor <izzylobo@faerealm.faerealm.com>
>>Subject: Re: Re GURPS Trav CGen
>>>Dom queries:
<snip>
>>>>Would a 200 point starting amount seem too much from which to purchase
>>>>a template and some other skills.
>>>
>>>GT specifies 100 point characters... the GURPS standard.
>>
>>I would say that it depends entirely on what your campaign is about, and
>>what kind of influence/powers you want the players to have access to.
>
>Of course, you *could* run a GURPS:Traveller-Black Ops crossover!
>
>All those 650 point characters would be, er, *interesting* in Traveller!

:-)

OTOH, just think what they would be up against...


Scott Taylor
Freelancer for Hire
have mac, Will Travel

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 11:01:16 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

On Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:04:38 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 12:30:49 +1300
>From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
>Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement
>
>At 22:51 7/10/98 GMT, Phillip McGregor wrote:
>
>>The Vilani stuffed up the Solomani while the Terrans freed up the Vilani. That's
>>the reason, basically.
>
>However this requires the Vilani to have stuffed up the Terrans at least as
>much as the Terrans freed up the Vilani. And, IMO, it still doesn't explain

No, it doesn't.

The Vilani were rigid, authoritarian, and lacked innovativeness to begin with.
The new Terran rulers broke this down somewhat over the several hundred years of
the RoM.

The Terrans were *not* rigid, *were* innovative, and were anti-authoritarian. So
the Vilani occupying forces that Estigaribbia must have used to keep them in
line worked so much harder! They were so much more successful. Probably shipping
off the ones that were too big a nuisance to the Vilani sphere where they were
submerged ... but boosted Vilani innovativeness somewhat.

So you have a double effect, Solomani society has been taken over and replaced
to a great (and unrecognised) extent by the Vilani occupation forces and their
descendants (who probably *are* SolSec and the Solomani Party!) and the society
as a whole has been stripped of its most creative and rebellious, quite
deliberately, over the several centuries of the RoM.

Simple, really.

>the lack of rapid advancement in the rimward areas of what bacame the
>Solomani Confederation. Remember that in many ways the Confederation had
>less control over its member states than the 3I did, and IMO anyway a

*Except* for SolSec. Which must be following the tradition of Vilani Occupation
Security (and may well be still ethnically Vilani ... though, of course, they
are hiding by using the "big lie" mechanism ... saying that they're pure
Terran!).

>goodly number of the PEs that sprung up in the rimward areas during and
>after the long night were from the Terrans 'insurance policy' colonies, and
>therefore would've had little or no contact with your contaminated Rule of
>Man.

Maybe. That's not the way I read the RoM. YMMV.

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 21:48:19
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Trade and Economics (sorry Loren)

>From: CardSharks@aol.com
>Subject: Re: A Proposition
>
>In a message dated 10/7/98 6:43:22 PM Central Daylight Time, lkw@io.com
>writes.... goldendj@pcisys.net writes:
>
><<  the economics and trade
> >rules in most of Traveller are very, very badly broken, and this
> annoys me at least - >>
>
>My handwave is that if the process automatically generated money, then
>everyone would set it on autopilot and come back to collect some time later.
>Kinda like your handwave.
>
>Marc
>

The major criticism I have are

(1) the existing trade rules do not encourage long distance trade (ie
across a couple of subsectors)

(2) they allow money to be made with too much certainty, as long as you
have a minimal amount of capital (say, a million in cash - not much given
that the ship is worth 20 times that. Being undercapitalised is a good way
to go broke - just ask 8 out of 10 game companies) and a profitable route

(3) prices of 'trade goods' do not scale with the prices of actual goods in
Traveller (for example, what if a PC with a Type S wants to buy 4 10m3
Fission power plants at a TL9 IN world, to take to an asteroid belt to sell
? According to FFS2, the power plants should cost about MCr 1 each in TL9
credits)

(4) they push Travellers away from poor, underdeveloped worlds and towards
the hi-pop, hi-tech, good starport worlds, as these are the profitable
worlds to trade with - if the Free Traders are picking up the scraps from
the Megacorps, then it should be the other way around (reverse the Starport
cost effects !)

(5) the poor, lo-tech worlds have unprofitable exports, but have the hard
currency to import goods (IN pensions will provide a drip feed of hard
currency, but only a drip feed)

(6) they do not deal with financial intermediaries ('I own 20% equity in my
ship, right ? Can I borrow three million in cash to finance this
specualtive trade route ?')

(7) there is no framework to deal with players who set up even a
rudimentary trade infrastructure ('I've got Recruiting ... how about I hire
a couple of locals to find cargos for us, and warehouse them so we can turn
up, unload, load and go ... I'll budget Cr 5000 a month for the office
space, another 5K for the warehouse space and pay the locals 3K a month
each, plus five points on the profits. To be on the safe side, Jack, how
about you contact some local underworld types and spread some cash around
in case we need to be able to drop names if they think about skimming off
us ?').

(8) the freight and passengers rates are also broken, most notably for not
costing more the further you go. Although the Cr 2000 'life support costs'
comes a close second, in my opinion.

(9) crew salaries for highly skilled crew are probably too low, given the
influence of elite crewmembers on combat capability and trade profitability.

(10) we dont have some definitive guidelines for aging effects and related
price depreciation in starships, which I think is important given that
starships are usually bought on 40 year mortgages

(11) we dont have guidelines for the effects of non-mainworlds on
interstellar trade. For example, if the mainworld is non-Ag but there is an
Ag world in the system, then the world will presumably demand Ag goods less
(Suggestion : TL8+ worlds with Asteroid belts count as As worlds for trade
purposes. Roll a 10+ to cancel any 'disadvantageous' trade code except
those related to mainworld population. This represents other colonised
worlds in the system).

I can suggest some quick fixes for some of these problems, but I really
think Traveller's trade rules need a ground-up rebuild.

>From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
>Subject: Re: Corsairs, economic analysis (long)
>
>one of the benifits of Megacorp run ships is th efast turn-around, this
>is approx. 35 /year,  tramp traders would use 26 / year.
>

The way around this is long distance trade. Spend your week buying the
cargo of Tokaj Escienza, take it thirty-five jump-3s at a jump every 10
days, and then spend a week selling it. Leave the short-haul stuff to the
megacorps, and see the universe !

This does essesntially require adequate capital and a jump-3 ship (see the
THUDDD exploratory traders), but it does remove the advantage of the
megacorps in having the trade-support infrastructure.

Alternativly, put someone on retainer at each of your usual ports of call,
and give them access to a line of credit to buy speculative cargos, as and
when they become available.

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 21:41:59
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: UNCLE

Thanks to everyone for mailing my articles back. Now stop. Pleeeeeease ...

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 05:47:04 -0600
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants, etc.

>
>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 08:48:30 EDT
>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>Subject: GURPS Trav power plants
>
>  After carefully perusing the Starship design system for GT, I discovered a
>paragraph on pg 162 which states that a power plant has sufficient internal
>fuel for 200 years!  Is this a typo, or just a complete abandonment of one of
>the important aspects of every prev version of Traveller?   With 200 years to
>operate the M-drive, jump drives are not necessarily needed (if your patient,
>that is).  Fuel amounts changed w/ each version, granted; but all the prev
>systems had about a 4-week limit to the power fuel (give or take).
>
>Can anyone enlighten me (or care to comment?)
>

GT power plants are fusion power plants from GURPS Vehicles (2d ed), which
have the 200-year fuel supply as part of *their* canon.  There has been
considerable debate on this list and its predecessors about just where all
that hydrogen was going (just for power plants - never mind the jump fuel
debate), and concluding that it was unrealistic but a useful game mechanic.
[YMMV.]

GURPS VE2 had a different set of experts and a different set of
conclusions, in this case that you could include enough hydrogen in a
fusion plant's case to run it for 200 years with no trouble:  better to
seal the thing and make it as idiot-proof as possible.

There was some debate during the GT playtest about adapting powerplants to
Traveller rules (as was done with gravitics and jump drives), but the
decision was to maintain compatibility with the rest of the GURPS line.

>
>Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 02:14:04 +1300
>From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
>Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants
>
>but the limitation on STL were 1) supplies (you still 
>have to eat) and 2) the 1000 diameter threshold for thrusters. As long as
these 
>factors have are still constant there's no real change to the background. No 
>more annoying than the loss of fusion guns and repulsors.
>

I should point out that:

(1) "total" life support systems in GURPS (VE2, p. 78; GT, p. 154) are
fully regenerative, and produce food as well.  Notice, there are no life
support costs on GT p. 122 or 159.  I'm still going to strongly encourge my
players to spend Cr and time on obtaining fresh fruit and veggies for their
passengers, but it's not required.

(2) GURPS reactionless thrusters (VE2, p. 38; GT, p 153-154) do not in
general have the 1000 diameter limitation, although I don't see why you
couldn't impose one if you wanted to.

I think the strongest limitation on STL flight in GT is probably maintenance.

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 08:01:18 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor) writes:
>Of course, the *real* truth is that the whole thing was a plot by
>Grandfather!
>he *knew* that the Terrans would, if left unchecked, "soon" (we're talking
>someone at least 250,000 years old, remember!) be a technological
>nuisance,
>perhaps even a threat, to him ... so he manipulated things (an earlier
>version
>of psychohistory) to get Estigaribbia to stage his coup.
>
[snip]
>
>So you have to figure out why. And my explanation is at least based on
>some
>historical experience that makes sense. Not the only explanation, of
>course
><sigh>

Phil's left out a bit. Grandfather manipulated the Ithklur into
manipulating the Hivers to take care of Estigaribbia.

Everyone blames the Hivers, but that's because the Ithklur are much more
subtle, behind their bluff, bloodthirsty 'good-ole-lizard' exteriors.

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:22:33 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Corsairs, economic analysis

Charles R Hensley writes:

>One of the benifits of Megacorp run ships is th efast turn-around, this
>is approx. 35 /year,  tramp traders would use 26 / year.

This is reasonable; it is the figures I use when doing calculations for MTU
(except that I allow any regularily scheduled starship, not just those of
megacorporations, to get 25 jumps per year (not 26; they need 14 days per
year for the annual maintenance) if going from surface to surface and 40/year
if going from jump limit to jump limit); but it is not canon. The only
canonical example that I can recall of how a large company runs mentions the
same one-jump-per-14-days that the rules give. (The company is Al Morai in
_Spinward Marches Campaign_. OK, it's not a megacorporation, it's "only" a
sector-wide line  --  a very thinly spread out sector-wide line. But still...)



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 01:23:27 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Thruster cut off limits

Date sent:      	Wed, 07 Oct 1998 22:27:53 -0600
From:           	"David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>

>Actually, they were SUPPOSED to cut off at 1000 (or 2000?) AU, not
>diameters. It was a rushed attempt in SSDS to justify why invading
>fleets go for the gas giant to refuel (which is canonical), rather
>than jumping into the Kuiper belt.

I think its better to have the cut off point related to diameter rather than a 
straight AU figure. It seems more "realistic" for a gravitic drive system. Also a 
1000 AU cut off point seems a tad large, IIRC Pluto is only 40 AU out (which 
sort of defeats the purpose doesn't it?).

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #916
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Thursday, October 8 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 917



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Transponders
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: Piracy
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: Transponder's true nature  (not long at all)
Re: Transponders
G:T and intellectual property (was re: Transponder's true nature)
Re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: Pets of the future
Re: GURPS and Munchkins
Re: Transponders
Re: (was "It Isn't Traveller")
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 13:24:04 +0100
From: Phil Kitching <Philk@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 12:18:25 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>

> IMO, I would like to see a ship combat system similar to SFB for Traveller.
> Most of the necessary rules are already written, all that would be needed
> would be damage charts for the Traveller weapons.  I'd love to see how a
> spinal Meson Gun off of a 500kton Battleship stacks up to a plasma-R.

This is an easy one.

In the Blue corner, a Tigress Dreadnought.
In the Red corner, a Federation Shuttle.

:-)

Firstly, the Tigress's meson gun is speed of light (actually slightly slower).
This equates to 1 hex per turn in SFB. The Tigress itself isn't going to
move 1 hex in a week's gaming.

The federation shuttle can travel 6x faster than this.

If the shuttle heads towards the Tigress at full speed, it arrives before
the Tigress can detect it.

The shuttle can detect (and hit 16%) objects moving at up to 32c, over
distances of at least 150,000km.

At this distance, the Tigress's firing solution is at least 1 second out of
date.

In 1 second, the shuttle gets 30 SFB turns and can be anywhere in a circle
1.8 million km in radius.

Finally, if you put a drone on the shuttle (a scatterpack) the drone moves
at 8c and is an unstoppable KKM allowing a remotely controlled shuttle to
destroy 6 Tigresses, leaving only 2 of your batron.

The only good news is that you can't use 6 type IIIMW drones because the
18 type IV submunitions are warp seekers - except that I think you can
point them at bases, so you probably can.

Your only hope is to use the rules in the Starships LBB - then your Free
Trader can move 1" in the Z direction and the shuttle, constrained to the
hex map, cannot see him. :-)

Phil

(Who likes SFB lots but hasn't played it in years.)

- --
  Interested in a wargames show in Colchester, Essex UK?
  http://www.btinternet.com/~salvo

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:04:28 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

Phillip McGregor writes:

>>From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>

>>This doesn't explain why the various Terran/Solomani states (which weren't
>>swamped by Vilani, being outside the first Imperium's old borders) in the
>>long night and early 3I periods didn't outstrip the Syleans and the Third
>>Imperium technologically. Nor does this explain how the 3I managed to stay
>>in front of the Solomani Confederation during the later part of its
>>membership in the Imperium and its seperation.
> 
>Of course it does!
> 
>If you accept that the RoM was "contaminated" by the Vilani cultural ethos
>against tech, then certain implications can be followed through.

[Long involved handwave]
 
>Ergo, the Solomani are still ruled by the descendants of the Vilani occupation
>force ... which must have been particularly harsh to suppress all possible
>opposition to the coup.
> 
>Really, nothing else explains the complete and total victory of a
>militaristic/totalitatian coup against a democratic state.

That is not a fact, it is an assumption you make, Philip. An assumption that
I for one don't agree with.

>There must have been resistance ... so how was it suppressed?

Take a look at how militaries in the Real World have taken over democratic
states. Take a look at several political "what if" novels about the overthrow
of the USA (though these are far more suspect, of course, often containing
their own unproven assumptions). Still, unless you have a religious belief
that "real" democracies cannot be subverted, many of these novels are at
least possible, some of them even plausible. Besides, how do you know that
the Terran Confederation of Estegariba's day was a "real" democracy?

And there were resistance of a kind. What were all those ethnic colonies
that were established during the Diaspora other than attempts to get out
from under a regime they didn't like? Perhaps you think that every single
one of them carry along their own Vilani masters?

> I really think that my solution is at least as likely as anyone else's.

The bottom line is that if you claim that the natural rate of tech advance
is something close to what we are experiencing today and will continue to
be at higher levels too, then you have to come up with a separate explanation
for why it didn't happen for every society in Charted Space except the
Darrians  --  well, the Darrians too, since they have had over two millenia
to clim up again. If you think the natural rate of advancement is a lot
slower, you only have to explain away two (or even just one) exception to
the rule. If you think that it is is at least as plausible that every
society in Charted Space except two are freak instances than that two
societies in CS are freak examples, then I can only say that you and I have
different notions about propabilities.

>It also explains why the Solomani remain behind ... the Solomani Party and
>SolSec (really dominated by closet Vilani who hid their identities during the
>Long Night, and suppress the truth) have a much tighter control over the
>people of the Solomani sphere, and *continue* to effectively (if not
>necessarily intentionally) and viciously suppress technological development.

Now you want to introduce a three millenia old conspiracy secretly controlling
all Solomani-descended colonies both within and without the Confederation,
including, I suppose, those long-range colonies that were sent off BEFORE
Estagarriba let the Vilani take over. We certainly do have different notions
about what is plausible and what isn't.

>The Terrans running the 2I broke down Vilani conservatism *just* enough to
>allow *some* advancement ... at slightly more than the snail's pace the
>Vilani were used to, and slightly faster than the repressive Solomani
>regime allows the true Terrans.

And slightly faster than the Zhodani, the K'Kree, the Hivers, the Aslans, the
Vlazdumecta, and the many other races living outside the reach of the Vilani
and the Solomani. 
 
>Well, it *makes sense* ... is it true? How otherwise do you explain the lack
>of Terran revolts against the RoM?

Off the top of my head:

1) There were some but they were suppressed. That period isn't exactly well
   documented yet.

2) Things weren't bad enough under the RoM to spark revolts.

3) The RoM allowed malcontents to pack up and move elsewhere, thereby
   relieving the pressure sufficiently to keep the lid on.

4) The Templars secretly controlling the Terrans kept them under control.

5) The RoM put something in the water.

6) A resurgence of the roleplaying fad allowed the downtrodden Terrans to
   escape into their own fantasy worlds. And with all their scientists
   trying to get their MUs to 30th level, they didn't have time to invent
   anything.

>>Can you prove how long it will usually take to advance technology beyond
>>TL 9? Can you even prove that the speed with which we have advanced in
>>the last couple of centuries is not a freak occurrence?
> 
>No, but the speed of advance is indicative ...

One example merely proves that it is possible. It says absolutely nothing
about how likely it is.

>...as are the cultural reasons for it. There would have to be some huge
>disaster to change this ...

A huge disaster is one possible reason. Another possible reason is that in
the nature of things advancement is very difficult and rapid advancement
depends on rare circumstances. And since almost every society in the
Traveller universe display slow advancement, regardless of whether they
have catastrophes or not, I think it is far more likely.

An aside about Vilani conservatism. Even if the TL advancement of the 3rd
Imperium is typically, the Vilani were slowpokes. Under this theory it
should typically take a couple of millenia to get from TL 9-10 to TL 15.
The Vilani stayed at TL 11 for longer than that. 


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 23:00:01
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Transponders

>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Transponders
>...
>>I have no dought that these thing are true today in a world where the
>>greatess distance travellable can have records sent in minutes.  What happen
>>when getting a record from 'next door' takes two week?  What about a
>>wandering ship that is from two sector away?  It may take a year to get any
>>responce and two or three years to get a complete responce.

*manic laughter* two weeks ??? You can get records out of 'next door' (ie
Legals or the Contracting Divisions) in two weeks ???

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 09:09:40 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa
On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Black ICE wrote:
> Best bet is to subscribe to Pyramid.  $15/year, for _much_ more content
> than a print magazine can carry (updated weekly!).  Go to:
>
> http://www.sjgames.com
But if I only play Traveller, and not any other GURPS games, how much of
Pyramid can be of any interest to me?
****************
just this week there was an article on the inve gavar(SP), that terrorist
organisation...plus you get to see (and comment on) all the GT stuff before
it goes to the printer.

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 09:28:03 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 23:33:33 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Quite Long)


Backfit HEPLaR if you want, and knock out the artifical acceleration
limits, but I would love to see something as simple as HG, even if it is an
abstract re-write of QSDS.
***************
sounds you you want the SDS from GT.

I don't necessarily want HG style combat (although I do want descriptive
abstract non-hex map combat as an option as hex stuff turns some of my
players off).
**************
the Space opera combat system from CI

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 09:30:31 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> writes:
>_Knightfall_ is by GDW and is set circa 1120. I can't imagine what reason you
>will cook up for why that somehow dosen't count, but I'm confident that you
>will think of something.

Maybe because Knightfall was written by the folks of DGP? (Personally I
regard both GDW and DGP as canon, and strive to remain consistant with
everything they've published.)

IMTU, I have an alternate explanation for Virus, which has never 'leaked'
into the writing I've done for publication. (Although I'm willing to
explain it if you are curious.)

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:33:36 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

TravelrTNE@aol.com wrote:
> No, they say, "If you want your ships to enter our space, you put this new
> transponder system."  No doubt, specs are provided, etc etc.

I don't see how the spec could be provided in order to do what the Imperium
ultimately wanted to do, at least considering Research Station Omnicrom. Why
use the Deyo over the older, established transponder? Why justify the cost?
As far as pure transponder functions are concerned, the old system worked
peachy-keen. Plus, its established and stable. The cost of upgrading the
Imperium to a new system would be rather staggering (remember, you not only
have to upgrade the ships, but the systems used by Space Traffic Controllers
and Starports). Economics would force a "it ain't broke, don't fix it"
mentality - UNLESS there was a tangible benefit to the Deyo chip over the
exisiting system. In my mind (and I could be wrong, of course), that
advantage ultimately is the back door that the Deyo chip allows into a
ship's system to shut it down, thus allowing for "soft kills" without a
shot. Plus, with its limited sentience, the Deyo would be able to perform
intellegence operations as well. I don't think the Imperium would advertise
either of these abilities, and certainly wouldn't give the specs to a
foreign government.

Plus, giving the full specs of the Deyo system to another government is to
admit the existance of the Cymbelline (sp?) chips...this is bad for two
reasons:
	a) The applications of the chips have incredible military potential - truly
intelligent weapon systems, robots, etc...thus, it should be treated as
controlled technology.
	b) There could be some (not huge, mind you, but some) public outrage at
using a sentient species as, essentially, a slave. Even though the Deyo
chips are mutations and are essentially lobotomized, I'm sure sophont rights
groups would scream bloody murder. While he's no saint, if Strephon holds
true to his publicly stated feelings about sentience, he would not approve
the Deyo experiment UNLESS the chips themselves volunteered. In my mind, the
Deyo chips were created at the whim of Lucan, not Strephon (this may not be
canon...I don't know the actual date of Deyo creation, since my copy of SM
is at home). And why would Lucan do it? Power. Simple and pure power. And
there would be no way he would make the true purpose behind Deyo public.

> The Imperial markets are *huge* and remember the Imperium mostly exists to
> foster *internal* trade.  The same may or may not hold true for the other
> polities, but my bet is that the others lose more than the Imperials do to
> losing the trade.  In any case, it's more than reasonable (to me
> anyways) to
> adopt the IFF system of of a foreign govt if you wish do business in their
> territory.

Within reason. Blindly accepting another government's IFF system isn't
likely to happen, and as I said I can't see the Imperium giving out the
complete Deyo specs.


> Infection was
> also made easy by computer control of tight-beam commo.  "Encoding and
> decoding, correcting for the doppler shifting in messages sent
> between ships
> with tremendous crossing vectors, keeping tight-beam antennae on
> targets with
> accuracies measured in attoradians, all of these tasks were taken by the
> computer to simplify the task of small multi-tasked crews.  Incoming and
> outgoing messages were not sent or received by human hands, they
> were mediated
> by the ship's computer- its central nervous system.  By tacking
> its invasive
> code onto these messages, a virus could ensure that its infection
> would pass
> directly through the target's central computer system."  SM pg 77.

I won't beat a dead horse, but this is what bugged me the most about Virus.
I have no problem with  Deyo equipped ships infecting other Deyo equipped
ships and equipment...I can handwave that away. But I can't rationalize Deyo
being able to attack and usurp any computer system, Deyo or no. Just doesn't
work for me. YYMV.

> I respect your right to do whatever you want IYTU (as if i can do anything
> about it, in any case <g>). I most likely would even enjoy
> hearing about it.
> I just don't think the OTU should pretend TNE never happened.  I love the
> sense of loss that strikes me from reading Survival Margin.

For the background material IMTU, Hard Times and Virus do occur...it's just
slightly different than canon. Virus is nearly widespread in the Imperium
becuase so many Military ships have Deyo...and most new ships do as well.
These ships become vampires and destroy planets/other ships. Big mess. Some
infections occur outside the Imperium, but not as bad as canon describes it,
and some governments/technological bases survive mostly intact.

> It's also been stated that DGP went beyond what was intended.  How do you
> interpret G:T Aliens I being explicity instructed by "Miller and
> Wiseman" not
> to use anything DGP?

I had not heard that. If true, then I retract my previous statement.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                         |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/ - AOL IM: Iowa Akins |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/ - AOL IM: CMS AndyA  |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+    |
|       vi+ da+                                                        |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+      |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                             |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:06:48 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>>A pirate inside 100 dia. is toast.  A pirate that has not got his H2 tanks
>>full and a ploted jump deserves to be toast.
>
>Yes, but the problem is inside 100 diameters is where the interstellar
>traders are. 'Chicken stealing' in the outsystem - raiding isolated belter
>colonies, stealing sublight cargo shuttles and so on - is a different
>matter. Much lower risk, much lower reward ... 'There are old pirates, and
>there are bold pirates, but there are very few old, bold pirates'.
>
>

What about subsidised pirates?  One with unofficial 'letters of mark'?  Back
at the Varga example.  What if the 'Varga pirates' were Zoodanni or
Solomanni backed?  Any booty they get is fee and clear.  Their saleries are
payed and repair bases are available in the Extents.  Their primary job is
to raise a little heck for a few years before an attack on the other border.
When the real attack comes they keep up the pressure or press even harder
but only in 'pirate' mode to avoid tipping their hard.  This would pull
ships off the line to deal with the pirate patrols.  A cheap way to gaina an
advantage.  Add in so Zoodoni spys to provide intel on target and you got a
great place to put the characters.  Maybe start the the Traveller Adventure
to throw them off.  The meson guns are for the privateers big ships.  Add in
a Zoo or Sol heavy cruiser or strike carrier group in the Extents to deal
with any large patrol group and stir for fun.

Things start to get interesting when the fronteir regions are getting cutt
off because of the pirates and the war.  The PC and their ship are hired and
armed for local defence.  Perhaps an emergence refit of their far trader to
give them two more turrets?  Let them work this job a while before they have
to face a flight of raiding scout ships with a Varga raider cruiser on a
smash and grab.  The scouts hit the planets' supply points with marrines and
grab the goodies while the cruiser and its' escorts hold the high gaurd.  Of
course the defences have been weeken by previous raids that the PCs helped
fight off and sabatage.  The PCs ship should get chewed beyond repair.  Some
good roleplaying and enmergency repairs to let it survive reentry but to
badly burned to be repaired but as the planet scrambs to find defensive
units a rumer of an old cruiser hull in an abandoned scrap metal yard
surfaces...can the PC claim this hull before others find out about it?  Can
they get it space worthy before the next raid?  SHould they run or fight on?
Can they salvage enough parts from their damaged ship?  Where can they find
the military grade NPAWs for their Kinyener class battle cruiser hull?

Any comments/suggestions?  I have a group that may be ready to start up next
weekend and I'd like to use this as a frame work for a campain.

Charles L.

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 07:08:59 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

TravelrTNE@aol.com wrote:

> It's also been stated that DGP went beyond what was intended.  How do you
> interpret G:T Aliens I being explicity instructed by "Miller and Wiseman" not
> to use anything DGP?

Simple: Real-world legal concerns. Neither Marc or SJG are licensed to use the
DGP material. (DGP was licenced to create it, but the final product is theirs,
not MM's, and for SJG to use material from, for instance V&V in G:T A1 they
would need permission.) Note: It is unlikely that the issue is this
simple...licencing of licenced derivative works is a legal can o' wyrms, that
cause people like Bloo to get paid exhorbitant amounts of money to straighten
out. 

Unlike us GM's who gleefully steal from anywhere and everywhere for our TU's,
the _publishers_ of material can't.

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:06:57 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature  (not long at all)

At 11:57 PM 10/7/98 EDT, you wrote:
>> I can only assume you missed the post.  Perhap you or I have missed some
>> posts and that may be the reason for the misunberstandings.
>
>Must have.  Maybe a lil cognitive dissonance, too? ; )
>
>> >I don't believe in "they."  And if you do, i'm sorry. : )
>> 
>> There have always been conspirators.  The THEY is not the one big THEY that
>
>Yeah, I know.  Just yanking your chain a lil. : )  I'm just not a big
>consipiracy buff.
>

Neither am I.  The only consipiracies I worry about are the terrorists (both
foriegn and domestic) that like taking pot shots at the USA.  They just
found two bombs in family planing clinics in our area!  That worries me.  I
just hope that these people do not learn to much from their mistakes.  Most
of them are far from briliant in their actions and I very much hope that
they stay that way.  I would not like to think about what a trained military
man could do if he were in one of these group to train and advise them.
That is scarry.

Charles L.

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:28:08 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Transponders

At 11:00 PM 10/8/98, you wrote:
>
>>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Transponders
>>...
>>>I have no dought that these thing are true today in a world where the
>>>greatess distance travellable can have records sent in minutes.  What happen
>>>when getting a record from 'next door' takes two week?  What about a
>>>wandering ship that is from two sector away?  It may take a year to get any
>>>responce and two or three years to get a complete responce.
>
>*manic laughter* two weeks ??? You can get records out of 'next door' (ie
>Legals or the Contracting Divisions) in two weeks ???
>

Oops!  I forgot, beuacrats are slower than jump drives.  Better add in some
'trusty-rusty' time there.  Any ideas about how much 'paper work' lag time
is in the TU?



Charles L.

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 10:35:25 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: G:T and intellectual property (was re: Transponder's true nature)

Andy Atkins wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> It's also been stated that DGP went beyond what was intended.  How do you
> interpret G:T Aliens I being explicity instructed by "Miller and
> Wiseman" not
> to use anything DGP?

I had not heard that. If true, then I retract my previous statement.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That may be a matter of intellectual property - whomever owns the
copyright on DGP materials may not be willing to give it for free
to SJG, and SJG may have wanted a product that
consisted of property they can be sure to own (at least as far as
their contract with Far Future Enterprises).

I do have some concerns about whether Canon (or canon) produced
by SJG for G:T will be available as source material for Traveller
authors. Loren, does SJG have a policy on this you could direct
us to?

Walt Smith

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 16:32:15 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: GT EMS Sensors

Bruce Alan Macintosh wrote:

> >Looking at this solely from a game play point of view, how does this
> >strike you? Stay passive and have a smaller area of detection. Go active
> >and have a larger area, but also give your own position away.  I think
> >it makes good *game* sense, but perhaps not good *science* sense.
>
> It depends on how weapon ranges compare to sensor ranges, of course.

<snip>

>  I generally like submarine-like sensor capabilities -
> active sesnros are shorter ranged but guaranteed to detect everything within
> their range, passive sensors are longer ranged but only ves "noisy" targets.

I tend to look at space combat in the same manner. Lots of sneaking around using
passive sensors followed (if needed) but short bursts of active activity.
You could always say that beam weapons require an active targetting solution,
whereas missiles can get away with a passive one. The missile gets launched
based on a passive solution and gets course corrections to place it in the same
hex as the target. It then goes active to aquire a hard targetting solution.

Paul Bendall

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 10:51:08 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Pets of the future

steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com> writes:
>I think a small a "Pets & Pests" or "101 Critters" might be a great
>resource.  Everything from Cats to Rats, Dogs to Parrots, and . . .
>(cue shark music from Jaws) . . . the dreaded . . . the feared . . .

There's already a LWB (Little White Book) about animals (101 Animals, 101
Beasts, something like that). Some of these critters would make nice pets.

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 11:03:10 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: GURPS and Munchkins

"Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net> writes:
>Okay, I must just live in a boring RPG town, and I don't go to conventions
>so I see none of this. I tend to buy stuff based on how it looks and reads
>rather than the people who play it (there's not many opportunities to see
>people playing most games around here).
>
[snip]
>
>Question (not a hassle) are the people you play with so set in their ways
>that they won't try something new?

Not really, but we don't have the money for it. I have the largest
collection, being (a) the oldest, (b) the one with the largest disposable
income (no kids yet), and (c) something of a completist once I start a
system. Even I can't afford to try everything, and as we try to swap
refereeing around to change to a different system would mean almost
everyone would have to buy the books.

We run Traveller (a combo of MT/TNE/homebrew), Star Wars, Babylon 5 RPG,
and Space 1889. (My Ottawa friends run Runequest and Cthuhlu, but I don't
routinely play with them, because a 10 hour round trip on a weekday night
is ridiculous!)

In one sense GURPS might be ideal, and we have been thinking about it.
OTOH, we also have Dream Park, which is a lot simpler, cheaper, and fits
our non-SF "melodramatic action comedy" style better. 
>
>
>I think that's what it boils down to: the friend factor, which is why I
>don't see much of this stuff. 

That's it.
>
>
>I dunno. I always find it very interesting when two different people have
>such different experiences with the same things.

Yup.



I'll play ANYTHING, even D&D, with my friends. I'll play a REALLY good
game with jerks on an infrequent basis, but the game has to make up for
the jerks, which is hard for an RPG. (Can do it with a wargame.)

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 11:14:53 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Transponders

Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au> writes:
> Remember the the military makes up only a
>>fraction of one percent of the population.  For every soldier there are
>>hundreds of civilians.
 <Charles>
>
>
>Depends how militarised the society is. Check out, say, the American Civil
>War, or (even better) France in WW1.

Or Canada and Newfoundland during WWI and WWII. Both had more men under
arms, proportional to population, than Britain and France.  (And lost
more, because the British regarded "colonials" as natural cannon-fodder.)

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:46:18 -0700
From: scharlto@ifsna.com
Subject: Re: (was "It Isn't Traveller")

Ah, Bruce is hanging out at the College of Pharmacy, surrounded by
interesting chemicals, and he's running a fever.

Remind me not to drive anywhere NEAR the University of Arizona campus
today...

Steve Charlton

Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 22:01:35 -0700
From:
Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> wrote
>
> Ok ok it's late, I'm running a fever, and feeling silly.
>

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 08:57:35 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

At 11:13 PM 10/7/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Douglas Berry writes:
>>Pocket Empires gives standard times for raising TL. 
>
>But that is for uplifting and bootstrapping, isn't it? It's not for original
>research TL advancement IIRC.

Nope, it includes original research.  I can't find the book at the moment
(have had the flu all week.. the place is a diaster), but I seem to recall
that going from TL13 to 14 took about 400 years, barring any miraculous
breakthroughs.
- --

+-------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry    | 
+-------------------------------------+
| "I created the universe; give ME    |
|  the gift certificate!!"            |
|        - Lisa Simpson, Overachiever |
+-------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 08:59:43 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Mea Revolutionary Culpa

At 01:38 PM 10/7/98 -0700, you wrote:

>But if I only play Traveller, and not any other GURPS games, how much of
>Pyramid can be of any interest to me?

A surprising amount.

Pyramid is a wonderful resource for gamers in genral.  The reviews,
columns, and generic articles can be used by just about anyone.
- --

+--------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net  |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/    |
+--------------------------------------+
| "Oh, My God.. they killed STREPHON!  | 
|  You Bastards!!!!                    |
|                -Grand Admiral Kyle   |
+--------------------------------------+

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #917
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Thursday, October 8 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 918



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Dogs, but not Vargr
Re: Dogs, but not Vargr
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Truth is gaining on fiction....
Re: GT EMS Sensors
Re: Military History (was re: Ironclads)
TCS press release
Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)
Re: Trade and Economics (sorry Loren)
Re: Keith catalog
Re: Keith catalog
Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Marc Miller and the Half Die
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: Transponders
Re: Piracy
Re: G:T alien races I art
Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:40:01 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Dogs, but not Vargr

In mail you write:

>>From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
>>Subject: Re: Dogs, but not Vargr 
> ...
>>>   Actually, the rules on telepathic (presumably) central direction for
> fighter
>>> pilots in Traveller (A:4) aren't terribly generous, and still difficult to
>>> justify even for Zho pilots who could all be telepathic themselves (ship
> tactics
>>> levels for the controller are conveyed as tactical skill to each of the
> pilots.)
>>
>>Tines aren't 'linked up' just for minutes at a time, they're linked up as 
> long 
>>as they're intelligent.  It's *ONE* mind shared between 4 to 8 bodies in 
> close 
>>quarters, with thoughs supported by ultrasonic networking.  There's no 
>>telepathy involved.
>
>   Yes, but that's the closest analogue in Trav. Besides, they're monumentally
> screwed by significant time-lags (they're helped to use radio in the book,
> IIRC), eliminating the flexibility of large volume coverage. They might
> simply make better gunship crews (or ground combat units).

The distances at which they can handle the lag are proportional to the
velocity difference between sound and light. I make that ratio to by
roughly 9e5:1. So since we *know* they can handle 10 meters using
sound, then using radio they can handle 9000 km. If they can handle 100
meters, then they can handle 900,000 km using radio.

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

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 01:53:05 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Dogs, but not Vargr

In mail you write:

> On Sun, 4 Oct 1998 21:21:17 -0400, shadow@krypton.rain.com
> (Leonard Erickson) wrote:
>
>>>> There is a great novel with telepathic wolves.
>>>> Vernor Vinge, Fire on the Deep, IIRC.  The wolves are only intelligent in
>>>> packs of 3-6, and they all see through each others eyes.
>
> Subintelligent in threes.  Some packs have been known to go
> larger than six, but it's rare (Amdiranifani was one example).
>
>>> The Tines weren't telepathic.  They 'networked' with ultrasound.  Great 
>>> concept for a player race, though...
>
>>The tines alsao show up in one other story by Vinge. It's set on a
>>planet just inside the slow zone.
>
> Y'know, you're a real bastard.  You drop a tidbit like this, and
> you say _nothing_more_ about the story in question.  No title, no
> collection, no ISBN, no publisher, no _nothing_.  C'mon, GIVE.
> Bastard.

That's because I can't recall any of those details. And my library is
in storage... I *think* it was in a collection of Vinge short stories.

>>Tines *would* be a neat addition to Traveller. And a Tine/Hiver
>>alliance would be scary. The Hivers might be able to talk the Tines
>>into "designing" individuals again. 
>
> I've been trying to come up with a way of bringing the Tines into
> Traveller.  Chargen promises to be a _bitch_.
>
>>That "harmless" ambassador and his staff (possibly as many as a dozen
>>"persons") may be able to rearrange into a crack espionage or combat
>>team simply by reconfiguring their comm links. 
>
>>Luckily, it takes *very* unusual circumstances to be able to handle
>>that sort of multiple personality. And Tines would find it distasteful
>>for reasons obvious to anyone who has read "A Fire Upon the Deep". 
>
> Yah.  IMTU, if the Hivers ever suggest this to the Tines, I think
> there will be a _violent_ reaction.  The legends of Flenser and
> Steel will _not_ be forgotten.

On the other hand, agents do extremely distasteful things all the time.

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

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 09:06:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

DustyLV769@aol.com writes:
 
> On a similar note...do anti-grav thrusters mangle physics as we know it
> (other than not being possible w/ our current tech?)  I would be much more
> comfy using something that is at least possible, as opposed to reactionless
> drives (which always cause my players to snicker).

Using standard power requirements, yes -- they violate conservation of energy. 
They'd avoid mangling thermodynamics if you give them a power requirement of
over 1 watt * (thrust, newtons) * (velocity, meters per second, relative to
controlling mass), where both thrust and velocity are vectors (i.e.
acceleration takes power, deceleration takes _negative_ power, turning takes
zero power).  Exactly 1 watt * the product doesn't violate conservation of
energy, but is entropically dubious.

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 10:12:58 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Truth is gaining on fiction....

The future may be less like Traveller and more like CyberPunk than we
think...ripped from todays headlines...<insert catchy news show music>

This was grabbed from our local paper's web site:

Implant allows brain to activate computer

The Seattle Times 

SEATTLE - Scientists have developed an electronic device that when
implanted in the brain allows severely impaired patients to ``will'' a
computer to speak for them. It may someday help them move limbs and
other body parts. 

Called a neurotrophic electrode, the device harnesses brain cells'
electric impulses to move a computer cursor, which in turn activates
spoken words or phrases. 

``This is right on the cutting edge. It's `Star Wars' stuff. . . . We
see it as replacement therapy for whatever has caused a (physical)
loss,'' said Emory University scientist Roy Bakay, who presented his
research yesterday to the Congress of Neurological Surgeons. More than
2,000 neurosurgeons are attending the meeting in Seattle this week. 

Bakay, vice chairman of the neurosurgery department at Emory University,
said the technology, called cognitive engineering, could someday be used
to help paralyzed patients move limbs or prosthetic devices. For now, it
is being tested in patients with the most severe impairments, including
the inability to speak and move their eyes. 

700,000 suffer strokes

More than 700,000 Americans a year suffer strokes and thousands more are
impaired from spinal-cord injuries and illnesses such as Lou Gehrig's
disease. Most can think quite clearly, but many are severely hampered by
their inability to communicate adequately. 

Bakay and his Emory colleague, Philip Kennedy, conducted extensive
research on monkeys before their first human experiments. The system
they devised uses a combination of the brain's most basic functions and
space-age electronics. 

Before the device is implanted, physicians first examine the brain
through magnetic-resonance imaging (MRI) to learn precisely the areas
that control muscle movements. When the patient thinks about moving an
arm or hand, for example, the MRI shows the increased activity in
certain areas: blood flow increases and the brain cells ``fire,'' or
conduct impulses. 

The key device in the system is the neurotrophic electrode, a glass cone
about the size of a ballpoint-pen tip that is implanted through the
skull and into the cortex just above the ear. Two electrodes are
implanted to facilitate vertical and horizontal movements of the cursor. 

The cone contains a gold wire and nerve tissue from the leg. Nerve cells
inside the cone stimulate cells of the cortex to grow into the device
and form contacts. The wire records the impulses between the cells. 

``It produces a little brain inside the electrode,'' Bakay said. 

Once the implant is made, the skull is closed and no wires go through
it. A receiver and amplifier for each implant sit in slight indentations
in the top of the skull. 

Thoughts make cursor move

The Emory University scientists and patients have learned through trial
and error how to tailor thoughts of movement for each patient. For
example, thinking about moving the hand and foot may make the cursor
move up and down for one patient. 

``At first it was difficult to stop the cursor on the speech icon, so we
had to reprogram the system,'' said Bakay, who has been working on the
project for more than eight years. 

Pointing to different icons produce phrases such as ``I am thirsty'' and
``turn the light on'' and ``See you later. Nice talking to you.'' 

Two patients have had the implants. The first was a 52-year-old woman
who eventually died of Lou Gehrig's disease (amyotrophic lateral
sclerosis). ``She really wanted to do this and we learned a lot about
the basic principles of this from her,'' Bakay said. 

The scientists are now working with a 57-year-old man, a stroke victim
who is paralyzed from the neck down. 

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:57:06 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: GT EMS Sensors

Rupert Boleyn wrote:

>Would a reasonable reflect of this in game terms be to give passive sensors
>much longer range than active sensors, but only require one detection task
>for an active sensors while requiring multiple tasks (at say, one task per
>turn) to build up a targetting solution with a passive sensor?

Depends on the sensor & situation. Typically, you are looking at two
discrete cases for passive sensors: 

1. Detecting some element of the opposition's signature (e.g. Neutrino
detection of power plants); 
2. Detecting the opposition's active sensors (Passive EMS detection of
active EMS).

A quick and dirty way to manage this would be to leave detection ranges
as they are for the first case, but to increase them to one range band
more than the active sensor transmitting for the second case.

In either case, the passive sensor tells you the vector towards the
target; but not the range.

In MT Terms:

To complete target motion analysis using passive sensors
Difficult, Sensor Ops, Ship Tactics, 20 mins, Uncertain

If the result is Some truth, an incorrect answer is given
If the result is No truth, the TMA is inconclusive
If two ships attempt this task on each other, it becomes confrontational

This task must suceed before any course can be plotted on the basis of
the other ship (closing etc).

Aetherem Vincere
Matt.
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk  | To Err is Human
My employers and I have a deal - They don't | To forgive is not Air Force Policy
speak for me, and I don't speak for them.   |   -- Anon, ETPS

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 09:04:43 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Military History (was re: Ironclads)

At 07:11 PM 10/7/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Black Ice wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>ObTrav:  IYTUs, how far back do your oldest military units trace
>lineage?  F'r instance, is there a jump troop unit that traces its
>history back to the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment of World War II? 
>How 'bout the Glosters?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>Seventh Cavalry (Solomani Grav Infantry, "Boots & Saddles") claims to 
>trace it's history back to pre-American Civil War Terra, but their lineage
>has been challenged by some post-Invasion-Earth Solomani units. This 
>makes for a good intra or inter-service barfight excuse. 

The Imperial Marines trace their lineage to the Terran Confedartion
Marines, and back from that to several pre-space Earth military units.
Specifically, the 82nd Airborne Divison, the USMC, The Royal Marines (UK),
The Highlanders, and other small elite forces.  These units were brought
together for the First Interstellar War.

Marines in the 3I still wear maroon berets, and for some ungodly reason
love bagpipes.
- --

+-------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry    | 
+-------------------------------------+
| "I created the universe; give ME    |
|  the gift certificate!!"            |
|        - Lisa Simpson, Overachiever |
+-------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:15:50 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: TCS press release

TCS Practice; for Public Release.

Ok, we have almost a full complement of players.

The first scenario involves a low tech system (TL < 10) that has to import
almost all equipment.  There are some orbital and planet based defenses.(to
 be chosen by .......). Some SDBs (run by ......),  There are also Two
other players.........running.........., and .......running........

[names deleted adeleted for security reasons]

The main world is a size 8  Planet.  it has 2 moons one at 8 hexes (Treat
as an asteroid).  and one at 16 hexes (size 2)

The system is laid out as follows:

Star
Rockball
Mainworld
Small gas giant
asteroid belt

There is a research base on the innermost moon of the gas giant (treat as
asteriod),  and a mining colony on another (lanthium or some other rare
metal).  the mining colony is on a size 2 moon.

the players are building their fleets with this information (plus other
information that will be given to each of them.). Personell for the fleets
will Cost 0.5M$ each. The will have skill 14. TL 12 forces will cost
double.

The play will be by email plus on IRC if it can be coordinated.

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 09:12:59 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)

At 10:32 AM 10/7/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Douglas E. Berry wrote:
>
>>>Hm, I see a way out of the problem of dyslexic one-handed 14-year-old
>>>streetkids with loads of skills.
>>
>>In GURPS, that 14 year old can spend a maximum of 28 points on skills.  The
>>rule is 2x age.
>
>So? As a player of mine once showed me, give the character a 14DX and a
>14IQ, then take 56 half-point skills. That's a load of skills at better
>than average for a 14-year old. :-)

OK, that character has the dexterity of a pro athlete and is a near genius.
 He's already paid 90 points for stats (assuming 10 ST and HT).  56 points
in skills brings the cost to 146 points.  If you are playing a 100-point
base, that character is going to need 46 points in disads and quirks.
Also, he can't take Youth, since he's at least 23.

Sounds like a neat Jack-of-All-Trades character.
- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 09:24:41 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Trade and Economics (sorry Loren)

At 09:48 PM 10/8/98, you wrote:

>The major criticism I have are
>
>(1) the existing trade rules do not encourage long distance trade (ie
>across a couple of subsectors)

From what I've seen, there is very little call for trans-subsector trade.
In my design for Lunion, the only real trade comes from the TL15 worlds in
adjacent subsectors (Glisten, Trin, Mora, Rhylanor), along with runs to the
Imperial worlds in Five Sisters.

>(3) prices of 'trade goods' do not scale with the prices of actual goods in
>Traveller (for example, what if a PC with a Type S wants to buy 4 10m3
>Fission power plants at a TL9 IN world, to take to an asteroid belt to sell
>? According to FFS2, the power plants should cost about MCr 1 each in TL9
>credits)

This is why I'm hoping to get a hold of 101 Cargos and the GURPS Traveller
Merchants book.  Being a gearhead, I would really enjoy a more detailed
trade system.

>(4) they push Travellers away from poor, underdeveloped worlds and towards
>the hi-pop, hi-tech, good starport worlds, as these are the profitable
>worlds to trade with - if the Free Traders are picking up the scraps from
>the Megacorps, then it should be the other way around (reverse the Starport
>cost effects !)

This is a game effect.. the Referee should deveolp a reason for the
characters to avoid the main worlds.  Perhaps the big boys are trying to
squeeze out the competition?

>(7) there is no framework to deal with players who set up even a
>rudimentary trade infrastructure 

Once again, this should be handled by the Referee on a case by case basis.

>(10) we dont have some definitive guidelines for aging effects and related
>price depreciation in starships, which I think is important given that
>starships are usually bought on 40 year mortgages

I've modified the "wear vlaues" from TNE to good effect. Each major
subsystem has a wear value that determines performance and rate of breakdowns.

- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 10:19:31 PDT
From: "Paul Zumstein" <pzumstein@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Keith catalog

Please send me a copy of the catalog.

Paul Zumstein
18560 E. Grace St.
Linden, CA 95236


>Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 10:07:03 -0700
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>From: Sanders <timmon@primenet.com>
>Subject: Keith "Lost Supplements" Catalog...
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>
>Keith "Lost Supplements" Collection Catalog
>
>I've nearly finished a small catalog that features the front covers of 
the
>supplements, a brief description describing each supplement, and 
ordering
>information. I will be mailing it out later this week. If you ordered 
LOM,
>then I will automatically be sending you a copy. For those who missed 
out
>on LOM, and would like a copy of the catalog, please send me an email
>containing your snail-mail address.
>
>Cordially,
>Paul Sanders
>Clans MacAlasdair, Comyn, and O'Delany 
>
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 10:23:04 PDT
From: "Paul Zumstein" <pzumstein@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Keith catalog

Oops, sorrrrrrrrrrry.

PZ

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:37:12 -0400
From: "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>
Subject: Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)

>Hm, I see a way out of the problem of dyslexic one-handed 14-year-old
>streetkids with loads of skills.


As a GM you have to watch out for munchkins like that. High cost disads can
impede play. As a GM I encourage my players to take more -5 point disads
because they help to flesh out the campaign and sometimes give good story
hooks (like a 5 point enemy). I may let them have a 10 point disad, but
anything higher needs a really good story around it.

>So? As a player of mine once showed me, give the character a 14DX and a
>14IQ, then take 56 half-point skills. That's a load of skills at better
>than average for a 14-year old. :-)


Unless he's Star Trek's own Wesley Crusher<G>

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:47:15 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

In a message dated 10/7/98 21:37:07 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
goldendj@pcisys.net writes:

>On a similar note...do anti-grav thrusters mangle physics as we know
it (other
>than not being possible w/ our current tech?)  I would be much more
comfy
>using something that is at least possible, as opposed to
reactionless drives
>(which always cause my players to snicker).

<< 	Sure enough, they do ... constant power input for constant thrust
 (i.e. constant acceleration), therefore the total energy input is
 proportional to time.  >>


Well, phooey!  I guess I'll have to get back to waving...:-)

Dusty

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 13:47:46 -0700
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Marc Miller and the Half Die

MJ Dougherty wrote:

> The T4 system worked OK for me.
>
> I read it, thought 'half dice, how odd' and used it.
>

Nothing is better than the feeling you get when you know you're playing a
well constructed game.  When the game mechanics are good, you feel like your
money has been well spent on something the game designers put a lot of
thought into.

The revised T4/T5 system, with that one half die in there, seems haphazard
to me.  It feels like a stop-gap, something put in place because the game
designers were too lazy to come up with something better.

If the whole system used half die, I'd feel differently, because there would
seem to be a method to their madness.  But, that one category, with that one
half die in it really seems out of place to me.

I don't get a good feeling about it, and I don't think Marc has taken enough
time to work out this bug.

This can be fixed, and it should be.

My suggestion:  use a system, like T4, where dice increase in whole dice.
This can be accomplished if the work is put into it.  Or, use a different
system, where Stat gives you points and level gives you dice to throw.

For example:  a character wants to fire his gun.  He's got a Dex of 7 and
Pistol-2.  I'd have him throw 2D6 +7 to hit the target number.

Or something like that.  You get the idea.

This also make for a more logical argument for Stats ranging from 1-15
whereas skills generally range from 1-6.  With skills adding a whole die to
the throw, all of a sudden a skill becomes something that a character really
needs--vs one point that a character would like to have but could really
care less about.

Some thought needs to be put into this, but I'm sure a great system could
evolve from this line of thinking--something that will seem intelligent to
use, not haphazard.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 12:01:43 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

>From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
>Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature
...
>and Starports). Economics would force a "it ain't broke, don't fix it"
>mentality - UNLESS there was a tangible benefit to the Deyo chip over the
>exisiting system. In my mind (and I could be wrong, of course), that
>advantage ultimately is the back door that the Deyo chip allows into a
>ship's system to shut it down, thus allowing for "soft kills" without a
...

  I'd have thought that the advantage (to a paranoiac) would have been the
enhanced security; I felt that the sabotage function was a little too risky
to develop.

...
>	b) There could be some (not huge, mind you, but some) public outrage at
>using a sentient species as, essentially, a slave. Even though the Deyo
...

  IIRC, their status was not public knowledge, possibly because a genuinely
informed Imperium would have debated the issue and perhaps come to a decision
contrary to what INI and the paranoiacs wanted.

        Steven Hudson

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 12:01:47 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Transponders

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
...
>>*manic laughter* two weeks ??? You can get records out of 'next door' (ie
>>Legals or the Contracting Divisions) in two weeks ???
>>
>
>Oops!  I forgot, beuacrats are slower than jump drives.  Better add in some
>'trusty-rusty' time there.  Any ideas about how much 'paper work' lag time
>is in the TU?

  Hopefully it's mostly automated; given 3000 years the paperless office
may yet arrive <giggle, snort>. If it is automated then even more can be
had - particularly if someone does manage to hack INI's anomaly watchdog
programs (I assume that INI just ignores their own covert ops, observes
those of "friendly" <ha> agencies that they're aware of, and that Imperial
Lines is either known to them or filteree out by their system without
their knowledge).

        Steven Hudson

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 12:01:45 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>What about subsidised pirates?  One with unofficial 'letters of mark'?  Back
>at the Varga example.  What if the 'Varga pirates' were Zoodanni or
>Solomanni backed?  Any booty they get is fee and clear.  Their saleries are
>payed and repair bases are available in the Extents.  Their primary job is
>to raise a little heck for a few years before an attack on the other border.

  One house rule for the TML Interminable Ethically Challenged Merchant Debate
is that foreign supported (or based?) elements don't count, IIRC - isn't that
in the FAQ yet? :)

  Anyway, the most eficient anti-piracy units are the smaller ones which
have very little actual combat value in a fleet action; if normal piracy 
has a (believably, IMO) very low equilibrium level then any genuinely
threatening upsurge is going to scream "commerce raider precursors".

        Steven Hudson

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:03:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: neo@total.net
Subject: Re: G:T alien races I art

[I am several days behind on TML Digests because I've been up until five in
the morning every day for a week producing deckplans and illustrations for
G:T's _Alien Races 1_, hence the lateness of this reply...]

Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> sez,

>I've just visited the G:T site and it seems that some art 
>from Alien races I is up.
>
><http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/traveller/AlienRaces/art.html>
>
>Okay, I like it, I'm not sure about the Vargr ship, it just doesn't
>have enough fins etc. 

Doh. I did  put a few tiny fins on it, but maybe you're right. It's
supposed to be a small landing craft, so I figured they kept the fins to a
minimum in order to fit it into the vehicle bay :).

>However I do like it.

Glad to hear it.

>I assume that the six legged creature disembowling the Vargr is an Adduxur.

Actually, that's a Clotho, a fur-covered spidery-humanoid sophont that
communicates by spinning webs.

I don't know who did the Clotho illustration, but I must say he has far
more skill at anatomical forms than I.

Best,

 + GMG +
 

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <neo@total.net>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
    "Sex times Technology equals The Future." -- J.G. Ballard

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 12:13:51 PDT
From: "jim clem" <travmind@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB

- --====================987654321_0==_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Thanks for asking.  I'm just getting started, but I have a first cut at 
simplifying the SSDs.  Following is a GIF of my simpler Fed CA SSD. The 
idea is to create a system that is simple, fast, yet retains the flavor 
of SFB.  For this SSD, I have basically folded all the systems into only 
four basic groups, Hull, Engines, Weapons, and Shields.  The labs, 
transporters, bridges, etc are all in with the Hull group, the shields 
are only 6 numbers, these are marked off with hash marks.  The weapons 
and their firing arcs are the same, something I think is essential to 
the game.  All told, this ship takes the same number of hits to kill as 
the standard SSD, just in a faster way.  The various optional systems 
might be modeled depending on the percentage of hull boxes left.  Let me 
know any ideas you have.

Jim


- ----Original Message Follows----
From: "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>
To: <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:46:45 -0400
Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM

I'd love to help. What do you have so far?
- -----Original Message-----
From: jim clem <travmind@hotmail.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Wednesday, October 07, 1998 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB


>
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 11:53:02 -0800
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
>Subject: OFF TOPIC: SFB
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>
>>>
>>>Yep, I lost most of my old CT, along with a LARGE collection of
>>>wargames, and a nearly complete set of SFB (and you SFB players out
>>>there know, thats no small pile of stuff) in a fire.  It'll never be
>>>again I fear.
>>
>>Ouch, a full set of SFB?  That did hurt.  Get replacement will not be 
>easy.
>>I wish they'd get off there butts and get back into production.
>>
>>Charles.
>
>Since, until the tiff between ADB and TFG is resolved, there is no
>production of SFB... don't hold your breath.
>ADB writes and owns the copyrights.
>TFG publishes under exclusive liscence and sells to distributers.
>TFG has failed to pay ADB for over a year on products already sold.
>ADB won't make more til they get paid or TFG gives up the exclusive
>printing/distribution rights.
>TFG won't pay til they get more product.
>
>mexican standoff going to court. (based upon materials posted by 
various
>SFB staffers to newsgroups and on the SFB Web page).
>==========================================
>Aye, tis a sad state of affairs.  So in the meantime, I'm writing my 
own 
>version, a merging of what I feel are the best concepts of SFB, 
>StarFire, and some other things, into my own game system.  Anyone care 
>to get involved?  I'm planning to make it available for free.  And 
>trying to arrange it so it doesn't interfere with ADB and TFG's 
>copyrights.  We can discuss this between ourselves, or If there is 
>enough interest, I can set up an egroup for us.  Lemme know!
>
>
>
>Jim Clem, B.S.E.
>GM, The Scattered Worlds Traveller PbEM, Where Humaniti Carves out a 
New 
>Home
>http://www.geocities.com/area51/dimension/7081/trvpg1.html
>Founder and CEO, Diasporan Systems, Inc.
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>




______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


- --====================987654321_0==_
Content-Type: image/gif; name="fedca11.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: x-uuencode
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="fedca11.gif"

begin 644 fedca11.gif
M1TE&.#EAD`'T`8```````/___RP`````D`'T`0`"_XR/J<OM#Z.<M-H#,DCZ
MXJYHF4>6YHFFZLJV[OMLQLB1-(W5\,[W_@\,"B.RG.Y2#"23QJ'S"8U*IRSF
MPNI97JG<KO<+]N$86,L86PZKU^PV&+0MP6=QM_V.SXO'S8_HWZ`5HD=8:'A(
MP:>D4H2&^`@926B59M9W*9FIN0G$1!GR!TAWY,AI>HK*>(0I\3FZFAHK.QO(
M6AF#X`E+R]L;.Y<K!SPCXFM\C)RLO,S<[/P,'2T]35UM?8V=K;W-W>W]#1XN
M/DY>;GZ.GJZ^SM[N_@X?+S]/7V]_CY^OO\_?[_\/,*#`@00+&CR(,*'"A0P;
M.GP(,:+$B10K6KR(,:/&C?X<.WK\"#*DR)$D2YH\%BJERF(G18HR\;)EQ9A*
M:-9,Q%+F0IO!`BF:D%-GP*"X:OVL0%3HO6%$',BXA?2HTG9,@=9ZM:+J5'-:
M$UV]^:+K5F]2D;P\TZ/LV&QJD9#A`!5%V[72YKJ]DK)37+K-]F:ID\NO7,%\
M?=FU`?C#D,.%9S%&/"BQWL;,",N)C!>*9<J2'O?RS!G19F.C0^<!C:RT:3>J
MB9R]K'DUI]9->ZJF#1.W["FHD0ZZ347W[B?"(7P"'GQXH>+&?]?\&93G8N6G
MA>@"B_6,("[,J8==_)H4*%91NGMG9+ZYY*=OL7)/?QZRDS*NZ)/G'9][^?:V
M^?_#/_%??K7%MAXFVX41H(!?$8A9$]KUM$:""NXR'W^7)"4A3!/^D*$UO6TX
M(#\=>C<B6R!6,5")JZFX#8N<N6CBB1H:!"-=-6ISXU8Y$K-2CS[^Z.,7.PHU
M9%Q0'1FB?C)ZI6113JGG9!=#GC3E(E`N:"&632[YI!=&7IEEF%N2Q51O22DV
MB9!)2M:@EF-RTX@GI1T86)IJ@LDFA6UZ^<UUQ,AGH)75W1FEF'H>BA]97?X%
MRPA5KID<GGM.2NF;V!SU86+LX?'H?1"ZB:BGD48(S)FM=,5'J=)%!6&GBQ+Z
MJJ&?@BHE&W'VL1F==8)R*ZX]DN&GJ[(F6FB>LPYKZ:C_H[AB%84;I.&HL<;Y
M*2AK$4(::K6T\OE&F(0QJU@ESTKKE)S'JB$LCT"NR^ZOUKZQ%VWUS3HN9D'N
M&E@H=J0KCJMB99HJKC64@A.VL&*4;E7:K02LO>+]*6IF!G.[$;^*``PN):F:
M&D->Y"I;L:UPY39>Q-/P6TZ5U$+G+IIPZ0MG2%,&VYI=*",H,\6]VN#7S0=[
MI/+"JP(+\\?1^,Q5?D@G'=]H17^;:1M%:SLM<M3-J4.NJ01[%Z-7`TJ'UJC,
M:PG8LEF=@]@\YP0U<V3[!MMP:(?]7+PS&J%V"O-RG&VQILW]E*Y&Q[I(WG*1
M(GBEK7R]-AS@(HMGO7"C%YWB_NZ5O5O-WDK*9##/BF5RYWLB>?>*I1\;^,6G
M!WZNY9B/KJ[KG#>F>8%^X\2VZVYK27K<ION.^NR+VT[XZ<'?+GIH\FZ._/"P
MURU[\L<7__J+`#)/?;//9^_U]MMJK_PF]F6[-/"4E8_MXX,_@GX^[=^N?O3L
MGSW5^_;8GP[^\^B/#O_Q^,\TZ^V`7?T`H#L"]"41A6^`$]O?`F&00&>LRP4&
MI`H/(M@7X9G-1A=LH##:U;*T:+![A4&@!S>HNTZ,L&NTZ^`*20BY#O4N*P)D
MX`M9^#VJ0?"&TEM+@C"(HA'*D(?@X\L/3PC#CPVQ>2C4D0B)V,,4<@B*2&S)
M$:GH_SSN76Z'3$SB6'XXP>\(485=Q"$'75A&+Y*/C%I48_V>F$8S*E$O/Z)@
M#;D8Q^K%D(TYE.,7X=C&)K9ND"V8H2K.!\@^9@&$(42C(B?70AOF41:&/-P#
MQ3C)7V`QD$1RY",=L\E/6M&3D*,<"`AFG5"6LI.2Y*0EG44<5:Y/)B:491&W
MZ*)*7N^2=K1E%FT1RTSZ$F@7#*,8V)3+88:.E;1`Y3*#Z,I;EO`SHF#8?(`$
M35YJ<E(55"8Q>>',+9ZBF^_X#QJ&EDU@-C-SK7PF#;D)3G;BD9#MQ&4\Z3=/
M=QX2EJ"46S[%69F83,UXVMPG/9/!M5[*4Z'Y`MT]^\/0W_Y%%*#+>-L[E9.>
M<$HP,N8AISPR.LO/<'2B$DTG195!,[Y)$Y\FU6$&*]=2EF:EFM1@W4'UZ$]]
M[,RE@BSI_!R6-?F5+G$]_5LF"&;1DQH4![L3D`&1.M*^O1)BQ?'H4F*:R%<D
ME:>&L.K]L$I*06VUFUZ]JD&#`-6@2C4W*C5?TRYJ'94$BFH2HM99%22<9`(5
MHC?=95^C^%:]!?-A?-6G&9LJ(]WHE;!X$ZK9$'LBQ0ZV55']J_FJRB6E5K&E
M!VJ$8TD(V<1.%:V:FH.^!JJ*MD*22\O#$<3@REJ_7LIEH\ULS=!94<L*DT0.
MI*U;;?O1D1$TLYJ])B./2\!N$?]WE:D<8Q<[558:X<RY;7Q4=`\"70_J<JU3
M7.YN_SG'YU+,N]',:GBK.U[R,O>8U,WAS-2[V;!*$;T@@Z\HP3M?]];7OO<E
M:7[W*(7K1B1'0#QO?V'+W_@64KOMG4Z"5PL>Y$KX7A5Z,$[YJ%_Q5MC"%V:O
MANG;7`[[T;S_-7!W1>Q&_*[QPR=&<8K]NV(0>]C%/"-M@TU<3QJ_^*XX+C$%
M!4R2#!78Q]S=L8XA#..#;E>W'3ZR,.0;XPQCTLD+5K&2;\QC*F>YMCV.,GJT
M7,P?3WC,'D,PF*<L6"Q[F61GYA!FU7SE-+?9QEPF<IQE.V<,%Y6K2ETR4(",
MT=:R&,#^B\PSL7;LYS[_UGVX_>Z!<:>PN@YWS796<#G-?+?N7$Q.DE[TG:4\
M8GR\^:)NHX\6HJ;*(5.ZR*R^]);W;&0K77'/B>:SK<L+CUN<"1!+4%6O._`Y
M8+_LU%KIF6&1#-A/$SK49I78:Q?V6NPP]=<.HNT-$F?L:"?YA+6N-:[+>9;Z
M:`P[U3:09[4ZGOC%BZAR7B29W^W01[-C?,[9POC.O==-U?M<=L/7ME?8[5`"
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M?]BG6?1G??:74\WG?!)F@`>X?0FH?N@G@<0W?Q48:Q=H?1E(@-P'@@<X@/K7
M>^''@=ZG@8EW@L=W=2DH?2O8@?Z7?RH(@R9H>\D7@@RX4(CF@BQ8@\572@JH
M?#]H:3<EA#E(A.W7@Q.H@S)E%@_X?!:X@B,8>]0G?P*(?ZOW@5?(?E0X?"58
MA!+HA3BHA1LXA5EXA$`X@?PWAE8(@`C(AFBXA/OW@VTH<04HA2=HAV`X@R]8
MAW*XA>:7A!@H@V5(@X,(AX68AJTG@FP%A1"8AQRXAWA(@F'8B-"7AH*(B"'H
M@96(A)O^*'L4&(@1>(:8.(<VF(23V(=DR(AQ:(JC&(D7J(J&^(66Z(I%!XMF
MJ(>`Z(EJB(%8^(J]J(F;.(N92(J[^$&/B%S'*(F\6(7U!XJAV(G/N(#1N(:*
MR'H!V(7.6(N?:(V;AXU;V(K`B(O"R(RRR(UD.(R(6(RG:(ODR(.Y.'XUV([R
MZ(?TF(YN>(Z:0!2J57!!5Q#U:(ZQ>%0N<VTLY'*#,6V-AA=2X7$_$Q7*N(P$
M&0D)]7OJ(SEQ<Y!#577BDX]WZ(TH@8K><Q."MBQXQG)6)9#4.(0(=22X<1TF
MV8$L5R<J^9%\Z(LSR3Z8@FIHP8GDY@?Q!B8+5Y#!R)(AZ9+_)1>4929<*_=!
MJQ`U/IF3[U*.1SF5/WE42FD64$DY+1<GUE0R3EF45=F-5VF6LW%@&Z.3_N9[
M`9-[RD66ZKB/%:E6K=)(F_9PB^8TYO*6$$EZQDB1D!"3GS47,IF1/@>6VE8W
M_C@H<:F/@2F8`J-/-H-GG].4?_:.T^68(&F63<@CO)(K3*F3^#9M9M!O'FF4
M9;F.#>%KH"%7TH@NCBB1(#27MU@9W[B6=(F;6-D9N\F;NKF;GIF;W2><?4F<
MSU"<=W18;;(QT<&0\PB#M]4H.7<AU1EYT2E;&:D+4ME8OPB;V\B1=+)P8W6=
MI>@[DB.53@=T1(>;,)DVUBEME?6;_]YY?NY9DN.Y'2DEE/>(G;ND<?3"'C!%
M8L0H6)[%:30%E$+FFV?YGG1C"^C);A#'CGJSD/RFG<,YCN`Y6G;5H,_68M^8
M5UQ)-,*EH+Z9G`RJH;=IHLBYH"=ZHI&402NZ43(:H\')HC3Z9[/YB"/YA\>W
MB`#XHM/DHZP'I"TJ?3_Z0D%J1$=*I$EJI$,JCD6*HZB(I&FDI&?4>57*25?J
M0TP:I4XZI>YGE;2HC?7II;U(IG`(CU3:I%;ZI%G:IEOZICFJHP_(H_@(I6@J
MI3::IV.ZI^UYIGX*IGP*IU_JIF'JCJ(HIXAJCR`WJ(#:IV69IM]III'*BG\*
MHH$JJ9AJC?^6`9CBB**56JAZ^JB9:JE6.*EKN*:!5Z>"=Z?].:J">JB$&GQ:
MJDA<^D>GRIFI2I_BYZF)NHIJFJ)L:JB+2JO$2JJS"JFQNJFEVJF:>JG.&HV_
MVJBL&*J^"JVHRJG3FJV[NJV@Z*FM:J>9*:JU&J>W.J?(*JO&NJSF6JSHRJ@#
M27[*:JK,&JWT^JRZBI.\BJ'11ZWRBJ;7>ISZ2HD!BZM.1+#!BJH">WW_:I7A
MZ$W^VJW[^JT$FK#\JK"J.JRL*JYD]JKFZ:[)RJ[U&K+K"J_'*J;-BJ_<>K'>
M5K$3VK+3)U4'^T8QVX(K"ZX36[!CRK`2:[/S.K+Y:J_:*JTY^[/_Z8>S%CNT
MWEJT2ENR*ANT+`MI'>NQY(JM1QN$30NS2TNQ6CN(#JN:*5NF5\NU.RNI/6M\
M8"N7V4BS2J&VCPFJ;<M,3WNO46NT99NQ^XJVP/>VG`FQ7%BNZ@JU)]NN@ENW
MA$NRADNT2;NU=$JU41BQ:7NC*(M0Z8I2EENY\4H:F)L:G"N2+?JXH=LN"TJZ
MI6NZIXNZJ:NZJ\NZK>NZKPN[L2N[LTN[M6N[MXN[N:N[N\N[O>N[OPN\P2N\
MPTN\Q6N\QXN\R:N\R\N\S>N\SPN]T2N]TTN]-%(F<U)L<JMC.Z686920TVM7
MA_EVQU&]XB*^:V(NVNMB#LF;@UF^JH.5.>E9O7Y`64V7EVZYM[I[`S&X,O,[
G,!':,9>IOBBVG4Q)88KYFM++H5-9F/.;<&!'F0[,OJ9YOQ51```[
`
end

- --====================987654321_0==_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

- --====================987654321_0==_--

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #918
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Thursday, October 8 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 919



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

At Last
Re: Piracy
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
More Seattle Times Tech
Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
re: OT: SFB
Re: More Seattle Times Tech
Re: Dogs, but not Vargr 
Re: Trade and Economics (sorry Loren)
Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)
Re OFF TOPIC SFB 
Re DGP
Re: Trade and Economics (sorry Loren)
Coke
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Trade and Piracy
Re: Re OFF TOPIC SFB 
Re: Tech advancement

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:32:41 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: At Last

I've been lurking for several months trying to get properly subscribed.
Looks like I made it this time.

I noted that some of the information I posted on worldbuilding when I was
here over a year ago was on the Missouri archive. I'm embarrassed to say
that it was based on some bad information and needs to be completely
revised. Planetology, anyone?

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 19:34:19 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 12:01 PM 10/8/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Piracy
>...
>>What about subsidised pirates?  One with unofficial 'letters of mark'?  Back
>>at the Varga example.  What if the 'Varga pirates' were Zoodanni or
>>Solomanni backed?  Any booty they get is fee and clear.  Their saleries are
>>payed and repair bases are available in the Extents.  Their primary job is
>>to raise a little heck for a few years before an attack on the other border.
>
>  One house rule for the TML Interminable Ethically Challenged Merchant Debate
>is that foreign supported (or based?) elements don't count, IIRC - isn't that
>in the FAQ yet? :)
>
>  Anyway, the most eficient anti-piracy units are the smaller ones which
>have very little actual combat value in a fleet action; if normal piracy 
>has a (believably, IMO) very low equilibrium level then any genuinely
>threatening upsurge is going to scream "commerce raider precursors".
>

However, Varga corsaers are canon and a constant problem.  As for the
'piracy debate' house rule, I was asking for an opinion of the campain
posibilities of the discribed senerio and ideas to fleash it out.  I was not
proposing it as justification for some point in some debate.  I have not
been on this list long enough to see this debate.  My question was/is, "Do
you have any sugestions?"

Charles L.

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:36:22 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

In a message dated 10/8/98 12:45:05 AM Central Daylight Time,
a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz writes:

<< A)  Skill prerequisites: To avoid the problem of the high characteristic
low skill
     character dominating play I introduced the concepts of skill
prerequisites to
     tasks. Every task requires a certain level of skill. This represents that
     some skills require greater knowlede of a task than others. Some tasks
may
     have prerequisites in more than one skill, some may have characteristic
     prerequisites (eg altering a pre-deyo transponder has prerequisites of:
     elect-3, comp-4, Naval Architect-0 and int 5)
  >>

I think it is a complex problem specifying the minumum skill level for every
task. My first thought is that the minimum level required is the number of
dice rolled.

Marc Miller

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:44:12 -0500 
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: More Seattle Times Tech

Here's another tech breakthrough story compliments of the Seattle
Times. Imagine this hooked up to onboard airlock iris valves; should
work through clear vacc suit faceplates.




Security For Your Eyes Only 
October 4, 1998

Envision if you will a keyless world in which your house gets locked, your
car secured and your bank and credit cards protected by an ironclad
identification system that can't be fooled. 

A new technology now being tested by two major banks - Citibank in the
United States and Nationwide Building Society of Britain - could fill the
bill,
Popular Mechanics reports in a recent issue. 

The process, called iris identification, converts the ring of color in eyes
into
a human bar code that is unique to every man, woman and child on the
planet. This is not to be confused with the much older retina identification
technology, long used to control access to nuclear weapons, which
compares the pattern of veins in the back of the eye. Unlike retina
identification, which requires the eye to be placed practically against the
camera lens, the iris method can work from up to 2 feet away. 

Exclusive worldwide patents on iris recognition are held by New
Jersey-based IriScan, a company formed by a pair of ophthalmologists. A
Cambridge University specialist developed the software that turns the flood
of patterns, shapes and colors in an iris into the bar code. 

The technology eventually could eliminate signature cards that slow teller
lines and the PINs used to access ATMs, and holds promise for Internet
applications. Telecommunications giant GTE is working with IriScan to
bring the technology to cyberspace. 

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:38:49 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

Steve Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  Hopefully it's mostly automated; given 3000 years the paperless office
may yet arrive <giggle, snort>. If it is automated then even more can be
had - particularly if someone does manage to hack INI's anomaly watchdog
programs (I assume that INI just ignores their own covert ops, observes
those of "friendly" <ha> agencies that they're aware of, and that Imperial
Lines is either known to them or filteree out by their system without
their knowledge).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
We may not see the paperless office ever.

I was working with the technical service group at our university's
library. They have a guidelines sheet for reliability of various
storage media over time - floppy disks, magnetic tape, CD-ROM.
None of them are rated as reliable past a decade or three - noting
that their use of "reliable" (being professional archivists) may be
more stringent than ours.

The winning media for reliability over time? Treated acid-free paper.
It was rated as "reliable" for time frames extending over 2000 years.

Walt Smith

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:08:58 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

>[thruster plates]
>        Actually, they were SUPPOSED to cut off at 1000 (or 2000?) AU, not
>diameters. It was a rushed attempt in SSDS to justify why invading
>fleets go for the gas giant to refuel (which is canonical), rather
>than jumping into the Kuiper belt.

No, itwas supposed to be ~2000 dimaters; the Kuiper belt starts 
somewhere around the orbit of Neptune , o ~20 AU.

Bruce

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:30:02 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: OT: SFB

jim clem wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the standard SSD, just in a faster way.  The various optional systems 
might be modeled depending on the percentage of hull boxes left.  Let me 
know any ideas you have.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You might take a page from Starfire - ships were represented as nothing
but a list of letters. You'd have:

SSSAALLHEEE

or something like that, representing a ship that had three shields,
two armor units, two lasers, one cargo bay and three engines. Damage
would be marked off left to right, though some special weapons
ignored shields and/or armor.

Have your generic hull boxes, and print a letter inside them. Mark them
off left to right, top row to bottom row. Treat them just as "hull",
at least in the basic game. In the advanced game, give the letters
meaning - B for Bridge, L for Lab, C for Crew, etc. A ship designed
with a well-protected bridge might have the boxes marked "B"
nearer to the bottom row, for example.

Walt Smith

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 16:49:52 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: More Seattle Times Tech

Here is the website:

http://www.iriscan.com/

Kurt


At 02:44 PM 10/8/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Here's another tech breakthrough story compliments of the Seattle
>Times. Imagine this hooked up to onboard airlock iris valves; should
>work through clear vacc suit faceplates.
>
>
>
>
>Security For Your Eyes Only 
>October 4, 1998
>
>Envision if you will a keyless world in which your house gets locked, your
>car secured and your bank and credit cards protected by an ironclad
>identification system that can't be fooled. 
>
>A new technology now being tested by two major banks - Citibank in the
>United States and Nationwide Building Society of Britain - could fill the
>bill,
>Popular Mechanics reports in a recent issue. 
>
>The process, called iris identification, converts the ring of color in eyes
>into
>a human bar code that is unique to every man, woman and child on the
>planet. This is not to be confused with the much older retina identification
>technology, long used to control access to nuclear weapons, which
>compares the pattern of veins in the back of the eye. Unlike retina
>identification, which requires the eye to be placed practically against the
>camera lens, the iris method can work from up to 2 feet away. 
>
>Exclusive worldwide patents on iris recognition are held by New
>Jersey-based IriScan, a company formed by a pair of ophthalmologists. A
>Cambridge University specialist developed the software that turns the flood
>of patterns, shapes and colors in an iris into the bar code. 
>
>The technology eventually could eliminate signature cards that slow teller
>lines and the PINs used to access ATMs, and holds promise for Internet
>applications. Telecommunications giant GTE is working with IriScan to
>bring the technology to cyberspace. 


Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 16:52:47 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Dogs, but not Vargr 

> In mail you write:
> 
> >>From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
> >>Subject: Re: Dogs, but not Vargr 
> > ...
> >>>   Actually, the rules on telepathic (presumably) central direction for
> > fighter
> >>> pilots in Traveller (A:4) aren't terribly generous, and still difficult to
> >>> justify even for Zho pilots who could all be telepathic themselves (ship
> > tactics
> >>> levels for the controller are conveyed as tactical skill to each of the
> > pilots.)
> >>
> >>Tines aren't 'linked up' just for minutes at a time, they're linked up as 
> > long 
> >>as they're intelligent.  It's *ONE* mind shared between 4 to 8 bodies in 
> > close 
> >>quarters, with thoughs supported by ultrasonic networking.  There's no 
> >>telepathy involved.
> >
> >   Yes, but that's the closest analogue in Trav. Besides, they're monumentally
> > screwed by significant time-lags (they're helped to use radio in the book,
> > IIRC), eliminating the flexibility of large volume coverage. They might
> > simply make better gunship crews (or ground combat units).
> 
> The distances at which they can handle the lag are proportional to the
> velocity difference between sound and light. I make that ratio to by
> roughly 9e5:1. So since we *know* they can handle 10 meters using
> sound, then using radio they can handle 9000 km. If they can handle 100
> meters, then they can handle 900,000 km using radio.

I'd say, 25-30 meters reliably.  AIR, they tended to stay fairly bunched up.

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 17:04:46 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Trade and Economics (sorry Loren)

dberry@hooked.net wrote:

> This is why I'm hoping to get a hold of 101 Cargos and the GURPS Traveller
> Merchants book.  Being a gearhead, I would really enjoy a more detailed
> trade system.

Patience.  I would really enjoy a more detailed "close quarters" combat system.
Hint, hint.   ;-)

Bloo

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:05:42 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)

>>So? As a player of mine once showed me, give the character a 14DX and a
>>14IQ, then take 56 half-point skills. That's a load of skills at better
                     ^^^^^^^^^^
>>than average for a 14-year old. :-)

>OK, that character has the dexterity of a pro athlete and is a near genius.
> He's already paid 90 points for stats (assuming 10 ST and HT).  56 points
>in skills brings the cost to 146 points.

[snippy snippy]

No, no, no. :-) 56 *half-point* skills. That's 56 skills for 28 points
(GURPS has the strange characteristic of allowing you to take a skill for
1/2 a character point).

So it's only a 118 point character, and 18 points in disadadntages and
quirks isn't too hard to do.

Mind you, you don't necessarily have to be a munchkin to like GURPS (I like
the system a lot myself -- FUDGE shares a lot in common with it), but a
munchkin sure can have fun with it.

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:07:35 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re OFF TOPIC SFB 

[snip]
>Finally, if you put a drone on the shuttle (a scatterpack) the drone moves
>at 8c and is an unstoppable KKM allowing a remotely controlled shuttle to
>destroy 6 Tigresses, leaving only 2 of your batron.
>
>The only good news is that you can't use 6 type IIIMW drones because the
>18 type IV submunitions are warp seekers - except that I think you can
>point them at bases, so you probably can.

Nope... wrong on several there. You can load a Type IIIMW with any
half-space drones... As for the Warp Seeking type VI's, they need a warp
signature; bases all have warp reactors, even tho they don't move...

>Your only hope is to use the rules in the Starships LBB - then your Free
>Trader can move 1" in the Z direction and the shuttle, constrained to the
>hex map, cannot see him. :-)

No, the tigresses go to passive sensors, cut as many of the emissions as
possible, and disengage by sub-light evasion.

>Phil
>
>(Who likes SFB lots but hasn't played it in years.)
- -Wil
(who plays SFB once a month, and runs tounaments once a year)

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:14:22 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re DGP

>> It's also been stated that DGP went beyond what was intended.  How do you
>> interpret G:T Aliens I being explicity instructed by "Miller and
>> Wiseman" not
>> to use anything DGP?

as MWM has stated before: COPYRIGHT ISSUES. MWM doesn't own the rights to
the DGP material that wasn't published by GDW (ie, isn't GDW-MT canon).
Roger Sanger does, and he feels that he's not been offered enough for the
material. Rog is a nice enough guy from my (non-financial) dealings with
him, but seems to overvalue the product he's acquired. MWM mad a decent
offer, which was refused by RS. So, while the material was canon for MT
games, it cannot legally be used for New Editions.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:20:29 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Trade and Economics (sorry Loren)

Ian Whitchurch wrote:

>The major criticism I have are

[snip]

>(3) prices of 'trade goods' do not scale with the prices of actual goods in
>Traveller (for example, what if a PC with a Type S wants to buy 4 10m3
>Fission power plants at a TL9 IN world, to take to an asteroid belt to sell
>? According to FFS2, the power plants should cost about MCr 1 each in TL9
>credits)

[snip]

I agree Ian's comments, especially this one. There have been many times in
campaigns that I have run that players knew specifically what items they
wanted to trade in and I was left with no idea how to handle it.

For example: What would the mark up be on personal pleasure items sold to
the lonely belters of Shinothy? I know the old standby, "as much as the
market will bear." But what, in a nutshell, would be the average range to
expect?

I'm not asking for *specific* items like this, necessarily, but some
guidelines for the economically-impaired (like myself) would be helpful.

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 21:36:50 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: Coke

Just a side remark on the Coca-Cola thread:

For a limited period annually, Coca-Cola is "kosher l'pesach",
Kosher for Passover. (Look for the Hebrew chickenscratching on
the container.)  During this period, regardless of where you are
or which syrup producer makes the stuff, Coca-Cola is made with
pure cane sugar.  Corn sweetener is right out (many [but not all]
Jews consider corn products to be chometz [leaven]), and I
believe that for some reason beet sugar cannot be made Kosher for
Passover (although it can be kosher for other-than-Passover use).
- --
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 16:33:55 -0500
From: Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:
 
> The recent discussion on wishes for T5 and JoT skill has prompted me to post
> my house rules modifying the basic T4 task system.
 
> A)  Skill prerequisites: To avoid the problem of the high characteristic low skill
>     character dominating play I introduced the concepts of skill prerequisites to
>     tasks. Every task requires a certain level of skill. This represents that
>     some skills require greater knowlede of a task than others. Some tasks may
>     have prerequisites in more than one skill, some may have characteristic
>     prerequisites (eg altering a pre-deyo transponder has prerequisites of:
>     elect-3, comp-4, Naval Architect-0 and int 5)

Andrew, this looks interesting. Could you give a couple of specific
examples of how you would write up Task Descriptions with one or more
prerequisites and walk through how you would resolve the tasks?  

Eris

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 07:42:26
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Trade and Piracy

>
>Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 09:24:41 -0700
>From: dberry@hooked.net
>Subject: Re: Trade and Economics (sorry Loren)
>
>At 09:48 PM 10/8/98, you wrote:
>
>>The major criticism I have are
>>
>>(1) the existing trade rules do not encourage long distance trade (ie
>>across a couple of subsectors)
>
>>From what I've seen, there is very little call for trans-subsector trade.
>In my design for Lunion, the only real trade comes from the TL15 worlds in
>adjacent subsectors (Glisten, Trin, Mora, Rhylanor), along with runs to the
>Imperial worlds in Five Sisters.

Yes. This is a problem. Look at, for example, trade before the 19th
century. Goods were routinely shipped across the world.

Just as an excersise, grab a world a couple of subsectors away from Lunion
(one with some sort of trade profile), and see what happens if the Base
Value of goods is KCr 50 a dton rather than KCr 5.

>
>>(3) prices of 'trade goods' do not scale with the prices of actual goods in
>>Traveller (for example, what if a PC with a Type S wants to buy 4 10m3
>>Fission power plants at a TL9 IN world, to take to an asteroid belt to sell
>>? According to FFS2, the power plants should cost about MCr 1 each in TL9
>>credits)
>
>This is why I'm hoping to get a hold of 101 Cargos and the GURPS Traveller
>Merchants book.  Being a gearhead, I would really enjoy a more detailed
>trade system.

Being a gearhead, you already have part of one. Bits of ships built with
FFS are *excellent* trade goods ("Yeah, Jim Boy, we're lugging accumulators
from Ruie to Roup ... they just decommisioned a sub-orbital PAW, and they
sold em off at public auction").

>
>>(4) they push Travellers away from poor, underdeveloped worlds and towards
>>the hi-pop, hi-tech, good starport worlds, as these are the profitable
>>worlds to trade with - if the Free Traders are picking up the scraps from
>>the Megacorps, then it should be the other way around (reverse the Starport
>>cost effects !)
>
>This is a game effect.. the Referee should deveolp a reason for the
>characters to avoid the main worlds.  Perhaps the big boys are trying to
>squeeze out the competition?

Of course the big boys will try and squeeze out the competition, but if
that driver is in the rules already, players will find less reason to cry
'unfair', and the GM will have entire new vistas of plot hooks.

>
>>(7) there is no framework to deal with players who set up even a
>>rudimentary trade infrastructure 
>
>Once again, this should be handled by the Referee on a case by case basis.
>

Guidelines would help, just in case a GM runs into a player whose knowledge
of accounting and trade is better. Even just a 'it will cost between x and
y for a small trade station, depending on the world's prosperity and
starport class, and the established commercial interests will probably try
and do z about it' would help IMO.

>>(10) we dont have some definitive guidelines for aging effects and related
>>price depreciation in starships, which I think is important given that
>>starships are usually bought on 40 year mortgages
>
>I've modified the "wear vlaues" from TNE to good effect. Each major
>subsystem has a wear value that determines performance and rate of
breakdowns.

Care to post the modifications ? 

>
>- --
>
>Douglas E. Berry
>Templar Agent at Large.
>dberry@hooked.net  
>http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 


>From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Piracy
>...
>>What about subsidised pirates?  One with unofficial 'letters of mark'?  Back
>>at the Varga example.  What if the 'Varga pirates' were Zoodanni or
>>Solomanni backed?  Any booty they get is fee and clear.  Their saleries are
>>payed and repair bases are available in the Extents.  Their primary job is
>>to raise a little heck for a few years before an attack on the other border.
>
>  One house rule for the TML Interminable Ethically Challenged Merchant
Debate
>is that foreign supported (or based?) elements don't count, IIRC - isn't that
>in the FAQ yet? :)
>
>  Anyway, the most eficient anti-piracy units are the smaller ones which
>have very little actual combat value in a fleet action; if normal piracy 
>has a (believably, IMO) very low equilibrium level then any genuinely
>threatening upsurge is going to scream "commerce raider precursors".

I can see why powers would want to 'poke' each other occasionally, just to
see what happens, but the problem with this is is gives the other side
practice, too.

Six months chasing pirates lets you give your front line forces have some
excellent practice, gees up your second line and support crews, and
provides you with data on what your anti-commerce raiding capabilities are.

What could be more interesting is to have a high charisma Vargr some
distance from the Imperium launch a big public subscription, gets hold of a
bunch of ships and start raiding ... leading to desperate covert Zhodani
attempts to *assist* the Imperials in stopping them, because they dont want
the Imperium to in effect get ready for their already planned spoiling
attack (the 5th Frontier War).

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 17:58:43 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Re OFF TOPIC SFB 

At 01:07 PM 10/8/98 -0800, you wrote:
>[snip]
>>Finally, if you put a drone on the shuttle (a scatterpack) the drone moves
>>at 8c and is an unstoppable KKM allowing a remotely controlled shuttle to
>>destroy 6 Tigresses, leaving only 2 of your batron.
>>
>>The only good news is that you can't use 6 type IIIMW drones because the
>>18 type IV submunitions are warp seekers - except that I think you can
>>point them at bases, so you probably can.
>
>Nope... wrong on several there. You can load a Type IIIMW with any
>half-space drones... As for the Warp Seeking type VI's, they need a warp
>signature; bases all have warp reactors, even tho they don't move...
>
>>Your only hope is to use the rules in the Starships LBB - then your Free
>>Trader can move 1" in the Z direction and the shuttle, constrained to the
>>hex map, cannot see him. :-)
>
>No, the tigresses go to passive sensors, cut as many of the emissions as
>possible, and disengage by sub-light evasion.

Actually, what I was getting at when I made the initial comment was that I
would like to see some of the Traveller ships detailed in a similar manner
as the SFB ships and then use the SFB core rules to handle ship to ship
combat.  

IMO, this would then give the small, fast, nimble ships a reason for
existing in a fleet situation.

Later,

Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 09:08:48 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

At 19:50 7/10/98 -0700, Steven Hudson wrote:
>>From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
>>Subject: Re: Tech advancement
>...
>>I would say that from the time that triremes and other ram equipped galleys
>>went out of favour until the advent of the rifled gun and high explosive
>>shells defence has pretty much ruled naval warfare. Similarly on land IMHO
>>defence has generally been superior to offence through most of history.
>>Even in WWII, which everybody thinks proved fixed defences to be outmoded,
>>defensive lines were only broken by massively superior force, unless they
>>could be by-passed (like the Manginot Line), let alone such strongpoints as
>>cities. Look at Stalingrad, for example - in both the taking and retaking
>>of the city the defenders made the attackers pay very, very heavily even
>>though they were outnumbered.
>
>  The only qualification I would suggest to the above is that on land there
>was a switch of an advantage from the _strategic_ defensive (the glacis of
>star fortresses covering NE France) to the _tactical_ (breach-loading rifles,
>machine-guns) defensive. Conversely, while the horse & musket era battlefield
>was probably offense/defense neutral, more modern warfare became advantageous
>to the strategic offensive with improved infrastructure and organizational
>support.

Well by most I meant just about everything pre-Napolonic (plus most of last
century and early this century). While it's true that on the battlefield
offense and defence were relatively balanced over a long period even in the
priod when it was accepted that any fortress could be taken you were
looking at seiges that lasted a year or more.

In medieval times holing up in a castle and forcing a seige was popular
because it gave much better chances than opting for a set piece battle in
the open, which is a pretty good indicator that defence was superior to
offence.

In Roman times things were a little more balanced, because the Romans were
the first people to develop good seige equipment and tactics, so the
offense had an advantage until fortress designers had a chance to catch up.
Even so the Romans generally had to live with long seiges unless the inital
assault was succesful, and that only worked because they were careful to
ensure that whenever possible they outnumbered their opponents.

In pre-Roman times pretty much the only way to take a fortified place was
by starvation. Alexander took a few by escalade, but by and large if the
locals got inside their walls any seige was going to be a long, drawn out
process, and often you were better off packing up and going home. An
example of this was the Peloponnesean War - every summer the Spartans would
invade Attica, but the Atheneans had invested in some walls, and while the
Spartans would rip up all the farms, etc outside the walls they couldn't
get in. In the end the Spartans had to become a naval power and starve
Athens in submission.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #919
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Thursday, October 8 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 920



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Trade and Economics
Re: Transponders
Colonial units and the callous British
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Re: Transponders
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #916
Re: GURPS Trav power plants, etc.
Re: Transponders
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: Limits to tech advancement

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 09:28:33 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Trade and Economics

I've always prefered the trade system from the LLB's because it's more
colourfull, and it makes more sense (to me, anyway) for cargo to cost
different amounts depending on what it is as much as where it's from. 

Anyway I was wondering how much difference in profitability there is
between this and the other, later, trade system. I was also wondering why
and when the trade system was changed. Can anyone tell me?

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 09:22:50 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Transponders

At 11:14 8/10/98 -0400, Rob Prior wrote:

>Or Canada and Newfoundland during WWI and WWII. Both had more men under
>arms, proportional to population, than Britain and France.  (And lost
>more, because the British regarded "colonials" as natural cannon-fodder.)

In WWII New Zealand had the most men under arms, as a percentage of
population, of any english speaking or commonwealth nation. We also had the
highest casualty rate per soldier, because of this policy. WWI wasn't much
better.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 12:11:27 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Colonial units and the callous British

Date sent:      	Fri, 09 Oct 1998 09:22:50 +1300
From:           	Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>

>At 11:14 8/10/98 -0400, Rob Prior wrote:

>>Or Canada and Newfoundland during WWI and WWII. Both had more men under
>>arms, proportional to population, than Britain and France.  (And lost
>>more, because the British regarded "colonials" as natural cannon-fodder.)

>In WWII New Zealand had the most men under arms, as a percentage of
>population, of any english speaking or commonwealth nation. We also had the
>highest casualty rate per soldier, because of this policy. WWI wasn't much
>better.

This is a classic example of oversimplification. The reasons that the colonial 
units suffered heavier casualties are actually quite complex, the classic reason 
that it was due to the "callous British" is mostly a political argument that 
doesn't hold up to close scrutiny.

The truth is that most of the British field commanders had deep respect for the 
colonial units, recognising them as excellant combat units superior to the 
average line unit. Then there was the requirement of the various colonial 
government that their divisions be grouped together, this lead to them being 
grouping into very powerful corps (in the 1st WW the Canadians had 6 or 7 
divisions in one corp, the Australians had 4; compared with 2 for the average 
British corp). Again few field commanders would fail to use these very powerful 
combat units. Then there was the units themselves, where as the British 
government held back reinforcements causing the units to drop below 
establishment, the colonial governments kept their units at full strength (the 1st 
NZ was maintained at 12 full strength bn throughout the entire 1st WW while 
British divisions dropped to 9 understrength bn). The colonial units suffered 
heavier casualties because they got used more, and the main reason they got 
used more was because they were stronger and better than the British units. 
The story is similar in the 2nd WW.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 17:26:33 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

At 03:38 pm 10/8/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Steve Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>  Hopefully it's mostly automated; given 3000 years the paperless office
>may yet arrive <giggle, snort>. If it is automated then even more can be
>had - particularly if someone does manage to hack INI's anomaly watchdog
>programs (I assume that INI just ignores their own covert ops, observes
>those of "friendly" <ha> agencies that they're aware of, and that Imperial
>Lines is either known to them or filteree out by their system without
>their knowledge).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
>We may not see the paperless office ever.
>
>I was working with the technical service group at our university's
>library. They have a guidelines sheet for reliability of various
>storage media over time - floppy disks, magnetic tape, CD-ROM.
>None of them are rated as reliable past a decade or three - noting
>that their use of "reliable" (being professional archivists) may be
>more stringent than ours.

	I just had a lesson in "reliability" ... I needed to pull up my
finance records from 1995, so I tried to unzip the archive I had the
Quicken files in ... bad CRC, file unusable. Worried, I wrote a batch
file to go through and check ALL the archives on a hard drive. Eight
out of ten finance archives were corrupted, plus old website
archives. 
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 17:27:13 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

At 01:08 pm 10/8/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>[thruster plates]
>>        Actually, they were SUPPOSED to cut off at 1000 (or 2000?)
AU, not
>>diameters. It was a rushed attempt in SSDS to justify why invading
>>fleets go for the gas giant to refuel (which is canonical), rather
>>than jumping into the Kuiper belt.
>
>No, itwas supposed to be ~2000 dimaters; the Kuiper belt starts 
>somewhere around the orbit of Neptune , o ~20 AU.

	Well, all I can plead is SSDS was written in one mad,
brain-cell-killing week ... I can't remember that far back.
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:10:11 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Transponders

[To recap old issues that need recaping....]
Wed, 07 Oct 1998 23:35:31 -0700, shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)

>  Wait a month until all of the paperwork arrives - it's the most cost-
>efficient way and still effective for most purposes. With a constant
>flow of info any merchant ship that outruns its' reports is suspicious
>by definition.

OTOH, ships that outrun their paperwork are going to be uncommon,
but not rare, and detaining them all until you can check them will
be a significant effort.

This also get to the issue of how you see the Imperium.  If they
are keeping this kind of info, presumably they are also keeping
track of everything else of similar importance, once you think
it through, that can add up a lot of info to be trying to keep
current on a system of slow communications.

One thing we need to remember is that this isn't like a cop
on a us street, having access to a vehicles VIN number.  In
the imperium every place is a spot that has no communications
other than what arrived on the last truck.  Historically, it
was uncommon for such info to be tracked in such a system, esp
in a decentralized society as the Imperium supposedly has....

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 00:13:00 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

On Thu, 8 Oct 1998 08:23:46 -0400, you wrote:

>aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor) writes:
>>Of course, the *real* truth is that the whole thing was a plot by
>>Grandfather!
>>he *knew* that the Terrans would, if left unchecked, "soon" (we're talking
>>someone at least 250,000 years old, remember!) be a technological
>>nuisance,
>>perhaps even a threat, to him ... so he manipulated things (an earlier
>>version
>>of psychohistory) to get Estigaribbia to stage his coup.
>>
>[snip]
>>
>>So you have to figure out why. And my explanation is at least based on
>>some
>>historical experience that makes sense. Not the only explanation, of
>>course
>><sigh>
>
>Phil's left out a bit. Grandfather manipulated the Ithklur into
>manipulating the Hivers to take care of Estigaribbia.
>
>Everyone blames the Hivers, but that's because the Ithklur are much more
>subtle, behind their bluff, bloodthirsty 'good-ole-lizard' exteriors.

You forgot the Addaxur ;-)

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:19:20 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #916

Thu, 08 Oct 1998 21:48:19, Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
>The major criticism I have are
[snip]
>(2) they allow money to be made with too much certainty, as long as you
>have a minimal amount of capital (say, a million in cash - not much given
>that the ship is worth 20 times that. Being undercapitalised is a good way
>to go broke - just ask 8 out of 10 game companies) and a profitable route

Now there should be routes that make money reliably.  However, they
should just be tied up by the megacorps.  The best way is to have
a model of the economics of the Imperium where all the clearly
profitable routes are identified.  When a Free Trader looks at
those routes he has a low chance of finding cargoes because
they have been taken by the big Corps.

>(4) they push Travellers away from poor, underdeveloped worlds and towards
>the hi-pop, hi-tech, good starport worlds, as these are the profitable
>worlds to trade with - if the Free Traders are picking up the scraps from
>the Megacorps, then it should be the other way around (reverse the Starport
>cost effects !)

Well, there should be fewer scraps, but they are more likely
to be tasty (there will be some low profit cargoes along the
best routes along with a few cargos that sliped through the
corporate cracks)


______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:23:18 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants, etc.

>I should point out that:
>
>(1) "total" life support systems in GURPS (VE2, p. 78; GT, p. 154) are
>fully regenerative, and produce food as well.  Notice, there are no life
>support costs on GT p. 122 or 159.  I'm still going to strongly encourge my
>players to spend Cr and time on obtaining fresh fruit and veggies for their
>passengers, but it's not required.

In my game I have ruled the such systems produce a tasteless mash
that is only just barely palatable.  In many ships, in fact,
they don't bother installing such system (even if the system
is otherwise a "total" life support) and just give you a bit
more space for "real" food.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:32:18 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Transponders

Thu, 08 Oct 1998 12:01:47 -0700, shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
>>Oops!  I forgot, beuacrats are slower than jump drives.  Better add in some
>>'trusty-rusty' time there.  Any ideas about how much 'paper work' lag time
>>is in the TU?

>  Hopefully it's mostly automated; given 3000 years the paperless office
>may yet arrive <giggle, snort>.

And you have never let an e-mail sit in you in box until you go
around to it?

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 20:38:57 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

> > No, they say, "If you want your ships to enter our space, you put this new
> > transponder system."  No doubt, specs are provided, etc etc.
> 
> I don't see how the spec could be provided in order to do what the Imperium
> ultimately wanted to do, at least considering Research Station Omnicrom. Why
> use the Deyo over the older, established transponder? Why justify the cost?

New systems would come and go periodically (probably over ~100 year periods in
this case IMO), especially for something like transponders.  The designers say
this one is *really* <g> foolproof and explain its features to some high ups
(even if that's just the "sales pitch" by an Imperial megacorp that wants to
subcontract for the transponder system).

Even w/ the specs, there is still a mountain of difficulties a Deyo
transponder.  Even so, it would've just been the foreign "high-ups" to get
specs (and maybe a visit to RS Omicron, depending on the level of their
relations w/ the 3I at the time.  

> advantage ultimately is the back door that the Deyo chip allows into a
> ship's system to shut it down, thus allowing for "soft kills" without a
> shot. Plus, with its limited sentience, the Deyo would be able to perform
> intellegence operations as well. I don't think the Imperium would advertise
> either of these abilities, and certainly wouldn't give the specs to a
> foreign government.

You're right about that.  Sometime between 1097 and 1108, it was ordered to
exploit that feature of the chips. It resulted in the late 1120s AI program on
RS Omicron.  But there's very little success until it gets to the TL16-17
range.  I'd actually envision a somewhat...  cliff notes... version of teh
specs.  Really minor and not so detailed.  It's more than reasonable for a
government to have an IFF system and to require foreigners to submit to said
system.  IMO anyways.

> Plus, giving the full specs of the Deyo system to another government is to
> admit the existance of the Cymbelline (sp?) chips...this is bad for two
> reasons:
> 	a) The applications of the chips have incredible military potential - truly
> intelligent weapon systems, robots, etc...thus, it should be treated as
> controlled technology.
> 	b) There could be some (not huge, mind you, but some) public outrage at
> using a sentient species as, essentially, a slave. Even though the Deyo
> chips are mutations and are essentially lobotomized, I'm sure sophont rights

Yes, but the nature of the transponder is kept hidden from the general public
until 1114 and even then edited by Imperial Army Intelligence to hide certain
features.  It's not truly revealed until the Rebellion is well under way.

It is in the interests of the Imperium that the foreign traders be willing to
accept the transponder.  Even so, the true specs, etc (to whatever level u
think acceptable) are provided only to the higher levels of govt, who would
then give their approval towards their interface traders mounting them.

> groups would scream bloody murder. While he's no saint, if Strephon holds
> true to his publicly stated feelings about sentience, he would not approve
> the Deyo experiment UNLESS the chips themselves volunteered. In my mind, the
> Deyo chips were created at the whim of Lucan, not Strephon (this may not be
> canon...I don't know the actual date of Deyo creation, since my copy of SM

mmm... Strephon Emperor in 1071.  1086 was when they were in final testing.
1088 was when they were legislated.  12 year phase in period for retrofit.
Of course, Strephon probably only gave approval to a "new transponder system"
and I doubt he got into the particulars.

> is at home). And why would Lucan do it? Power. Simple and pure power. And
> there would be no way he would make the true purpose behind Deyo public.

"There's a way to disable or destroy rebel ships?  Do it!  NOW! :::cackle::::"

> > The Imperial markets are *huge* and remember the Imperium mostly exists to
> > foster *internal* trade.  The same may or may not hold true for the other
> > polities, but my bet is that the others lose more than the Imperials do to
> > losing the trade.  In any case, it's more than reasonable (to me
> > anyways) to
> > adopt the IFF system of of a foreign govt if you wish do business in their
> > territory.
> 
> Within reason. Blindly accepting another government's IFF system isn't
> likely to happen, and as I said I can't see the Imperium giving out the
> complete Deyo specs.

How about partial specs?  The unrestricted commo and comp access is going to
raise some questions.  If the operations are explained entirely (and backed up
w/ appropriate specs and observations), they'll understand it's only registry
info, etc.  The mute button is provided, etc.  

If there was a relative level of detente, I could see a visit to RS Omicron
and full specs being given to govt officials for a polity interested in taking
the transponder system domestically.  The Aslan, for example, have a great
need for a reliable transponder.  Any one designed by a single clan or clan
bloc would be untrustworthy to it's neighbors/enemies.

> For the background material IMTU, Hard Times and Virus do occur...it's just
> slightly different than canon. Virus is nearly widespread in the Imperium
> becuase so many Military ships have Deyo...and most new ships do as well.
> These ships become vampires and destroy planets/other ships. Big mess. Some
> infections occur outside the Imperium, but not as bad as canon describes it,
> and some governments/technological bases survive mostly intact.

Sounds interesting.  Starports usually had a deyo transponder installed to (to
communicate w/ ships).  It is from here that planetary traffic nets, power
grids, etc were infected.  Note it was all gradual and Virus didn't reveal
itself until it was near omnipresent (or as omnipresent as it was going to get
IYTU), through whatever means.  So they didn't pop up periodically but most
infections revealed themselves with frightening synchronization.

> > It's also been stated that DGP went beyond what was intended.  How do you
> > interpret G:T Aliens I being explicity instructed by "Miller and
> > Wiseman" not
> > to use anything DGP?
> 
> I had not heard that. If true, then I retract my previous statement.

As others have pointed out this is probably due more to contractual reasons
than not, though I do recall Loren (?) saying he thought DGP had went farther
than GDW intended.

Gary

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 00:59:23 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

On Thu, 8 Oct 1998 12:00:59 -0400, you wrote:

>Phillip McGregor writes:
>
>>>From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
>
>>>This doesn't explain why the various Terran/Solomani states (which weren't
>>>swamped by Vilani, being outside the first Imperium's old borders) in the
>>>long night and early 3I periods didn't outstrip the Syleans and the Third
>>>Imperium technologically. Nor does this explain how the 3I managed to stay
>>>in front of the Solomani Confederation during the later part of its
>>>membership in the Imperium and its seperation.
>> 
>>Of course it does!
>> 
>>If you accept that the RoM was "contaminated" by the Vilani cultural ethos
>>against tech, then certain implications can be followed through.
>
>[Long involved handwave]
> 
>>Ergo, the Solomani are still ruled by the descendants of the Vilani occupation
>>force ... which must have been particularly harsh to suppress all possible
>>opposition to the coup.
>> 
>>Really, nothing else explains the complete and total victory of a
>>militaristic/totalitatian coup against a democratic state.
>
>That is not a fact, it is an assumption you make, Philip. An assumption that
>I for one don't agree with.

It is based on the "facts" and on historical precedents.

It doesn't make sense to you ... you disagree with the assumptions. Fine. Not a
problem!

Like I said, some (many?) people don't. 

I just do not believe *their* (not necessarily *your*) handwaving about how
atypical the pre-coup Terrans and pre-Flare Darrians (who were basically
influenced by the Terrans and uncontaminated by the Vilani) were.

YMMV

>>There must have been resistance ... so how was it suppressed?
>
>Take a look at how militaries in the Real World have taken over democratic
>states. Take a look at several political "what if" novels about the overthrow
>of the USA (though these are far more suspect, of course, often containing
>their own unproven assumptions). Still, unless you have a religious belief
>that "real" democracies cannot be subverted, many of these novels are at
>least possible, some of them even plausible. Besides, how do you know that
>the Terran Confederation of Estegariba's day was a "real" democracy?

Militaries in the real world have never taken over truly democratic states. And,
no, Germany is *not* an example. The Nazis took that over, not the military.

As you say, "what if" novels have their own assumptions, most of which are, not
to put too fine a point on it, bullshit.

Did I say that real democracies cannot be taken over? Nope.

What I said was that their would *certainly* be resistance to Estigaribbia's
coup ... it is made plain that he was supported by the fringe worlders rather
than (by extension) the core worlders. Worlds which were probably militarised
right from the start rather than worlds with a democratic tradition.

There would be resistance. Yet we hear nothing about it.

Why?

1) Imperial Propaganda: The RoM suppressed all evidence (a la the 3I and the Ine
Givar), and the 3I has done the same, as it would undermine the legitimacy of it
as a successor state (or so the thought might run).

2) Passage of Time: Any historian knows that this is the real problem.
Especially with a 1000 year or so Dark Age plunked right down in the middle.

3) Suppression: It was ruthlessly suppressed. By whom? The colonials? Doubtful
they could be trusted *that* much. They would have, even as militarised as they
may have been, much closer to the societies of the core worlds and would, quite
quickly, have been corrupted by them. To put it bluntly, you couldn't trust them
to be brutal enough.

This leaves the Vilani. Which makes perfect sense. Use the Vilani, who have no
reason to love the Solomani core worlders, as the occupation governors and
garrisons. If they have an order to suppress resistance, they will ... what do
they care, after all ... these are merely foreign barbarians.

Does this have to be true?

No!

Does what the Imperial Encyclopedia says about the RoM have to be completely
true?

No!

Do you have to accept what I propose?

No!

It makes sense. More so than other explanations, IMNSHO. YMMV.

>And there were resistance of a kind. What were all those ethnic colonies
>that were established during the Diaspora other than attempts to get out
>from under a regime they didn't like? Perhaps you think that every single
>one of them carry along their own Vilani masters?

Well, the only successful one we know of is that to Darrian. Perhaps all the
high tech worlds in the Imperium are the descendants of just such attempts? And,
as I have suggested, the Vilani are still dominating (covertly) the Solomani
sphere, and have suppressed those they discovered?

There is an implication somewhere (PE?) that there is a population requirement
to achieve the higher TLs (I do not agree with this 100%, I think there probably
is, but I also think that, for whatever gameplay reason, it has been
overestimated several fold.) Perhaps the Terrans managed to boost themselves as
a group of worlds ... the Core worlds ... and the colonies, isolated or set down
amongst the Vilani, have not been able to do so. Maybe the core worlds had an
aversion (a longstanding one) against large populations? After all, all the
Hi-Tech worlds are also Hi-Pop. Terra in the 3I is what, 40 billion or so?! (or
is that the whole Sol System?).

Certainly these ideas make as much sense as anything else. YMMV of course.

>> I really think that my solution is at least as likely as anyone else's.
>
>The bottom line is that if you claim that the natural rate of tech advance
>is something close to what we are experiencing today and will continue to
>be at higher levels too, then you have to come up with a separate explanation
>for why it didn't happen for every society in Charted Space except the
>Darrians  --  well, the Darrians too, since they have had over two millenia
>to clim up again. If you think the natural rate of advancement is a lot

But have been hemmed in by the Vilani. There's obviously something going on and
the Vilani have a lot to answer for!

>slower, you only have to explain away two (or even just one) exception to
>the rule. If you think that it is is at least as plausible that every
>society in Charted Space except two are freak instances than that two
>societies in CS are freak examples, then I can only say that you and I have
>different notions about propabilities.

Nope. I believe in these instances that the exception proves the rule.

Survival Margin makes it pretty clear, for example, that the aim of the 3I is to
*suppress* the advancement of tech.

It is implied that the reason a world cannot simply buy the tech, or even
develop it, to advance a level is because the 3I allows effectively unlimited
patent lifespan.

So World X has reasonable mechanical tech, capable of producing BA Rifles, but
wants to develop SMGs (higher tech). They cannot just buy the tools and dies,
the Megacorps want a huge premium for selling them; and it is strongly implied
that if they gain access to plans (or simply reverse engineer an import), they
are penalised by the 3I for patent infringement. In effect, they have to
reinvent the wheel in a completely new and different way.

This sort of meddling seems, so it is implied, to exist all the way from the
lowest levels of Tech to the highest.

So the 3I is *deliberately* retarding Tech advances, should we be surprised that
they are successful?

After all, consiider it from the first emperor's pov ... he becomes emperor
because he has exclusive access to a tech advance ... if anyone can beat him in
this race, then his very office can be called into question. He can be replaced.

It is made plain that this was the attitude of the Vilani Ziru Sirka, too.

So, to me, it makes sense that the 1I, 2I and 3I all systematically suppressed
tech advancement, as it was in their own survival interests to do so. Only the
Terrans, with their democratic traditions and untainted culture, did not have -
until the coup.

The Terrans that fled to Darrian were also untainted - but are now surrounded by
the Vilani and authoritarian tainted 3I.

Makes sense to me.

Do *you* have to believe it?

Nope.

>>It also explains why the Solomani remain behind ... the Solomani Party and
>>SolSec (really dominated by closet Vilani who hid their identities during the
>>Long Night, and suppress the truth) have a much tighter control over the
>>people of the Solomani sphere, and *continue* to effectively (if not
>>necessarily intentionally) and viciously suppress technological development.
>
>Now you want to introduce a three millenia old conspiracy secretly controlling
>all Solomani-descended colonies both within and without the Confederation,
>including, I suppose, those long-range colonies that were sent off BEFORE
>Estagarriba let the Vilani take over. We certainly do have different notions
>about what is plausible and what isn't.

Not necessarily. The Darrian one was sent off, IIRC, just before the collapse of
the RoM (well, maybe a century or so) ... but it is reasonably possible that one
such long range flight from the Vilani occupation forces would be successful.
There were probably shorter range ones, as well, and these were probably
successful in their own way ... but they must have been small to start off,
probably didn't find a suitable local population to boost their society,
couldn't grow to the required pop levels to achieve the Tech advances needed,
and probably regressed because they were cut off from resupply and support
(being done secretly). The ones closer in would soon have been reabsorbed by the
Vilani occupation forces.

And I'm not saying its a conspiracy in the way you think it is. I'm simply
saying that the bulk of the Solomani ruling classes are probably Vilani, and
hide it for their own purposes ... its unlikely they're pure Vilani by now
anyway (racially). The big thing is that *culturally* the Solomani have been
tainted by Vilani conservatism ... and with their ruling class wanting the same
sort of control the 3I wants, its not surprising that SolSec suppresses so much
spread of tech.

>>The Terrans running the 2I broke down Vilani conservatism *just* enough to
>>allow *some* advancement ... at slightly more than the snail's pace the
>>Vilani were used to, and slightly faster than the repressive Solomani
>>regime allows the true Terrans.
>
>And slightly faster than the Zhodani, the K'Kree, the Hivers, the Aslans, the
>Vlazdumecta, and the many other races living outside the reach of the Vilani
>and the Solomani. 

The Zhos are an authoritarian race, and with an institution like the Thought
Police, if their ruling classes want to suppress the advance of tech that might
threaten their privileged position, wouldn't it be *so* easy?

The K'kree and Hivers, well, you can explain it away as their own homegrown
cultural conservatism or racial blindspots. The K'kree are certainly *very*
conservative, and perhaps the lack of an easy written language has restricted
the advances that the Hivers have made.

As for the Aslan, well, it is well known (to us) that they are really not a
Major Race. They stole Jump Tech from a Terran Scout and concealed all evidence
of it. Maybe the pussies would never have managed to leave their homeworld by
themselves. It certainly seems likely, given the fact that, AFAIR, they were
wracked by a planetwide nuclear war at around that time. Perhaps the arrival of
Terran jumptech saved an otherwise moribund race, and they never would have
advanced far or fast technologically speaking.
 
>>Well, it *makes sense* ... is it true? How otherwise do you explain the lack
>>of Terran revolts against the RoM?
>
>Off the top of my head:
>
>1) There were some but they were suppressed. That period isn't exactly well
>   documented yet.

Agreed. But they must have been widespread, and how did the Fringe worlders
avoid being corrupted by their culturally close cousins in the Core worlds?

>2) Things weren't bad enough under the RoM to spark revolts.

Your elected government is suppressed by some uniformed thugs and you don't
think that there are enough people out there who would want to fight back?

I prefer to differ.

>3) The RoM allowed malcontents to pack up and move elsewhere, thereby
>   relieving the pressure sufficiently to keep the lid on.

The RoM (and their Vilani occupation forces) probably deported malcontents and
their entire families, root and branch. WHich explains why the 3I is more
advanced ... Vilani society was changed by these people, if only a little; and
Solomani society was changed by their absence, a lot.

>4) The Templars secretly controlling the Terrans kept them under control.

No! Like Rob said, its really Grandfather manipulating the Hivers through the
Ithlklur (he forgot the Addaxur!) ... the Templars are simply tools of the
Vilani SolSec (or so SolSec thinks ;-}

>5) The RoM put something in the water.

Yes, how did you know? Wait quietly for SolSec to arrive, you need to be
re-educated for society's benefit. Do not resist. Resistance is futile. The
State is more important than the individual. <grin>

>6) A resurgence of the roleplaying fad allowed the downtrodden Terrans to
>   escape into their own fantasy worlds. And with all their scientists
>   trying to get their MUs to 30th level, they didn't have time to invent
>   anything.

<Argh> Forget SolSec ... Grandfather's clonebots are on their way *right now*,
you need to be brainwiped ... or replaced by a clonebot! You have penetrated the
conspiracy!

>>>Can you prove how long it will usually take to advance technology beyond
>>>TL 9? Can you even prove that the speed with which we have advanced in
>>>the last couple of centuries is not a freak occurrence?
>> 
>>No, but the speed of advance is indicative ...
>
>One example merely proves that it is possible. It says absolutely nothing
>about how likely it is.

Well, YMMV, but I think it does. I *did* say that there were people who
disagreed with my interpretation, didn't I <grin>

>>...as are the cultural reasons for it. There would have to be some huge
>>disaster to change this ...
>
>A huge disaster is one possible reason. Another possible reason is that in
>the nature of things advancement is very difficult and rapid advancement
>depends on rare circumstances. And since almost every society in the
>Traveller universe display slow advancement, regardless of whether they
>have catastrophes or not, I think it is far more likely.

And the huge catastrophe for the Solomani was having their unique culture
suppressed, contaminated, and perverted by the Vilani, all in the name of a
military thug in pursuit of unlimited personal wealth and power.

>An aside about Vilani conservatism. Even if the TL advancement of the 3rd
>Imperium is typically, the Vilani were slowpokes. Under this theory it
>should typically take a couple of millenia to get from TL 9-10 to TL 15.
>The Vilani stayed at TL 11 for longer than that. 

Like I said, the populace of the 3I have been slightly contaminated by the
exiled Solomani.

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #920
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest       Friday, October 9 1998       Volume 1998 : Number 921



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

GURPS Traveller starship questions
Re: G:T alien races I art
Re: GURPS Trav power plants
Re: Corsairs, economic analysis
Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.
Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions
Re: Military History (was re: Ironclads)
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: What I would like to see in T5.
Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
the Ithklur (was Re: Limits to tech advancement)
Cannonicity of DGP material
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #909
Re: Truth is gaining on fiction....
Re: Off topic : SFB
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:43:52 -0400
From: "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>
Subject: GURPS Traveller starship questions

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_002F_01BDF2DA.D4BD25C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm a new Traveller player brought to this universe from years of GURPS. =
I am really impressed at the expanse of background for this game and =
can't wait to run a game.

A couple if questions:

1. On G:T p. 122 it shows a map of the Regina subsector. No scale is =
given. What is the scale of each hex?

2.  What is a Black Globe? Also- What about nuclear dampeners? Will nuke =
missiles be added to the game?

Thanks

Stilleon

- ------=_NextPart_000_002F_01BDF2DA.D4BD25C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#c8e0d8>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm a new Traveller =
player brought to=20
this universe from years of GURPS. I am really impressed at the expanse =
of=20
background for this game and can't wait to run a game.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2>A couple if =
questions:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2>1. On G:T p. 122 it =
shows a map of=20
the Regina subsector. No scale is given. What is the scale of each=20
hex?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2>2.&nbsp; What is a =
Black Globe? Also-=20
What about nuclear dampeners? Will nuke missiles be added to the=20
game?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Stilleon</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_002F_01BDF2DA.D4BD25C0--

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 14:11:00 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: G:T alien races I art

From:           	neo@total.net
Date sent:      	Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:03:15 -0400 (EDT)

>Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> sez,

>>Okay, I like it, I'm not sure about the Vargr ship, it just doesn't
>>have enough fins etc. 

>Doh. I did  put a few tiny fins on it, but maybe you're right. It's
>supposed to be a small landing craft, so I figured they kept the fins to a
>minimum in order to fit it into the vehicle bay :).

Ignore me, it was just an off hand comment, I guess I'm just used to the DGP 
Vargr with all their fins and stripes etc. Anyhow I really do like it (small fins and 
all). The art in G:T is top quality, you've done a really good job.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 20:46:40 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: GURPS Trav power plants

DustyLV769@aol.com wrote:

>In a message dated 10/7/98 15:19:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz writes:
>
><< Thrusters cut off abruptly at 1000 diameters. Its a change
introduced in
>T4,
> presumably to avoid exactly that problem.  >>
>
>Are you sure of this?  I can't seem to either find or recall any info
on this
>in T4.  I am going by the last edition I know of that mentioned it
>specifically, which was MT.

T4, Book 2, page 71:
Thruster Plates
"The cutoff parameter turns out to be around 2,000 solar radii.  Beyond
this point, thruster plates are virtually worthless for anything beyond
stationkeeping,..."

ContraGravity
"By 10 diameters out from a planet, the ContraGravity drive is virtually
worthless, only producing1% of the thrust it would on the surface."

Charles

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 21:27:58 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Corsairs, economic analysis

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:

>Charles R Hensley writes:
>
>>One of the benifits of Megacorp run ships is th efast turn-around,
this
>>is approx. 35 /year,  tramp traders would use 26 / year.
>
>This is reasonable; it is the figures I use when doing calculations for
MTU
>(except that I allow any regularily scheduled starship, not just those
of
>megacorporations, to get 25 jumps per year (not 26; they need 14 days
per
>year for the annual maintenance) if going from surface to surface and
40/year
>if going from jump limit to jump limit); but it is not canon. The only
>canonical example that I can recall of how a large company runs
mentions the
>same one-jump-per-14-days that the rules give. (The company is Al Morai
in
>_Spinward Marches Campaign_. OK, it's not a megacorporation, it's
"only" a
>sector-wide line  --  a very thinly spread out sector-wide line. But
still...)

IMTU I allow PCs to get the jumps/year benifit IF they buy a shuttle for
every port on thier route, rent a warehouse and office at every port,
Hire a broker, warehouseman, shuttle crew, and a secratary. diliveries
are orbit to orbit, buy fuel at every port.  They have not found the
startup to be economical yet.

Charles

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 23:44:05 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Ironclads, the facts...long.

In a message dated 10/7/98 3:24:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time, eris@gulf.net
writes:

<< Seeing as the Yankees won, they get to call the shots on
 the names...except for Bull Run, that is, for some reason the Southern
 name for the first of those battles has stuck. ;->
  >>

Not to this unrepentent Yankee....:-) 

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 23:56:30 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions

- --------------C15927F497C944A1558E02D8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

N. Eric Phillips wrote:


> I'm a new Traveller player brought to this universe from years of
> GURPS. I am really impressed at the expanse of background for this
> game and can't wait to run a game. A couple if questions: 1. On G:T p.
> 122 it shows a map of the Regina subsector. No scale is given. What is
> the scale of each hex?
>  2.  What is a Black Globe? Also- What about nuclear dampeners? Will
> nuke missiles be added to the game? Thanks Stilleon

Welcome to the TML, Stilleon.  You may be the first TMLer straight from
G:T.

One quick thing: not everyone can handle HTML in their mail reader,
so if you send as HTML only, some won't be able to respond to your
posts.  And it makes commenting to specific portions a real pain.

Your questions:
(1)  I can't believe that this slipped through.  Probably the answer is
hidden
in G:T somewhere, but if it did slip, thats really suprising.

A hex on that map is One Parsec.  Approximately 3.65 light years.
This is the maximium range of a Jump-1 drive. (G:T p.120).
So on the map on page 122, Regina is 1 parsec (or jump-1) away from
Hefre, but three parsecs (or Jump-3) from Roup.

(2)  Black globes are screens that stop energy and matter  from passing
through, in both directions.  They flicker at varying rates to allow a
ship to
drop the screen and fire through, then pop the scren back up.
Someone else can explain them much better than I.

Nuclear Dampeners stop nuclear reactions from happening, thus
stopping nuclear missiles from working.  (G:T p. 154).

As for adding Nuclear Missiles to the game, we have these real
world right now.  They're real nasty.  Its against Imperium Laws
of Warfare to use them. As for constructing them, I'm no sure
where those stats would be.

Bloo

- --------------C15927F497C944A1558E02D8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML>
N. Eric Phillips wrote:
<BR>&nbsp;
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE><FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1>I'm
a new Traveller player brought to this universe from years of GURPS. I
am really impressed at the expanse of background for this game and can't
wait to run a game.</FONT></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;<FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1>A
couple if questions:</FONT></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;<FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1>1.
On G:T p. 122 it shows a map of the Regina subsector. No scale is given.
What is the scale of each hex?</FONT></FONT></FONT>
<BR><FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1></FONT></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;<FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1>2.&nbsp;
What is a Black Globe? Also- What about nuclear dampeners? Will nuke missiles
be added to the game?</FONT></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;<FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1>Thanks</FONT></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;<FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1>Stilleon</FONT></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>

<P><BR>Welcome to the TML, Stilleon.&nbsp; You may be the first TMLer straight
from
<BR>G:T.
<P>One quick thing: not everyone can handle HTML in their mail reader,
<BR>so if you send as HTML only, some won't be able to respond to your
<BR>posts.&nbsp; And it makes commenting to specific portions a real pain.
<P>Your questions:
<BR>(1)&nbsp; I can't believe that this slipped through.&nbsp; Probably
the answer is hidden
<BR>in G:T somewhere, but if it did slip, thats really suprising.
<P>A hex on that map is One Parsec.&nbsp; Approximately 3.65 light years.
<BR>This is the maximium range of a Jump-1 drive. (G:T p.120).
<BR>So on the map on page 122, Regina is 1 parsec (or jump-1) away from
<BR>Hefre, but three parsecs (or Jump-3) from Roup.
<P>(2)&nbsp; Black globes are screens that stop energy and matter&nbsp;
from passing
<BR>through, in both directions.&nbsp; They flicker at varying rates to
allow a ship to
<BR>drop the screen and fire through, then pop the scren back up.
<BR>Someone else can explain them much better than I.
<P>Nuclear Dampeners stop nuclear reactions from happening, thus
<BR>stopping nuclear missiles from working.&nbsp; (G:T p. 154).
<P>As for adding Nuclear Missiles to the game, we have these real
<BR>world right now.&nbsp; They're real nasty.&nbsp; Its against Imperium
Laws
<BR>of Warfare to use them. As for constructing them, I'm no sure
<BR>where those stats would be.
<P>Bloo</HTML>

- --------------C15927F497C944A1558E02D8--

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 23:57:18 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Military History (was re: Ironclads)

In a message dated 10/7/98 4:28:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU writes:

<< Black Ice wrote:
 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 ObTrav:  IYTUs, how far back do your oldest military units trace
 lineage?  F'r instance, is there a jump troop unit that traces its
 history back to the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment of World War II? 
 How 'bout the Glosters?
 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 Seventh Cavalry (Solomani Grav Infantry, "Boots & Saddles") claims to 
 trace it's history back to pre-American Civil War Terra, but their lineage
 has been challenged by some post-Invasion-Earth Solomani units. This 
 makes for a good intra or inter-service barfight excuse.  >>

I remember that some of the Solomani counters in Invasion Earth represented
the 82nd and 101st Airborne (Grav-mobile?). I think some other units were
represented, but I don't have my game in front of me...

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 00:15:59 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

In a message dated 10/8/98 12:49:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU writes:

<< hat their use of "reliable" (being professional archivists) may be
 more stringent than ours.
 
 The winning media for reliability over time? Treated acid-free paper.
 It was rated as "reliable" for time frames extending over 2000 years.
 
 Walt Smith
  >>

I always hated reading more than about a half dozen pages of text
electronically. If it's longer, I prefer paper.

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 98 23:52:36 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5.

On 10/07/98 at 05:31 PM,  "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net> said:

>	The original Star Trek roleplaying game had a fairly interesting
>system that involved the *entire* bridge crew to some extent or the
>other. 

I've heard that, but it's not in the boxed set I have.  Was it a suppliment?  If so, what was it called?

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 22:41:43 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions

> N. Eric Phillips wrote:
> 
> I'm a new Traveller player brought to this universe from years of
> GURPS. I am really impressed at the expanse of background for this
> game and can't wait to run a game.

Welcome to the Universe as we know it ;-) The best is yet to come...

> A couple if questions:
> 
> 1. On G:T p. 122 it shows a map of the Regina subsector. No scale is
> given. What is the scale of each hex?

That would be a single parsec (jump 1) per hex. All Traveller star maps are
like this, so you can use non-GURPS material perfectly well.
 
> 2.  What is a Black Globe? Also- What about nuclear dampeners? Will
> nuke missiles be added to the game?

Black Globes are very high tech, very rare devices that absorb all energy that
hits them. The energy has to go somewhere, and typically, the ship using one
uses it to power either the jump drive or weapons. However, they'll just keep
absorbing energy until you explosde, so you have to do _something_ with it. It
makes them less than perfect.

Also, you can't see or shoot out of them, either. 

Nuclear dampers prevent nukes from going off. Nuke missiles are there (there
are rules somewhere in GURPS, I'm sure, for doing nukes.) However, the
Imperium really _REALLY_ frowns on people (other than the Imperial Navy
themseves) using them. A good way to get a sizable chunk of the nearby
universe pissed off at you...

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 02:08:01 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:

>  Walt Smith said:

> > The winning media for reliability over time? Treated acid-free paper.
> >It was rated as "reliable" for time frames extending over 2000 years.

Assuming:
- - no fire
- - no water
- - no radiation (including solar)
- - no shredder

I think I'd encase the paper in very, very thing plastic sheets,
made from the plastic 6-pack holder stuff that I'm told will take
10,000+ years to degrade.

How sad is that.  Monkeys scratching on trees.

> I always hated reading more than about a half dozen pages of text
> electronically. If it's longer, I prefer paper.

Have to agree.  But have you seen the new RocketBooks?
Backlit electronic books supposed to be for sale this fall.
They have potential.

Bloo

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 23:28:12 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: the Ithklur (was Re: Limits to tech advancement)

Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior) wrote

> Grandfather manipulated the Ithklur into
> manipulating the Hivers to take care of Estigaribbia.
> 
> Everyone blames the Hivers, but that's because the Ithklur are much 
> more subtle, behind their bluff, bloodthirsty 'good-ole-lizard' 
> exteriors.

Remember that according to TNE cannon (Aliens of the Rim)the Ithulkur
are equal or superior (except for EDU) to both Humaniti and to Hivers. 
If subtlety is a function of Intelligence the Ithulkur should be
superior to Humans & Hiver, if it is a function of Charisma the Ithulkur
should be equal.  [A lot of people (not including me) dislike the
culture AotR gives to the Ithulkur & I'd rather not get into that but I
think the charecter generation system is relatively value free & can be
accepted even if the rest of the book is not your favorite.]

		Humans		Hivers		Ithulkur

Strength	2d6-1 (6)	2d6-1 (6)	2d6+1 (8)
Agility		2d6-1 (6)	2d6-1 (6)	2d6-1 (6)	
Constitution	2d6-1 (6)	2d6-1 (6)	2d6 (7)
Intelligence	2d6-1 (6)	2d6-1 (6)	2d6 (7)
Education	2d6-1 (6)	2d6+1 (8)	1d6 (3.5)
Charisma	2d6-1 (6)	2d6-1 (6)	2d6-1 (6)	

Human and Ithulkur charecters are subject to further attribute modifiers
based on their homeworld charecteristics, Hiver charecters are not.

When converting charecters from TNE to CT, MT, or T4 add 1 point to
attributes thus giving an average Ithulkur the follwing UPP 9788/3.5/6

- -- 
Peter Newman		pnewman@alaska.net
- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Member in Good Standing of The Society to Turn Wesley Crusher Into 
a Small Styrofoam Dodecahedron

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 23:35:09 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Cannonicity of DGP material

TravelrTNE@aol.com wrote:

> It's also been stated that DGP went beyond what was intended.  How do 
> you interpret G:T Aliens I being explicity instructed by "Miller and
> Wiseman" not to use anything DGP?

THis could be due to the desire to avoid possible legal questions over
ownership of DGP products and not due to a determination that they were
noncanonical.

Peter - who suddenly feels as if GURPS Traveller is the Vatican II of
canon

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 98 00:40:38 -0700
From: Tim Carroll <timc@paratwa.org>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #909

>So? As a player of mine once showed me, give the character a 14DX and a
>14IQ, then take 56 half-point skills. That's a load of skills at better
>than average for a 14-year old. :-)
>
>Players. Can't live with 'em, can't shoot 'em (although dropping heavy
>objects on their character's heads makes for an adequate substitute at
>times).


First question you ask the player is where the 14 year old got such a 
rounded education?  Given that this is a munchkin, I'd expect to see lots 
of combat skills...where did a 14 year old learn to fight so well?

Also, unless the kid brings his ST and HT up as well, you can exploit 
those.  Close combat in GURPS can be brutal if you're strength is 
lower....my experiences as player and GM is that people with average ST 
and HT are pretty easy to work.  (Drugs/poisons that force HT rolls are 
one option).

Anyway, from a more roleplaying attitude, the point I'm trying to make is 
that the character needs to be justifiable not just within the "rules", 
but also within the background.  If the player can't give me a good 
justification, then the character is not getting into my campaign.  Even 
if he has a good justification, I might force the player to take the 
"unusual background" disadvantage.  (So your character was trained by a 
cult of shaman/mystic/warrior/engineer/doctor/scientists, huh?  (Okay, 
that's a 20 point Unusual Background).

If the player is unwilling to work out their background, I might use that 
as an opportunity to figure it all out for myself.   Maybe the character 
is a secret experiment in accelerated learning that got loose...and 
doesn't know his background.  So there are other people out there 
interested in finding him.  This is an old trick from the Amber RPG -- 
anything the player isn't willing to work out in their character 
background is fair game.  By some interpretations, this could be 
considered to be disads the character doesn't get any points for.

Essentially, you get the player to fit the characrter into the universe, 
and have pieces of background to hook some plots, NPCs, etc. onto.  If 
the player is unwilling to give you anything interesting to work stories 
around, why do you even want him in your game?

Also, Youth, for all the low disad cost, can be played up an awful lot of 
grief.  The character is going to spend a lot of time getting dumped on 
with no respect, no one taking you seriously, can't get into bars and 
other places...can't drive...can't sign any legal contract without a 
guardian....and as many other nightmares as you want to put him through.

If the character has other obnoxious disads, they should be played up as 
well -- otherwise, you should do as others on the list have suggested and 
eliminate getting any points for disads.  Essentially, if someone takes a 
disad, as your job as GM, you need to enforce that disad (in so much as 
it doesn't completely interfere with a larger storyline).  

I *am* surprised that any munchkin would take physical limitations or 
dyslexia -- those are the easiest disads to enforce!  GURPS's dyslexia 
represents an extremely serious case; effectively being unable to read.  
In a High Tech society, it is difficult or impossible to learn most 
technical skills without direct instruction from another person.  If I 
wanted to push the interpretation of the rules (and I'm always happy to 
do this for munchkins), I'd assume that the 1/4 learning rule means that 
the player needs to spend 4x as much to buy initial mental skills, unless 
he has a teacher in his background.

I kinda said it above, but for me it comes down to one of three choices: 

(1)  Player comes up with an interesting character, with cool background, 
story elements, and so on.  This is the most common for the games I'm in 
these days, because over the years I've managed to find good players, and 
find ways to help create good players. 

(2)  I can try to come up with interesting background elements for the 
character, and suck them into it.  I'll do this for new players or 
players who are redeemable.

(3)  I find out the player is a munchkin, and not fun to roleplay with.  
They aren't good players, and they don't get invited back.  It may sound 
harsh, but it usually keeps all the other players in the game happy, and 
fun *is* the reason why we play these things, right?

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

Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 23:41:00 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Truth is gaining on fiction....

Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> wrote
> Subject: Truth is gaining on fiction....
> 
> The future may be less like Traveller and more like CyberPunk than we
> think...ripped from todays headlines...<insert catchy news show music>
> 
> This was grabbed from our local paper's web site:
> 
> Implant allows brain to activate computer

But Traveller does have Cyberpunk style brain implant computers, the
Imperium merely has very strong social sanctions against them & may make
them difficult to find or not comercially availiable (see TNE's FFS 1
Alternative Technologies and GURPS Travellersp 109).

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 17:50:09
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Off topic : SFB

>From: Phil Kitching <Philk@btinternet.com>
>Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB
>
>Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 12:18:25 -0400
>From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
>
>> 
>Finally, if you put a drone on the shuttle (a scatterpack) the drone moves
>at 8c and is an unstoppable KKM allowing a remotely controlled shuttle to
>destroy 6 Tigresses, leaving only 2 of your batron.

Objection ! A KKM (a drone without a warhead, built under FD12) is
specifically stated to come under FD13.0 'Slug Drones' and I quote from
FD13.0 'If a slug drone reaches the hex of the target, it simly
self-destructs without causing any damage'.

FD7.32 also states <a scatter pack> 'is controlled as a seeking weapon', so
you need another unit (usually within 35 hexes, more if using a Special
Sensor) to control it. The submunitions will also need control channels
(see FD7.35), so clearly the Tigresses will win against a single
unaccompanied scatterpack.

>
>The only good news is that you can't use 6 type IIIMW drones because the
>18 type IV submunitions are warp seekers - except that I think you can
>point them at bases, so you probably can.
>

FD2.56 'Warp Seekers' - 'Warp-seeking drones can track any type of energy;
see (FD5.11)'.

FD5.11 '(The drone can find any type of energy it was told to look for, so
the target need not have warp energy. They can be targeted on asteroids,
for example)'

>Your only hope is to use the rules in the Starships LBB - then your Free
>Trader can move 1" in the Z direction and the shuttle, constrained to the
>hex map, cannot see him. :-)

Actually, you should be OK, as long as the Tigress' legal team has a copy
of 'Early Years', which deals with sublight laser-armed ships *grin* I
think it's module Y ... the Y sequence of rules is reserved to deal with
it. Like all sublight ships, the Tigress will get to move a hex and turn,
or do sublight TACs.

Ian Whitchuch

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 21:24:32 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

Date sent:      	Thu, 08 Oct 1998 16:33:55 -0500
From:           	Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>

>Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:

>> The recent discussion on wishes for T5 and JoT skill has prompted me to post
>> my house rules modifying the basic T4 task system.

>Andrew, this looks interesting. Could you give a couple of specific
>examples of how you would write up Task Descriptions with one or more
>prerequisites and walk through how you would resolve the tasks?  

Well taking Marc sugestion of using the number of dice as the skill prerequisite 
(why didn't I think of that, its just so neat).

To remove an appendix under "field" conditions
  (dex+med) -4 for lack of proper equipment < average (2d)
  15 minutes

Now this is a 2d task so the prerequisite is med-2 (any reasonably advanced
med student should be able to remove an appendix), but because its being 
done without proper facilities it has a -4 on the target.

Eneri has med 3 and dex 8 (an average surgeon) he will succead on a 7-
Sharik has med 1 and dex 10 (a talented 1st year student) normally she would
  have the same chance as Eneri, but because she has only med 1 and the
  task has a prerequisite of 2 difficulty is increased one level to difficult (2.5d);
  again she will succead on a 7- but due to the increase in difficulty her chance
  of success is less than Eneri.
Rojl has med 1, JoT 2 and dex 9 (a scout paramedic). While he only has med 1
  his JoT skill boosts it to 3 _for the purposes of prerequisites_ only so he does
  not suffer the same increase in difficulty as Sharik. Also his JoT skill reduces
  the penalty due to insufficent facilities to -2. Thus Rojl's target number on 2d
  will be: 1 + 9 - 2 = 8- (his JoT does not add to his med skill for the chance of
  success, but it does negate half the penalty). If Rojl had JoT 6 he would
  negate the entire penalty, but the "extra" 2 points of JoT would have no effect.

To spot a hidden vehicle at distance
  (int + recon) +1 for binoculars < difficult (2.5d)
  1 minute

The prerequisite skill here is recon 3 (the half die counts).

Eneri has recon 3 and int 8. His target is 8 + 3 + 1 = 12-
Sharik has recon 1 and int 12. Since this is a 3d task (half die counts as a die)
  and she only has recon 1 the difficulty is increased by 2 levels (to 4d). Thus
  her target is 12 + 1 + 1 = 14- (apparently better than Eneri, but since she is
  rolling 4d rather than 2.5d, her chance is considerably worse)
Rojl has recon 1, JoT 2 and int 7. His two levels of JoT skill counter his poor
  prerequisite skill level and thus her target is: 7 + 1 + 1 = 9- (not as good as
  Eneri, but better than Sharik)

To rewire a pre-Deyo Transponder
  (dex+elect) -3 for lack of tools < staggering (4d)
  1 hour, comp 3 and mech 1 also required

The prerequiste here is elect 4, but due to the extreme complexity two 
additional prerequisites are also required (tasks requiring more than one 
prerequisite should be _very_ uncommon)

Eneri has elect 4, comp 3, mech 1 and dex 10, he succeads on a 11-
Sharik has elect 2, comp 1, mech 0 and dex 15. Since the prerequisites for this
  task are elect 4, comp 3 and mech 1 and Sharik is lacking 5 skill levels the
  task is increased 5 levels (to a 9d task!). Her target roll is: 15 + 2 - 3 = 14-
  (go ahead roll)
Rojl has elect 1 comp 0, mech 1, JoT 4 and dex 12. Now Rojl normally would
  have the difficult of this task increased by 6 levels, but his JoT 4 reduces this
  to 2 levels (6d). His JoT skill also negates the -3 penalty. Thus Rojl's target
  is: 12 + 1 = 13-

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #921
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest       Friday, October 9 1998       Volume 1998 : Number 922



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

The RoM coup (Was: Limits to tech advancement)
Re: Trade and Nuke Dampers
G:T Nuke Dampers
Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 1
Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 3
Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions
Re: Trade and Economics
re: OT: SFB
re: Paperless Imperium
Re:  At Last
Re: Transponder's true nature
Re: What I would like to see in T5.
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 22:10:25 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: The RoM coup (Was: Limits to tech advancement)

The Interstellar Wars period is currently under development on the TWG.

The Late Terran Confederation was not a "true" democracy by any standard. 
Even at its formation its response to vocal critics was to quietly remove them to 
the distant colonies. From its beginning it was dealing with dissidents by 
"unpleasant" means.

The Core worlds of the TC were Terra and Prometheus. All the other worlds 
were militarised frontier worlds. Political power was always concentrated on 
Terra and all other worlds were grossly under represented (Terra got one 
representative in the assembly per nation, the colonies one per world).

There was resistance to the Coup, but it was supressed by the efficent 
Gendamarie and the fleet (largely composed of colonials)

The Vilani did eventually absorb the Terrans, but not in the Terran colonised 
worlds of the former TC.

Throughout the IW the Terrans were deliberately sending long range colonial 
missions far to rimward and then equally deliberately "lossing" them (the 
organisation responsible was the Confederation Agency for the Preservation of 
Indigenous Cultures CAPIC).

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 19:36:51
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Trade and Nuke Dampers

>From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
>Subject: Re: Corsairs, economic analysis
>
>IMTU I allow PCs to get the jumps/year benifit IF they buy a shuttle for
>every port on thier route, rent a warehouse and office at every port,
>Hire a broker, warehouseman, shuttle crew, and a secratary. diliveries
>are orbit to orbit, buy fuel at every port.  They have not found the
>startup to be economical yet.

I can understand making them put a broker on retainer, hiring an office and
staff and so on, and buying fuel at starports is just more efficient
(*hint* try buying a small fuel refinery unit, and refining fuel in your
warehouse. Be prepared to apologise and sign it over if fuel refining is
some sort of Imperial-sanctioned monopoly).

Cargo contracys being orbit to orbit I can also understand, but why do you
make them buy a shuttle ? In any case, if it is orbit to orbit, you should
be able to get away with a vacuum-proofed grav truck. At the least, let
them rent one when their ship comes in.

The other thing to consider is they may want to authorise your people on
the ground to deal with other traders ... this is doing to the trade rules
what various rules and guidelines about running a mercenary company have
done to the combat rules - take them from running a small group and
ignoring the 'off screen' stuff to running a larger one and having to
concentrate on the supporting elements.

>From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
>Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions
>
>Nuclear dampers prevent nukes from going off. Nuke missiles are there (there
>are rules somewhere in GURPS, I'm sure, for doing nukes.) However, the
>Imperium really _REALLY_ frowns on people (other than the Imperial Navy
>themseves) using them. A good way to get a sizable chunk of the nearby
>universe pissed off at you...

You can also use them to stop fission power plants (especially *plot hook*
badly maintained fission reactors that are rapidly going supercritical)
from working, and to make radioactive areas non radioactive (possibly in a
dirty great big flash of x-rays, depending on the referee's views about (a)
conservation of energy and (b) big flashy dangerous special effects).

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 19:40:31
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: G:T Nuke Dampers

Nuke dampers should be another Gunner specialisation. In the G:T universe,
I'd probably be generous and put them with Meson Screens it Electronics Ops
(Force Fields).

Except since we're Traveller grognards we'll call it 'Screens' rather than
'Force Fields' ...

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 01:59:19 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 1

I really like GURPS Traveller but it has some problems.  I am going to
list the problems I have noticed.  This message will cover Chapter 1.

pg6-7 Imperium Map

Capital/Core is located in the wrong place.  The dot immediately under
the word Capital is located at aproximately 3220 Core, right on the
border with Fornast Sector.  Capital/Core is actually located at 2118
Core about 1.5 subsectors to spinward. Reference/Core's location is also
several parsecs off.  Terra?Spinward Marches appears on the map at about
2321 Spinward Marches not at 1827 where it should be.
I think many of the other stars are also slightly off.  I believe that
when this map was created a dot was placed near the name on the map but
the exact location the dots should be in was not checked (each sector
map is about 15mm x 21mm & each mm of error on the map is therefore
about 2 parsecs of error).

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 02:37:48 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2

I really like GURPS Traveller but it has some problems.  This message
will discuss problems I have noted in Chapter 2 (Details of a Universe)

Planets with Traveller UPP's - a number of planets are listed in the
library data with UPP's (a good thing) but these UPP's do not seem to be
explained anywhere. Sidebar pg 107 covers converting TL's & pg 123
covers converting planets other stats but nowhere is the UPP defined.  I
am glad to see the then but how will anyone without previous Traveller
experience knwo what these weird numbers following the listings for
Andory, Antiquity, Capital, Darrian, Mire, Glea, Guaran, Kirur, Kuzu,
Lair, Junidy, Regina, Terra, & maybe more _means_ ?  The Upp for Recgina
is missing the TL as well.  Suggested fix - a sidebar explaining that
UPPs are the means the Imperium uses to charecterize planets & that is
why they show up in library data, this note will tell peoplehow to
convert them to GURPS descriptions.

TAS sidebar pg 35 - Already mentioned by others Cost is Cr 1,000,000 per
year not for lifetime.  Also members get 1 passage per month not every
other month. TAS has hostels at Class V (= type A) starports, in
previous canon TAS was located at type A and type B ports. Suggested fix
- - change back to previous nambers & note that TAS is found at type V and
type IV starports.

pg 36 - "Hivers like planets of size 6 or less."  What is a size 6
planet?  Suggested fix - "Hivers like planets with diameters of 6,499
miles or less."

pg 38 sidebar - defines Holiday & says other holidays are up to the GM. 
I would like to see a mention of the Emperors Birthday as a major
Imperial holiday, as it was portrayed in past canon, but this is a minor
point.  Suggested fix - paragraph on the Emperors Brithday.

pg 44 - duration of jump - it says jump takes 168hours +/- 10% or "6
days 7 hours 12 minutes to 6 days 20 hours 48 minutes" this should read
6 days 7 hours 12 minutes to 7 days 16 hours 48 minutes.  SUggested fix
- - change it.

pg 78 sidebar - Low Lottery - the Low Lottery is describded as betting,
by crewmembers & seasoned travellers on _which_ low passengers will not
survive.  Past canon descibded the Low Lottery as betting on
_how_many_total_ low passengers would survive & allowed low passengers
themselves to bet.  Suggested fix - change it back.

pg 62 sidebar - description of Terra system - it says that Terra has a
type I (ie type E) starport.  Past canon & pg 67 of GT give Terra a type
A (or type V) starport.  Suggested fix - change to type V starport.

pg 62 sidebar - description of Terra system - the distances of the
planets from the sun are given in AU & they say that Neptune is at 38.8
AU and that Pluto is at 77.2 AU - these _distances_ are way off, it
looks as if they just used Bodes law to determine where the planets
should be & did not bother to consult an astronomy text which will tell
you that Neptune is at about 30.1 AU and Pluto is at about 39.5 AU. 
Suggested fix - kill those responsible for this table & then change the
values on the table

pg 66 Sylea - the library data entry for Sylea does not bother to tell
you that the planet is now called Capitol or to cross reference
Capitol.  Suggested fix - a sentance saying Sylea was renamed Capital in
the year ? by Cleon, see Capitol.

pg 80  (GM's Only section)







The Mystery of the Ancients "Grandfather sired 20 children, each of whom
had 20 children of their own...  With 420 offspring, Grandfather decided
he had enough and stopped"  Grandfathers Grandchildren are not his
offspring they are his _descendants_.  Suggested fix - change text to
with 420 _descendants_.  [I know this one is just a grammer rant.]

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 02:51:54 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 3

I really like GURPS Traveller but it has some problems.  This message
lists problems I have found  in Chapter 3 (Charecters).

pg 83 Wealth "A careeer as a merchant may have resulted in a charecter
owning a trading starship (or having an interest in one)."  Howvever the
rules for the new Advantage Ship Patron (sb pg 84-5) do not say that it
can be split or how many points partial ownership of a ship is worth. 
If a Beowulf Class free Trader is a 36 point advantage how many points
is 40% ownership of one?  Suggested fix - define point costs on partial
ownership or use of a ship.

pg 84 Psionic Powers - Teleportation "The skills of Autoteleport and
Exoteleport may all be aquired at normal cost."  Autoteleport is the
ability to teleport yourself but Exoteleport is the ability to transport
objects from place to place without going along with them.  For example
a Zhodhani with Exoteleport could teleport a Hydrogen bomb onto an
Imperial ship to blow it up.  This ability was not present in previous
versions of Traveller (except possibly as a Special Psionic power). 
[This error is also repeated in the, now in playtest, GURPS Aliens I
Zhodhani Commando charecter template.]  Suggested fix - forbid
Exoteleport (or require an high unusual background cost).  Exoteleport
ability will really affect what Teleporters can do & I don't like it
(unless I was playing a Teleporter....)

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 06:17:31 -0600
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions

>
>Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 23:56:30 -0400
>From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
>Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions
>
>N. Eric Phillips wrote:
>
>
>> I'm a new Traveller player brought to this universe from years of
>> GURPS. I am really impressed at the expanse of background for this
>> game and can't wait to run a game. A couple if questions: 1. On G:T p.
>> 122 it shows a map of the Regina subsector. No scale is given. What is
>> the scale of each hex?
>>  2.  What is a Black Globe? Also- What about nuclear dampeners? Will
>> nuke missiles be added to the game? Thanks Stilleon
>
>Welcome to the TML, Stilleon.  You may be the first TMLer straight from
>G:T.
>

Seconded (or thirded - there was another response).

>Your questions:
>(1)  A hex on that map is One Parsec.  Approximately 3.65 light years.

I must differ with my esteemed colleague - a parsec is ~3.26 ly.

>This is the maximium range of a Jump-1 drive. (G:T p.120).
>So on the map on page 122, Regina is 1 parsec (or jump-1) away from
>Hefre, but three parsecs (or Jump-3) from Roup.

Don't worry about parsecs - it's an arbitrary measure at best.  The
important fact is that every hex distance is one jump-1, and larger jumps
are multiples of this.  You can jump to an empty hex, if you carry enough
fuel to jump out again to your next destination - this is a reason for
having extra fuel capacity (over your jump number), per the Ship Patron
advantage on pp. GT84-85.

Because the map is flat, only the most important systems (in jump topology
or for interstellar trade and commerce is deliberately left unclear) are
actually depicted - the standard Traveller map of near-Earth space has 33
systems within 6 pc of Earth, when in reality there are something like 84.
Most of us ignore this and play the map as drawn.

>
>(2)  Black globes are screens that stop energy and matter  from passing
>through, in both directions.  They flicker at varying rates to allow a
>ship to
>drop the screen and fire through, then pop the scren back up.
>Someone else can explain them much better than I.
>

Black/white globes, nuclear dampers, and meson screens (pp. GT108 and 154)
are the only "force fields" in the Traveller universe (and nuke dampers
aren't really a field effect; see below).

A white globe is theoretically a more advanced (TL16+?) version of a black
globe, that absorbs and reradiates energy from outside (except for narrowly
tuned "windows" that allow the ship to see and communicate), but freely
permits energy to leave the globe from inside.  Black globes are black
because they absorb everything - they can be used as a limited form of
"cloaking device" (although once you know something's out there you simply
look for the "hole" in the background radiation).  White globes glow white
with the reradiated energy.


>Nuclear Dampeners stop nuclear reactions from happening, thus
>stopping nuclear missiles from working.  (G:T p. 154).
>

Nuke dampers play with the strong nuclear force (that governs radioactive
decay) at a distance.  They can either suppress the force, causing the
radioactive nuclei to decay at a greater rate and leaving you with a
warhead full of slightly radioactive lead instead of plutonium, or enhance
the force, slowing down radioactive decay and allowing you to store nuclear
materials with very short half-lives.  The former is the mechanism behind
defensive nuclear dampers (although in Traveller these originally had to be
targeted on each warhead like a weapon).  The latter is what makes nuke
damper boxes (p. GT51).

>As for adding Nuclear Missiles to the game, we have these real
>world right now.  They're real nasty.  Its against Imperium Laws
>of Warfare to use them. As for constructing them, I'm not sure
>where those stats would be.

VE2, pp. 108-110.  Replacing the HEAT warhead on the SIM's (pp. GT158-159)
with 1 Mton nuclear warheads adds Cr32,000 to the cost and does 12d x
2,000,000,000 hits at the point of impact, x 1/4 for every 1024 yards away
from ground zero.  On average, this will completely destroy a free trader
at 5.6 miles (135,000 hits) and still damage her (106 hits) at 8.6 miles.
This is probably overkill, even for naval ships.  SATNUCs might be amusing,
though.

As Bloo says, the Imperium frowns heavily on nuclear missiles in civilian
hands.  SJ Games plans to bring out an Imperial Navy supplement to cover
things like this.

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 07:00:37 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: Trade and Economics

Rupert Boleyn wrote:

> I've always prefered the trade system from the LLB's because it's more
> colourfull, and it makes more sense (to me, anyway) for cargo to cost
> different amounts depending on what it is as much as where it's from.

My feelings exactly! I've never used any of the newer systems for just that
reason. I think that having value based on the item carried encourages more
genuine speculation. Players can be in the situation of having to carefully
decide whether or not to spend almost their last credit on an especially
expensive, but potentially lucrative, cargo. I could never get my head around
the fact that X dT of Lanthanum has the same value as an equivalent amount of
rice. Get real!
What's to stop the players just breaking open the said Lanthanum lot and selling
it off seperately?
They must know what they're buying for shipping documentation reasons.

Paul

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 05:47:34 PDT
From: "jim clem" <travmind@hotmail.com>
Subject: re: OT: SFB

- ----Original Message Follows----
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
To: "'TML'" <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: re: OT: SFB
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 16:30:02 -0400
Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM

jim clem wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the standard SSD, just in a faster way.  The various optional systems 
might be modeled depending on the percentage of hull boxes left.  Let me 
know any ideas you have.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You might take a page from Starfire - ships were represented as nothing
but a list of letters. You'd have:

SSSAALLHEEE

or something like that, representing a ship that had three shields,
two armor units, two lasers, one cargo bay and three engines. Damage
would be marked off left to right, though some special weapons
ignored shields and/or armor.

Have your generic hull boxes, and print a letter inside them. Mark them
off left to right, top row to bottom row. Treat them just as "hull",
at least in the basic game. In the advanced game, give the letters
meaning - B for Bridge, L for Lab, C for Crew, etc. A ship designed
with a well-protected bridge might have the boxes marked "B"
nearer to the bottom row, for example.

Walt Smith

========

Thats another possibility I'm considering.  BTW, my apoligies to the 
list, the original was not intended to go to the TML.  But if anyone has 
any idea, please let me know.

Jim

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:06:29 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Paperless Imperium

Steve Daniels wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>  Walt Smith said:

> > The winning media for reliability over time? Treated acid-free paper.
> >It was rated as "reliable" for time frames extending over 2000 years.

Assuming:
- - no fire
- - no water
- - no radiation (including solar)
- - no shredder
<snip>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
How many floppy disks or magnetic tapes will survive that kind of
treatment in readable form?

Then there's another problem. Paper records can be used as long
as people know how to read. Other media can become useless
when people stop using the right hardware or software to read them.
Right now our Viking Mars mission data tapes are useless
because no one can find a machine that can still read them.

Walt Smith

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 08:32:43 -0500 
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: Re:  At Last

Thad Coons posted:
>
>I've been lurking for several months trying to get properly subscribed.
>Looks like I made it this time.

Welcome back!

>I noted that some of the information I posted on worldbuilding when I was
>here over a year ago was on the Missouri archive. I'm embarrassed to say
>that it was based on some bad information and needs to be completely
>revised. Planetology, anyone?

Post away, Thad, post away! I'm building a campaign and I need all the help
I can get.

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 08:40:38 -0500
From: Andrew Akins <igor@ames.net>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

TravelrTNE@aol.com wrote:
> transponder.  Even so, it would've just been the foreign 
> "high-ups" to get specs (and maybe a visit to RS Omicron, 
> depending on the level of their relations w/ the 3I at the time.
<snip>

> If there was a relative level of detente, I could see a visit to 
> RS Omicron and full specs being given to govt officials for a 
> polity interested in taking the transponder system domestically.  

You've suggested this several times in several posts...I just don't buy
it. I think this is one of the fundamental differences I have with your
handling of the Deyo stuff...I don't see how the 3I could allow the
specs of Deyo to get in the hands of foreign govts, even allied ones.
Even partial specs would be suspect, becuase it would create some
interesting questions...

	"Hey, why does the transponder need to be connected to the main system
bus?"
	"Well, um, you see...."

Letting a emissary of another government into RS Omnicrom to see the
innards of the Deyo project is tantamount to allowing someone access to
Langley, or Fort Meade. I don't think (I could be wrong) that this would
happen.

Plus, espionage being what it is...the other side is GOING to eventually
know what the Deyo chip can do. Once they know, there is no way they are
going to cheerfully go along with it.

I realize I'm not going to convince you...just as you probibly aren't
going to convince me. But the blind acceptance by everyone of the Deyo
system to me is a plot device - and not a well thought out one. YMMV. I
like the Collapse...I just wish that the Virus and such had been thought
out a bit more. As it is, I just don't care for it...

Its interesting to me that TNE tends to have rabid fans...or rabid
detractors (me). Few people feel TNE is "OK"...they either think its the
best or the worst. At least this is how it seems to me. I respect your
(and others) view that TNE is the best ruleset (I disagree) and/or the
best background (I really disagree)...but these discussions are useful
and interesting, as they get us all to consider options...

For the record - why don't I like TNE? Here's the short list:
	d20 vs d6
	Virus and Deyo \__I really was disapointed with these
	Ithklur        /  two.
	Loss of HEW on ships
	Loss of Thrusters
	Loss of Repulsors
	
What _do_ I like about TNE?
	FF&S - excellent system
	The Collapse - while I don't like _how_ the collapse
		happened, I like the setting.
	RCES - Again, good setting.
	Regency - Very good setting - a return to the Marches.
	More careers

- -- 
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                       |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/                    |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+  |
|       vi+ da+                                                      |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+    |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                           |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:23:36 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@citnet.com>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5.

Eris,

It was a chapter of the original FASA rule book in the boxed set I have
(shows a drawing of Spock and Kirk on the cover). The book is still packed
since I moved so I can qoute any details. The boxed set also included
several paper "console" representing Communications/Sensors, Engineering,
Help, Weapons, and Captains display if I remember correctly.

Mike Peters, Letterworks@CITnet.com
"For my part, I travel not to go anywhere, but to go. I travel for travel's
sake. The great affair is to move."
Robert Louis Stevenson

- -----Original Message-----
From: Eris Reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Friday, October 09, 1998 1:20 AM
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5.


>On 10/07/98 at 05:31 PM,  "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net> said:
>
>> The original Star Trek roleplaying game had a fairly interesting
>>system that involved the *entire* bridge crew to some extent or the
>>other.
>
>I've heard that, but it's not in the boxed set I have.  Was it a
suppliment?  If so, what was it called?
>
>Eris
>--
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>
>

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 15:14:46 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:

> The winning media for reliability over time? Treated acid-free paper.
> It was rated as "reliable" for time frames extending over 2000 years.

>I always hated reading more than about a half dozen pages of text
>electronically. If it's longer, I prefer paper.

You can't grep hardcopy.

ObTraveller(1): There has been some talk of `manuals on holocrystal' as
a starship maintenance policy. I've never liked this idea, since the
time you most need the manuals is when the computer (and thus
holoreader) is down.

ObTraveller(2): How do ppl deal with operating systems for Traveller?
Assume that someone eventually got a monopoly; or are nasty referees
making players deal with incompatible software/hardware et al? 

Aetherem Vincere
Matt.
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk  | To Err is Human
My employers and I have a deal - They don't | To forgive is not Air Force Policy
speak for me, and I don't speak for them.   |   -- Anon, ETPS

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 10:24:31 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

Try applying the concept to the following examples drawn from the draft text
for the Task Chapter of T5.

Marc

TASKS IN ACTION
	A character’s six characteristics are a measure of that character’s ability
in specific areas or endeavor. For example, Dexterity (Dex) is a measure of
that character’s dexterity: someone with Dexterity 2 is very clumsy; someone
with Dexterity 12 is very adroit. At the same time, the characteristic is a
measure of that character’s aptitude or potential to perform tasks which
require strength: someone with a high Dexterity is much more likely to succeed
when attempting a task which requires Dexterity.
	Demolitions is a skill governing the use of explosives; it is associated with
Dexterity. A character with low dexterity has a low aptitude for demolitions
work; a character with high dexterity has a high aptitude for demolitions
work. When a character contemplates career skills, a low dexterity character
would rightly decide to avoid learning that skill. 

Three Characters Learn Demolitions
	Consider three characters: Three (with Dex 3); Seven (with an average Dex 7),
and Eleven (with Dex 11). Eleven has the best aptitude for the skill, but
without training is unable to safely interact with explosives; Three has the
worst aptitude. All three are selected to attend a class on explosives; all
three successfully complete the training, and all three receive Demolitions-1.
	Now consider three tasks involving explosives and Demolitions skill. 

	To disarm a simple device.
	(Dex + Demolitions) > Easy (1D)

	The character must roll equal to or less than Dex + Demolitions on 1D.

	Easy Demolitions Tasks. When Eleven tries the Easy task, he automatically
succeeds (since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 = 12, and the worst roll possible on
1D is only 6). When Seven tries the Easy task, she automatically succeeds
(since Dex 7 plus Demolitions-1 = 8, and the worst roll possible on 1D is only
6). Three, however is at a disadvantage: his low Dexterity 3 plus
Demolitions-1 = 4 means that even on this Easy task, he has a 33% chance of
failure.

	To disarm a complex device.
	(Dex + Demolitions) > Average (2D)

	The character must roll equal to or less than Dex + Demolitions on 2D

	Average Demolitions Tasks. When Eleven tries the Average task, he
automatically succeeds (since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 = 12, and the worst
roll possible on 2D is still 12). When Seven tries the Average task, she
succeeds 72% of the time and fails 28% of the time (since Dex 7 plus
Demolitions-1 = 8, and the possible rolls extend up to 12). Three knows (or
should know) better than to try an Average task (his low Dexterity 3 plus
Demolitions-1 = 4 means that on this Average task, he has an 83% chance of
failure).

	To disarm a bobby-trapped device.
	(Dex + Demolitions) > Difficult (2.5D)

	The character must roll equal to or less than Dex + Demolitions on 2.5D.

	Difficult Demolitions Tasks. When Eleven tries the Difficult task, he
succeeds 91% of the time (since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 = 12 and the highest
roll possible is 15). When Seven tries the Difficult task, she succeeds 43% of
the time and fails 57% of the time (since Dex 7 plus Demolitions-1 = 8). Three
knows (or should know) better than to try an Difficult task (his low Dexterity
3 plus Demolitions-1 = 4 means that on this Difficult task, he has an 96%
chance of failure). Spectacular Failure happens if the roll is three 1’s.
There is, for each of these characters, a 1% chance of Spectacular Failure;
and a 1% chance of Spectacular Success regardless of skill.
	More Demolitions Training. Three may decide that regardless of his aptitude,
he wants to be a Demolitions Expert and he pursues nine years of study and
practice and eventually reaches the same level of achievement as Eleven (since
Dex 3+ Demolitions-9 is the same as Dex 11 and Demolitions-1 when we consider
the bomb defusing aspect of Demolitions as a Dexterity based activity). If
Eleven made no improvements in his skill, and Three made these major
improvements, than Three would certainly be more of an expert, with more
knowledge, theoretical experience, and even practical experience; but when it
came to defusing bombs, the Eleven (with Demolitions-1) and Three (with
Demolitions-9) would be about equal. They might make a good team: Three giving
instructions and advice and Eleven doing the actual nimble finger work.

Three Characters Become Deep Space Fighter Pilots
	Consider the same three characters (Three (with Dex 3); Seven (with an
average Dex 7), and Eleven (with Dex 11)) after they have received training in
deep space fighter piloting (the skill is Ship’s Boat). Eleven has the best
aptitude; Three has the worst. All three ultimately receive Ship’s Boat-3.
Each character is otherwise average and has a UPP 7X7777 (X is Dexterity).
	Now consider the range of tasks for a deep space fighter: Preflight. Launch.
Transit. Maneuver. Encounter. Dogfight. Mission Profile. Return. Landing.

	To perform a preflight check on a deep space fighter.
	(Edu + Ship’s Boat) > Easy (1D)

	Preflight Tasks. All three individuals have Edu 7, which in conjunction with
Ship’s Boat-3 requires a roll of 10 or less. Using one die, success is
guaranteed. An unskilled/untrained individual would fail this task.

	To launch/take-off a deep space fighter.
	(Dex + Ship’s Boat) > Average (2D)

	Launch Tasks. When Eleven tries this Average task, he automatically succeeds
(since Dex 11 plus Ship’s Boat-3 = 14, and the worst roll possible on 2D is
still 12). When Seven tries this Average task, she succeeds 92% of the time
and fails 8% of the time (since Dex 7 plus Ship’s Boat-3 = 10, and the
possible rolls extend up to 12). Three knows (or should know) better than to
try this Average task (his low Dexterity 3 plus Ship’s Boat-3 = 6 means that
on this Average task, he has an 42% chance of failure).
	It should be apparent that only highly skilled individuals should be deep
space fighter pilots. The others are better suited to support or
administrative tasks, or to missions which have substantial additional
training or rehearsal. 

	To travel to a destination in a deep space fighter.
	(End + Ship’s Boat) > Easy (1D)

	Transit/Travel Tasks. All three individuals have Edu 7, which in conjunction
with Ship’s Boat-3 requires a roll of 10 or less. Using one die, success is
guaranteed. An unskilled/untrained individual would fail this task.

	To maneuver against an opponent  in a space fighter.
	(Dex + Ship’s Boat) > Average (2D)
	Opposed (2). Success provides Advantage-3 in Dogfight.

	Maneuver Tasks. Success in this task depends on the skill of the opposing
deep space fighter. Eleven is more likely to succeed than Seven, who is more
likely to succeed than Three. Success gives an advantage in the ensuing
dogfight.
	A highly skilled individual might select Hasty, increasing difficulty one
level; if successful, he has completed the task first and is automatically in
position before the other, regardless of that pilot’s success or failure.

	To dogfight an opposing deep space fighter
	(Dex + Ship’s Boat) + Advantage> Average (2D)
	Opposed (2). Success allows an attack by the fighter.

	Dogfight Tasks. Success in this task depends on the skill of the opposing
deep space fighter. Eleven is more likely to succeed than Seven, who is more
likely to succeed than Three. Success allows an attack on the opponent.

	To attack a target with a deep space fighter
	(Dex + Ship’s Boat) > Average (2D)

	Mission Profile/ Attack Tasks. Eleven automatically succeeds (Dex 11 plus
Ship’s Boat-3 = 14). Seven succeeds 92% of the time (Dex 7 plus Ship’s Boat-3
= 10). Three succeeds 42% of the time (Dex 3 plus Ship’s Boat-3 = 6).

	To return to base with a deep space fighter.
	(End + Ship’s Boat) > Average (2D)

	Landing Tasks. Eleven automatically succeeds (Dex 11 plus Ship’s Boat-3 = 14,
and the worst roll possible on 2D is still 12). Seven succeeds 92% of the time
(Dex 7 plus Ship’s Boat-3 = 10, and the possible rolls extend up to 12). Three
succeeds 58% of the time (Dexterity 3 plus Ship’s Boat-3 = 6 means succeeds
58% of the time).

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #922
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest       Friday, October 9 1998       Volume 1998 : Number 923



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

re: Paperless Imperium
Woo hoo, woo hoo, woo hoo! (was A modification for the T4/5 task system)
RPSCS Status
Re: Trade and Economics
Re: Dogs, but not Vargr 
Re: Transponders
Re: Off topic : SFB
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #921
Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
101 Vehicles
Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 3
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #906
Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions
Re: RW US aircraft
Re: What I would like to see in T5.
Re: Trade and Economics
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Archival materials
SDB
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: What I would like to see in T5.
RE: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:32:23 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Paperless Imperium

Matt Clonfero wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You can't grep hardcopy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ever see the data retrieval system from the opening of
"The Prisoner", or "Brazil"? Records were kept on paper or
cards, automated systems would move them around like
robots arms load tapes today. Wonderfully clunky... <g>

Seriously, OCR (optical character recognition) tech is workable
today, should be usable in the future. Moving things from paper
back to computer storage should be relatively easy, even without
use of "smart watermarks" (a tech being tested today, little marks
on the paper almost invisible to us that mean all kinds of page
formatting stuff to the right kind of computer OCR system).

I could imagine some very important things (like Cleon's articles
of Imperium, or whatever they called that document) being kept
on paper as well as in computer storage, just in case.

Matt again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ObTraveller(1): There has been some talk of `manuals on holocrystal' as
a starship maintenance policy. I've never liked this idea, since the
time you most need the manuals is when the computer (and thus
holoreader) is down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The computer would be down, but I'd imagine the starship would
have some portable holoreaders available.

My military and scout ships often have a mini-microfiche reader
tucked away in a cabinet somewhere, just in case, with a stack
of microfiches containing at least enough info to get the computer
running again.

Matt again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ObTraveller(2): How do ppl deal with operating systems for Traveller?
Assume that someone eventually got a monopoly; or are nasty referees
making players deal with incompatible software/hardware et al? 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Since my CT computers are described as "very reliable" (work on a
1 or better on 2d6), I'm assuming Microsoft didn't get the monopoly. <G>

IMTU, enforcement of technological compatibility (a jump-2 civilian
starship must be able to work with any Model/1bis or Model/2 computer,
for example) is one of those things that slows down tech advances 
in a multi-sector interstellar state. 

I treat all computers as compatible IMTU - they may not have identical
software or hardware, but they can all run an Imperial-standard interface
of some type and (if storage and memory requirements are met) run
most any program. A computer expert can tweak programs a bit, and
some computers have more capability than you will see if you only
know how to use the Imperial Standard interface and programs.

This of course only applies to computers created for starships, or
made by companies with interstellar interests. I apply proper
penalties for trying to use foriegn computers - a character with
computer-3 might only have effective computer-1 when sitting
at an Aslani machine, unless he had a very high education score.
Even a computer made by an Imperial planet might give the
character some penalties if it was made for local use only - and
this doesn't even address computers made by and for creatures
with different sensory ranges than we have.

Walt Smith

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:01:23 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Woo hoo, woo hoo, woo hoo! (was A modification for the T4/5 task system)

>        To disarm a bobby-trapped device.
>        (Dex + Demolitions) > Difficult (2.5D)

For some reason, I get this image of a bunch of "men in blue" popping out
of a spring-loaded box and hopping around while hooting like Daffy Duck.

Truly, Demolitions is a versitile skill.

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:11:54 -0500 
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: RPSCS Status

Can anyone tell me if Joe Walsh ever completed his
Role Playing Space Combat System? I have version 0.9
from the Missouri archives and I'd like to get a more
current version if one exists.

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 09:26:12 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Trade and Economics

>From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
>Subject: Re: Trade and Economics
...
>Anyway I was wondering how much difference in profitability there is
>between this and the other, later, trade system. I was also wondering why
>and when the trade system was changed. Can anyone tell me?

  AFAIK, the JTAS "Merchant Ptince" (?) Special Supplement, which became
most of Book 7.

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 09:26:32 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Dogs, but not Vargr 

>Subject: Re: Dogs, but not Vargr 
...
>> The distances at which they can handle the lag are proportional to the
>> velocity difference between sound and light. I make that ratio to by
>> roughly 9e5:1. So since we *know* they can handle 10 meters using
>> sound, then using radio they can handle 9000 km. If they can handle 100
>> meters, then they can handle 900,000 km using radio.

  900 K-km is 3 seconds delay - 100 meters is less than 1 sec?

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 09:26:41 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Transponders

>From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
>Subject: Re: Transponders
...
>>  Wait a month until all of the paperwork arrives - it's the most cost-
>>efficient way and still effective for most purposes. With a constant
>>flow of info any merchant ship that outruns its' reports is suspicious
>>by definition.
>
>OTOH, ships that outrun their paperwork are going to be uncommon,
>but not rare, and detaining them all until you can check them will
>be a significant effort.

  There's been a misunderstanding: I didn't suggest detaining such
vessels, merely waiting for the paperwork to show up and then decide
whether they nedd to be hunted down and seized. Of course, giving such
a ship a thorough search would be good practice, with detainment likely
following on the discovery of sufficient grounds.  

...
>other than what arrived on the last truck.  Historically, it
>was uncommon for such info to be tracked in such a system, esp
>in a decentralized society as the Imperium supposedly has....

  Early modern France comes to mind.

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 12:22:38 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Off topic : SFB

At 05:50 PM 10/9/98 +0000, you wrote:

>Actually, you should be OK, as long as the Tigress' legal team has a copy
>of 'Early Years', which deals with sublight laser-armed ships *grin* I
>think it's module Y ... the Y sequence of rules is reserved to deal with
>it. Like all sublight ships, the Tigress will get to move a hex and turn,
>or do sublight TACs.

Yes, and IIRC, each _laser_ that hits does one point of damage.  And since
you roll per turret in Traveller, if you hit, you do three points.  In HG,
you would roll by the battery, which would give you 30 lasers for 30 points
of damage.  With all the batteries the Tigress has, not to mention all the
bay weapons and spinal mount, it is sure to put a hurtin' on whatever it
targets.

Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 12:37:23 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #921

> I'm a new Traveller player brought to this universe from years of GURPS.
=
> I am really impressed at the expanse of background for this game and =
> can't wait to run a game.

Welcome :)

> 1. On G:T p. 122 it shows a map of the Regina subsector. No scale is =
> given. What is the scale of each hex?

The scale is one parsec per hex. (and yes, this should have been mentioned
somewhere...no one is perfect)
 
> 2.  What is a Black Globe? Also- What about nuclear dampeners? Will nuke
=
> missiles be added to the game?

Black Globes are a kind of forcefield, with the disadvantage that while
they are operating, the ship cannot see or be seen. They can be set to
"flicker", which allows the ship inside to see and fire weapons, but then
their effectiveness is reduced. Nuclear Dampers put out an energy field
which inhibits nulcear reactions. I believe the Imperial Rules of War
prohibit the use of nuclear missles on starships (but of course other
powers don't neccesarily follow the rules of war, do they?)

Allen

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 12:59:45 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 02:37:48 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
I really like GURPS Traveller but it has some problems.  This message
will discuss problems I have noted in Chapter 2 (Details of a Universe)
Planets with Traveller UPP's - a number of planets are listed in the
library data with UPP's (a good thing) but these UPP's do not seem to be
explained anywhere. Sidebar pg 107 covers converting TL's & pg 123
covers converting planets other stats but nowhere is the UPP defined.  I
am glad to see the then but how will anyone without previous Traveller
experience knwo what these weird numbers following the listings for
Andory, Antiquity, Capital, Darrian, Mire, Glea, Guaran, Kirur, Kuzu,
Lair, Junidy, Regina, Terra, & maybe more _means_ ?  The Upp for Recgina
is missing the TL as well.  Suggested fix - a sidebar explaining that
UPPs are the means the Imperium uses to charecterize planets & that is
why they show up in library data, this note will tell peoplehow to
convert them to GURPS descriptions.
************
there is an expalnation near the back of the book,,  in the before the
Starship Design System.

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 13:08:04 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 02:37:48 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
I really like GURPS Traveller but it has some problems.  This message
will discuss problems I have noted in Chapter 2 (Details of a Universe)
this note will tell peoplehow to
convert them to GURPS descriptions.
***********
page 123


pg 36 - "Hivers like planets of size 6 or less."  What is a size 6
planet?  Suggested fix - "Hivers like planets with diameters of 6,499
miles or less."
*******88
page 123


 Suggested fix - paragraph on the Emperors Brithday.
*********
good Idea, other stuff I agree with snipped


pg 78 sidebar - Low Lottery - the Low Lottery is describded as betting,
by crewmembers & seasoned travellers on _which_ low passengers will not
survive.  Past canon descibded the Low Lottery as betting on
_how_many_total_ low passengers would survive & allowed low passengers
themselves to bet.  Suggested fix - change it back.
***************
then accordint to the GT rules most people will say all of them, it is not
nearly as dangerous as before.

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 13:27:54 -0400
From: "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>
Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2

- -----Original Message-----
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com <Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Friday, October 09, 1998 1:13 PM
Subject: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2


>pg 36 - "Hivers like planets of size 6 or less."  What is a size 6
>planet?  Suggested fix - "Hivers like planets with diameters of 6,499
>miles or less."


On G:T p. 123 it states that the UPP code for size converts as follows:

0=asteroid belt
A=10,000 miles
a number=that number times thousands of miles

Size a size 6 world becomes: 6000 miles. Close enough for a conversion.

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 13:46:34 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: 101 Vehicles

Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU> writes:
>Emperor's Vehicles was a great idea that was poorly executed, hopefully
>in T5 we can get it right.

Too true.

I've written the text for 101 Vehicles, which I was hoping BITS would
publish. Is there a demand for this? (The vehicles are CSC designs.)  



PS. Actually there's more than 101 vehicles. I've already up past 150...

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 13:53:13 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 3

Peter Newman wrote:

> I really like GURPS Traveller but it has some problems.  This message
> lists problems I have found  in Chapter 3 (Charecters).
>
> pg 83 Wealth "A careeer as a merchant may have resulted in a charecter
> owning a trading starship (or having an interest in one)."  Howvever the
> rules for the new Advantage Ship Patron (sb pg 84-5) do not say that it
> can be split or how many points partial ownership of a ship is worth.
> If a Beowulf Class free Trader is a 36 point advantage how many points
> is 40% ownership of one?  Suggested fix - define point costs on partial
> ownership or use of a ship.

This one does need a fix for clarity.  I take it to mean the ship costs
36 points for possession (if not actual ownership), but only 31 points
if you take the loan.  There is no term specified for the loan, just
1/240th of purchase price payable to the bank each month.  If its
240 months, thats 20 years.

With the loan, its easy to understand how much an interest a character
has in the ship, but without the loan, there's no indication of how much
interest.

Bloo

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 13:50:33 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #906

Limits to tech advancement writes:
>>>That speed will not continue.  It is "canon" that tech slows down big
>time
>>>and that we're in an unusual advancement curve.  In fact, tech
>advancement
>>>slows to a snails pace.
 
>
>> 
>> Pardon?  What canon?  Where does it say that?
>
>Traveller history shows that it takes the 3rd Imperium 300-400 years per
>step to get from TL 12 to 15 (but 15 to 16 apparently only takes a bit
>more than a century). There are two possible explanations for the rapid
>advancement of technology on Terra from TL 4 to 9. Either each TL
>advancement usually takes centuries and the spurt on Terra is a freak
>occurrence or the advancement to TL 9 is ordinary enough, but hits some
>sort of "wall" when you get to TL 10 or thereabouts. In either case the
>darrian advancement from TL 3 to TL 16 in four centuries is a freak.
>
>Mind you, no one is claiming that this is a realistic view of how things
>will work in the Real World. But it is the way things work in the TU.

Alternately, the tech levels aren't linear. This has always been my take
on things: I just assume that the Scout Service was fairly arbitrary when
assigning codes, and leave it at that. Lately I've just assumed that all
the codes are just a shortcut that the players know but the characetrs
don't, and that the characters just read a report that summarizes major
inventions and capabilities.

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 13:55:44 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions

Christopher Thrash wrote:

> >Your questions:
> >(1)  A hex on that map is One Parsec.  Approximately 3.65 light years.
>
> I must differ with my esteemed colleague - a parsec is ~3.26 ly.

Picky, picky.  I was close.  Whats 0.41 lightyears between friends?

Bloo

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 13:54:53 -0400
From: "Peter H. Brenton" <pbrenton@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: RW US aircraft

>>From: dberry@hooked.net
>>
>>The USN actually has a healthier attitude towards ground support than the
>>USAF, with some solid planes like the A-6 and the much maligned F/A-18.
>>
>
>It was my understanding that the A-6 was being phased out of service.

Last time I checked, a few years ago, the A-6 was out of service in the
bomber role.  'The EA-6B Prowler, an Electonic Warfare specialty aircraft,
is still flying and looks almost exactly like the A-6, but with a pod on
top of the tailfin.  My understanding is that the Navy got really screwed
in their attempt to acquire a replacement EW aircraft and ended up spending
a lot of (probably not very efficient) money refurbishing 20+ year old
EA-6B airframes to provide this capability.

There is (If I recall correctly) an EF-18 in the works (or maybe that's
what got them in trouble) as a replacement.  They can only keep an airframe
flying for so long after all.  And Grumman (The A-6 Maker) was swallowed up
a long time ago in the massive defense industry mergers.

ObTrav:  If fighters were escorted by a jamming fighter...

                      Peter H. Brenton : pbrenton@mit.edu
"A Good Traveller has no fixed plans and no intent on arriving."
  -Lao Tzu (570-490 BC)

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 14:06:46 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5.

Michael D. Peters wrote:

> Eris,
>
> It was a chapter of the original FASA rule book in the boxed set I have
> (shows a drawing of Spock and Kirk on the cover). The book is still packed
> since I moved so I can qoute any details. The boxed set also included
> several paper "console" representing Communications/Sensors, Engineering,
> Help, Weapons, and Captains display if I remember correctly.

Thats how I remember it.  It was pretty cool for the day.  You could
take power from life support or phasers to put into the warp or impulse
drive and say stuff like "I'm giving 'er all I can, Cap'n."

When designing shpis now using FFS2, I like to figure out how much
power each significant item takes to run, and how much power each
G of acceleration takes for my thruster plates.  Giving this information
to the players allows them to crank up the Gs by turning some systems
off.  Weapons, screens, jump drive, anti-gravity/inertial compensators,
llife support, etc.

There's a Simon Green story in his Deathstalker series about a ship that
was carrying hundreds of colonists/refugees in low berths. It had to run
an Imperial blockade.  It made its escape, barely. But it had to steal
power from most of the low berths to do it.  Only a fraction survived.

I really liked the dramatic potential of that.

Bloo

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 14:12:04 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Trade and Economics

>> I've always prefered the trade system from the LLB's because it's more
>> colourfull, and it makes more sense (to me, anyway) for cargo to cost
>> different amounts depending on what it is as much as where it's from.
>
>My feelings exactly! I've never used any of the newer systems for just
>that
>reason. I think that having value based on the item carried encourages
>more
>genuine speculation. Players can be in the situation of having to
>carefully
>decide whether or not to spend almost their last credit on an especially
>expensive, but potentially lucrative, cargo. I could never get my head
>around
>the fact that X dT of Lanthanum has the same value as an equivalent
>amount of
>rice. 

That's why I expanded the LBB system. Someone seems to have fornicated my
web site (and no word on how many months until things are returned to
normal), so I'll repost them here tonight when I get back on a Mac.

In essence, I created a simple way to create a trade good table for each
planet (in the same way that each planet has it's own set of animal
encounter tables). I've amassed a list of basic good types (with core
prices and handling characteristics) that are modified/determined through
rolls and the planet's nature.

For example, rather than just getting "Manufactured Goods", the players
get a specific good with a unique lot size, resale DMs, handling
requirements... All the referee has to do is name the good.

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 14:16:06 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

>> The winning media for reliability over time? Treated acid-free paper.
>> It was rated as "reliable" for time frames extending over 2000 years.
>
>>I always hated reading more than about a half dozen pages of text
>>electronically. If it's longer, I prefer paper.
>
>You can't grep hardcopy.

True. But you can get electronic paper. Saw it in a recent Scientific
American. Stuff was invented years ago, but Xerox decided there was no
market... SOund familiar?

>
>ObTraveller(1): There has been some talk of `manuals on holocrystal' as
>a starship maintenance policy. I've never liked this idea, since the
>time you most need the manuals is when the computer (and thus
>holoreader) is down.

I'll buy this. But hten, I'll also buy some self-contained, milspec
standalone datacrystal viewers as well :-)

>
>ObTraveller(2): How do ppl deal with operating systems for Traveller?
>Assume that someone eventually got a monopoly; or are nasty referees
>making players deal with incompatible software/hardware et al? 

Microsoft eventually won. This also neatly explains Virus: it was actually
Windows 1120 :-)

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:19:17 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Archival materials

><< hat their use of "reliable" (being professional archivists) may be
> more stringent than ours.
>
> The winning media for reliability over time? Treated acid-free paper.
> It was rated as "reliable" for time frames extending over 2000 years.
>
> Walt Smith
>  >>
>
>I always hated reading more than about a half dozen pages of text
>electronically. If it's longer, I prefer paper.
>
Funny, but at the national archives, the training manual said 200, not
2000, years for archival acid-free bond. Assuming correct humidity, temp,
and not near any acid bearing paper. I've seen 20 YO archival bond as brown
as Michael Jordan's Skin. I've also seen 130 YO legal bond that was still
white and pliable.

Also, to achieve maximum lifespans, you have to keep it in a very closely
controlled temp, humidity, and preferably in properly supportive folders.
Mircrofil is the US Gov'ts medium of choice for storage and dissemination.
CD Roms are rated at over 50 years (accordign to Popular Science, and the
Nat'l Archives). Only reason CD's aren't used for archival purposes is that
formats are likely to change to readily, and US law requires minimal
machinery readable methods for archival storage.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 15:28:17 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: SDB

Does anyone have deckplans of the System Defense Boat on the net?  I'm
looking for the 'standard' 400dton Dragon class SDB.

Thanks!

Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 12:27:27 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

Rob Prior wrote:

> True. But you can get electronic paper. Saw it in a recent Scientific
> American. Stuff was invented years ago, but Xerox decided there was no
> market... SOund familiar?

Hmmm Xerox invents paperless computing...but makes all their money
selling copiers that _use_ paper. I wonder _why_ they they decided not
to put themselves out of business...

There were other reasons for them not developing the electronic paper
further at the time; mostly the electronic document creation
infrastructure hadn't caught up. IIRC the original stuff was developed
even before PostScript was, so no one really had anything to make the
stuff _on_ their electronic paper.

This technology is getting dusted off, tthough, there are a couple of
competing versions of the technology going right now.

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 15:59:01 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@citnet.com>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5.

- -----Original Message-----
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Friday, October 09, 1998 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5.



>Thats how I remember it.  It was pretty cool for the day.  You could
>take power from life support or phasers to put into the warp or impulse
>drive and say stuff like "I'm giving 'er all I can, Cap'n."
>
>When designing shpis now using FFS2, I like to figure out how much
>power each significant item takes to run, and how much power each
>G of acceleration takes for my thruster plates.  Giving this information
>to the players allows them to crank up the Gs by turning some systems
>off.  Weapons, screens, jump drive, anti-gravity/inertial compensators,
>llife support, etc.
>
>There's a Simon Green story in his Deathstalker series about a ship that
>was carrying hundreds of colonists/refugees in low berths. It had to run
>an Imperial blockade.  It made its escape, barely. But it had to steal
>power from most of the low berths to do it.  Only a fraction survived.
>
>I really liked the dramatic potential of that.
>
>Bloo


I haven't done it yet, but I've concidered an armed merchant which is
"under-powered" so that the PC's would have to decide to fight or flee.
Unfortunately a quick look doesn't indecate that the payout for reducing PP
is high enough to warrent, there isn't a real significant increase in cargo
space. Now when adding weapons to a previously designed ship would warrent
the allocation of power to systems...

Mike Peters, Letterworks@CITnet.com
"For my part, I travel not to go anywhere, but to go. I travel for travel's
sake. The great affair is to move."
Robert Louis Stevenson

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 15:30:09 -0500 
From: "Moody, Danny M." <DMoody@bridge.com>
Subject: RE: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

On Friday, 09 October 1998 09:15, Matt Clonfero
[SMTP:Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk] wrote:
> Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:
> ObTraveller(1): There has been some talk of `manuals on holocrystal'
as
> a starship maintenance policy. I've never liked this idea, since the
> time you most need the manuals is when the computer (and thus
> holoreader) is down.

One holoreader for the entire ship?  Equip your engineers with SHADEs!

WhizzoDyne TL9 SHADE 
Simple Holographic Adaptive Display for Engineers

A SHADE looks like a pair of oversized sunglasses attached to a set of
hearing protectors.  It operates as a miniature, personal HUD with
surround-sound speakers.  At one end is a port for holographic crystals
and on the other is a standard data port for connecting the SHADE to a
portacomp or other computer.  The SHADE allows an engineer or technician
to read manuals while actually working.  The SHADE can project
holographic views of equipment onto the inside surface of the goggles,
overlay these views on the piece of equipment being viewed, and allow
other technical data to be shown or read.

Lower tech devices are controlled through a portacomp keyboard or a
small portable joystick-piccolo control, while higher tech versions are
voice and eye-blink controlled (look at menu choices in the HUD and
blink or wink to select) and also provide voice response.

SHADEs also act as eye and hearing protective devices in hazardous
environs by automatically blocking out loud sounds and very bright
lights.

> ObTraveller(2): How do ppl deal with operating systems for Traveller?
> Assume that someone eventually got a monopoly; or are nasty referees
> making players deal with incompatible software/hardware et al? 

IMTU there are many competing operating systems, all of them are
compatible with the standard Imperial Data Packets, so software written
for one platform will work on all, it just may not be as fast.

- -vargr1                                                  UPP-8D9B85
Traveller ----------------------------------- The Future is in Beta
Meyers-Briggs personality type: ENTJ         |   vargr1@jcn1.com
"...the ENTJ is not one to be trifled with." |   dmoody@bridge.com

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #923
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest       Friday, October 9 1998       Volume 1998 : Number 924



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Archival Materials
T5 Question
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: T5 Question
Re: Traveller ship design
Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
Re: What I would like to see in T5.
Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
Re: Archival Materials
Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: RE GT & POWER PLANTS
Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions
Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 1
Re: Transponders
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: 101 Vehicles
Re: RW US aircraft
Re: SDB
Re: Trade and Nuke Dampers
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
Re: SDB 

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 16:26:18 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Re: Archival Materials

William F. Hostman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Funny, but at the national archives, the training manual said 200, not
2000, years for archival acid-free bond. Assuming correct humidity, temp,
and not near any acid bearing paper. I've seen 20 YO archival bond as brown
as Michael Jordan's Skin. I've also seen 130 YO legal bond that was still
white and pliable.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mebbe the paper quality has improved since then?  <g>

2000yrs was on their handout, I didn't see any supporting materials - 
I thought it interesting at the time.

I'm thinking a laminated plastic sheet for futuristic archival storage,
if not some kind of crystal sheet.


Walt Smith

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 06:41:21 +1000
From: "cjbrain" <cjbrain@bigpond.com>
Subject: T5 Question

How do I go about getting hold of a copy of the T5 draft? Is this still
available ?

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 14:18:29 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

Moody, Danny M. wrote:
> 
> 
> SHADEs also act as eye and hearing protective devices in hazardous
> environs by automatically blocking out loud sounds and very bright
> lights.
> 

Ooh! Ooh! Do they come with Extreme Danger Sens-O-Matic shades? You
know, they go completely black in the presence of danger, so you don't
undergo the stress and wear and tear on your autonomic nevous system
that comes with the stress? Zaphod Beeblbrox swore by 'em...


- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 14:46:40 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: T5 Question

Marc has only posted bits and pieces of it over the last year or so.
Char gen rules, some skill lists, task resolution, and he _promised_ a
glimpse of the minor race gen tables just the other day...(nudge nudge,
Marc! ;-)

They will be in the list archives at:

ftp://ftp.mpgn.com/Gaming/Traveller/old.TML.digests/

Or you can get the TML/HWIG CD from Byan Borich (kagekiha@aol.com) and
search the archives on your computer.


cjbrain wrote:
> 
> How do I go about getting hold of a copy of the T5 draft? Is this still
> available ?

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 07:57:03
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Traveller ship design

>From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@citnet.com>
>Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5.
>
>I haven't done it yet, but I've concidered an armed merchant which is
>"under-powered" so that the PC's would have to decide to fight or flee.
>Unfortunately a quick look doesn't indecate that the payout for reducing PP
>is high enough to warrent, there isn't a real significant increase in cargo
>space. Now when adding weapons to a previously designed ship would warrent
>the allocation of power to systems...

The key isnt the space consideration, but the cost consideration.

In Traveller, power costs about KCr 100 per megawatt at TL12, and a
merchant ship wants to reduce costs to the minimum.

Therefore it should have about 5 megawatts 'over' whatever it takes to get
and keep the ship in jump space - this is what I call the ship's 'jump
minimum power'.

Basics (air, lights, sensors, computers) get first call on the power.

Maneuver drives come next. Note that merchant ships should *not* install
enough power to run the maneuver and jump drives simultaneously. If you
need to do 'running jumps', install a battery pack that will get you over
the hump for the neccessary 20 minutes.

Now, whatever is left is your 'disposable power' that can go to weapons. If
the power demand is more than (jump minimum power + 5), then you'll need to
install more fusion plant. 

Clearly, non-power using weapons are of interest to merchants. Sandcasters
are useful, and missiles also deserve consideration at TL13 and up
(allowing Heplar-using missiles with a small fusion power plant). But
lasers are good multi-purpose long range weapons, and it should be the
first weapon installed on an armed ship. Personally, I prefer lasers of
higher megajoulage than the 'standard' 250 MJ output, on the grounds that
when you hit something, it should stay hit.

Think very very carefully when installing weapons that will take you over
your 'disposable power'. Consider if a lower RoF is in order (needless to
say, take one laser that fires every 20 seconds than three that fire one
shot per minute).

If you go over your disposable power, think carefully about using batteries
rather than a bigger power plant on a merchant ship. Batteries are a *lot*
cheaper than fusion plant, and if you only plan to run the weapons in
combat, then one hour should be enough time - most civilian ships can only
take a couple of good hits anyway, so combat will tend to be short.

Ships engineers might want to consider the layout of the cargo bay and
engineering, with the intention of 'borrowing' spare cargo space for
installing a battery pack if combat or a need for running jumps appears
likely (a battery pack that allows a running jump-1, enough collapsible
tankage to fuel it and a upgraded sensor array will allow a trader to run
from just about anything, if it is prepared to sacrifice the cargo space).

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 13:57:16 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2

Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com

> From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
> Subject: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
> >I really like GURPS Traveller but it has some problems. 
> >Planets with Traveller UPP's - a number of planets are listed in the
> >library data with UPP's (a good thing) but these UPP's do not seem to 
> >be explained anywhere. Sidebar pg 107 covers converting TL's & pg 123
> >covers converting planets other stats but nowhere is the UPP defined. > >I am glad to see the then but how will anyone without previous 
> >Traveller experience know what these weird numbers following the 
> >listings forAndory, Antiquity, Capital, Darrian, Mire, Glea, Guaran, 
> >Kirur, Kuzu, Lair, Junidy, Regina, Terra, & maybe more _means_ ?  The 
> >UPP for Regina is missing the TL as well.  Suggested fix - a sidebar 
> >explaining that UPPs are the means the Imperium uses to charecterize 
> >planets & that iswhy they show up in library data, this note will 
> > tell people how to convert them to GURPS descriptions.

> there is an expalnation near the back of the book,,  in the before the
> Starship Design System.

The explanation on pg 123 and pg 107 does not tell a GURPS player that
the numbers in the library data mean _anything_ or what order they are
in.  If you do not know that the numbers are a UPP and it is in the
Starport, Planetary Size, Atmosphere, Population, Government, Law Level,
(hyphen), Tech Level format the conversion notes will do you no good at
all.  Moreover as UPP's are not a GURPS concept they must be explained
away as something the _Imperium_ uses to classify planets or what the
heck are they doing in a GURPS product anyway (other than for we
Traveller grognards)?

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 16:02:29 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5.

At 11:52 pm 10/8/98 -0500, you wrote:
>On 10/07/98 at 05:31 PM,  "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
said:
>
>>	The original Star Trek roleplaying game had a fairly interesting
>>system that involved the *entire* bridge crew to some extent or the
>>other. 
>
>I've heard that, but it's not in the boxed set I have.  Was it a
suppliment?  If so, what was it called?

	Nope, it was in the original game. This the the *original* original,
BTW. I understand there ahve been a few versions since ...
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 14:06:16 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2

"N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com> wrote

> >pg 36 - "Hivers like planets of size 6 or less."  What is a size 6
> >planet?  Suggested fix - "Hivers like planets with diameters of 6,499
> >miles or less."

> On G:T p. 123 it states that the UPP code for size converts as 
> follows:
> 0=asteroid belt
> A=10,000 miles
> a number=that number times thousands of miles
> Size a size 6 world becomes: 6000 miles. Close enough for a 
conversion.

So in order to understand page 36 you need to have read page 123 first? 
That is an very interesting [other words supressed to maintain the tone
of the list] design theory.  Using this same logic a cars instruction
manual would define driving the car on page 36 and starting the car on
page 123, with this sort of friendly design I am sure you have a great
future writing tech supposrt for software.

Moreover page 123 states "Planets - Thousands of planets have been
created for Traveller and hundreds for GURPS Space.  These tables allow
conversion between the two systems."  Notice that it does _not_ say
"This book will ocassionally use Traveller terminology without bothering
to define it or tell you when it is being used."  The use of the term
"size 6 world" will be perfectly understandable to thosee that knwo
Traveller and meaningless to those who do not - this is a BAD thing.

- -- 
Peter Newman		pnewman@alaska.net
- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Member in Good Standing of The Society to Turn Wesley Crusher Into 
a Small Styrofoam Dodecahedron

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 10:35:16 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Archival Materials

At 16:26 9/10/98 -0400, Walt Smith wrote:

>I'm thinking a laminated plastic sheet for futuristic archival storage,
>if not some kind of crystal sheet.

Let's go back to damp clay as a medium :) This means that you can let it
dry once you've got the text right, and it won't be accidentally erased,
and if it's intended for permanent archiving you can fire it. As long as
it's not dropped it'll last for a very, very long time.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 23:26:00 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: SFB

> IMO, I would like to see a ship combat system similar to SFB for Traveller.
>  Most of the necessary rules are already written, all that would be needed
> would be damage charts for the Traveller weapons.  I'd love to see how a
> spinal Meson Gun off of a 500kton Battleship stacks up to a plasma-R.

I think Slag! comes fairly close to this straight from the book.  I and a 
couple of other people on the TML have posted comments about how readily 
Traveller ships can be converted to Slag!

Slag is published by BTRC and a pdf (Acrobat) format of the rules can be 
bought from hypermedia.com.

IMO Slag! is simple and fast, has a "SFB" feel and could easily cover 
Traveller ships in more detail.  One of these days I plan a conversion from 
various Traveller design sytsems to Slag! as well as Imperial Squadrons to 
Slag!

Some people don't like the loss of newtonian movement and acceleration, but 
I'm not a big fan of newtonian games (c.f. Elite and Wing Commander or X-wing 
as computer games).  Slag! offers one hand wave around this; I just adopt a 
different technology IMTU where m-drive is replaced by something else (sub-c 
stutterwarp works well, as to numerous others).


Simon

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 23:26:04 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

I like the MT version of J-o-T; for each level of J-o-T you can retry a 
failed skill roll.

"I've just realised why the fuel line broke last time, and I think I've 
got a way round it..."


Simon

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 23:26:02 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: RE GT & POWER PLANTS

> In Imperium and Dark Nebula, ships can free acccellerate for months to
> cross one   space hex per 6 month turn. Hexes which would seem to be 1/2
> parsec (1.63 LY) across... but they don't need fuel except to jump!

I'm fairly certain that one turn in Imperium = 2 years

  
> Canon is thus inconsistant.

So what's new?  These small differences don't worry me too much; if you compare 
Fifth Frontier War with Imperium, you will find that running into a single scout 
(or indeed a huge fleet) does not stop you jumping for a year!

Simon

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 15:40:13 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller starship questions

>You can jump to an empty hex, if you carry enough
>fuel to jump out again to your next destination

Actually, you can do this even if you don't have enough
fuel.  However, the fact that you will likely die a nasty
lingering death makes it "unadvisable" :-)

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:47:17 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 1

In a message dated 10/9/98 3:05:52 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
pnewman@alaska.net writes:

<< Capital/Core is located in the wrong place.  The dot immediately under
 the word Capital is located at aproximately 3220 Core, right on the
 border with Fornast Sector.  Capital/Core is actually located at 2118
 Core about 1.5 subsectors to spinward. Reference/Core's location is also
 several parsecs off.  Terra?Spinward Marches appears on the map at about
 2321 Spinward Marches not at 1827 where it should be.
 I think many of the other stars are also slightly off.  I believe that
 when this map was created a dot was placed near the name on the map but
 the exact location the dots should be in was not checked (each sector
 map is about 15mm x 21mm & each mm of error on the map is therefore
 about 2 parsecs of error). >>

I think you are correct. I have the GDW poster of the Imperium (which appears
to have been the model for the GT map. The dots were approximated. I felt that
as long as the sector maps (I have Spinward Marches circa 1105+1116; Solomani
Rim circa post 1002; and Massilia circa post 1116) were accurate, that was
good enough. Of course if there was a computerised map available (especially
with click and zoom in/out functions; a good idea for a CD :-) ), things would
be different....

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 15:47:54 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Transponders

Fri, 09 Oct 1998 09:26:41 -0700, shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
>>OTOH, ships that outrun their paperwork are going to be uncommon,
>>but not rare, and detaining them all until you can check them will
>>be a significant effort.

>  There's been a misunderstanding: I didn't suggest detaining such
>vessels, merely waiting for the paperwork to show up and then decide
>whether they nedd to be hunted down and seized.

Of course you then have to make sure the paperwork wasn't just
lost before you commit the resources you need to finding a
ship with communications that aren't much faster (if you are
lucky) than the ship you are looking for.   Of course if
the ship just changes ID (or changes back to a legit one....)

>>other than what arrived on the last truck.  Historically, it
>>was uncommon for such info to be tracked in such a system, esp
>>in a decentralized society as the Imperium supposedly has....

>  Early modern France comes to mind.

An example to the contrary doesn't speak to wether it was "uncommon",
nor does the example have the decentralized society as presented
in Traveller.  Finally, communications in that example are fast
and easy compare to Traveller.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:17:58 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

In a message dated 10/9/98 7:30:21 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
CardSharks@aol.com writes:

<< 
 	To disarm a bobby-trapped device.
 	(Dex + Demolitions) > Difficult (2.5D)
 
 	The character must roll equal to or less than Dex + Demolitions on 2.5D.
  >>

Dear Mr. Miller:

My personal taste leans away from 1/2 dice. Is there a way to do this without
half dice?

Seth

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:27:11 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: 101 Vehicles

In a message dated 10/9/98 10:54:18 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca writes:

<< PS. Actually there's more than 101 vehicles. I've already up past 150... >>

Please do me a favor and title it 201 vehicles, since there was already a 101
vehicles published (DGP?). I am easily confused...:-)

Seth

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:43:34 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: RW US aircraft

In a message dated 10/9/98 10:59:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time, pbrenton@mit.edu
writes:

<< Last time I checked, a few years ago, the A-6 was out of service in the
 bomber role.  'The EA-6B Prowler, an Electonic Warfare specialty aircraft,
 is still flying and looks almost exactly like the A-6, but with a pod on
 top of the tailfin.  My understanding is that the Navy got really screwed
 in their attempt to acquire a replacement EW aircraft and ended up spending
 a lot of (probably not very efficient) money refurbishing 20+ year old
 EA-6B airframes to provide this capability.
 
 There is (If I recall correctly) an EF-18 in the works (or maybe that's
 what got them in trouble) as a replacement.  They can only keep an airframe
 flying for so long after all.  And Grumman (The A-6 Maker) was swallowed up
 a long time ago in the massive defense industry mergers.
  >>

As an ex-Long Islander, I follow Grumman closely. I was very sad when they got
snapped up by Northrup (and sadder when Republic closed. The P-47 and F-105
were very rugged "bring em home alive" birds. I used to commute THROUGH the
Factory complex in Farmingdale- yes a public street ran through it! I remember
the desolate vandalised buildings...:-(   ). EVERY A-6 is now a coral reef in
Florida. The Navy decided that the F-18's were better because the maintenance
hours were MUCH lower. They will have to shortly decide what to do with their
support birds. My guess will be F-18 and S-3 Viking frames as a stop gap,
until new aircraft are procured. The only ones happy about this are the Viking
drivers. They now have something to do besides ASW. They are bringing back the
30's Scout-Bomber concept. This is a good idea, as the F-18 while an excellent
bird, has very short legs. They are also adapting the F-14 into a Fighter-
Bomber. I am not crazy about this, as these planes are too large and old to go
low and slow, and they are the only planes in the fleet to carry the Phoenix
(still vital despite AAMRAM), and there are NO more replacement frames in the
pipeline. Any Navy pukes out there: If I made any mistakes, please chew me a
new A-----e...:-). BTW; the Air Force is also in trouble with regards to
jammers. They retired the 'Varks (F-111), and the Ravens (EF-111), so they got
their own problems...Pity; these are great birds. I guess this is where the
budget surplus came from...

Seth

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:48:15 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: SDB

In a message dated 10/9/98 12:28:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
kurt@blazenet.net writes:

<< Does anyone have deckplans of the System Defense Boat on the net?  I'm
 looking for the 'standard' 400dton Dragon class SDB.
 
 Thanks!
 
 Kurt Feltenberger
 
 “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
 habit.”
 --- Aristotle ---
  >>

I have not seen any. I know the plans are in LBB Supplement #9, and Seeker
games printed a set in 15 and 25mm. Sooner or later someone will scan
them...hint, hint. BTW; who knows where the jump shuttle crews sleep. I once
saw a deckplan, and the shuttle had no staterooms. This is strange, as the
shuttle could operate on its' own without an SDB attached.

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 18:59:06 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Trade and Nuke Dampers

Ian Whitchurch wrote:

>>From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
>>Subject: Re: Corsairs, economic analysis
>>
>>IMTU I allow PCs to get the jumps/year benifit IF they buy a shuttle
for
>>every port on thier route, rent a warehouse and office at every port,
>>Hire a broker, warehouseman, shuttle crew, and a secratary. diliveries

>>are orbit to orbit, buy fuel at every port.  They have not found the
>>startup to be economical yet.
>
>I can understand making them put a broker on retainer, hiring an office
and
>staff and so on, and buying fuel at starports is just more efficient
>(*hint* try buying a small fuel refinery unit, and refining fuel in
your
>warehouse. Be prepared to apologise and sign it over if fuel refining
is
>some sort of Imperial-sanctioned monopoly).
>

They think that scooping and refining on the ship is more cost
effective.

>Cargo contracys being orbit to orbit I can also understand, but why do
you
>make them buy a shuttle ? In any case, if it is orbit to orbit, you
should
>be able to get away with a vacuum-proofed grav truck. At the least, let

>them rent one when their ship comes in.
>

Shhhhh   don't give them to many hints (I told them that they had to
have a shuttle meet them when they hit orbit, i.e. minimize down time)
an orbit capible grav truck would work if you could get autorization
from the port authority to leave cargo in orbit until the truck could
get it all down.

>The other thing to consider is they may want to authorise your people
on
>the ground to deal with other traders ... this is doing to the trade
rules
>what various rules and guidelines about running a mercenary company
have
>done to the combat rules - take them from running a small group and
>ignoring the 'off screen' stuff to running a larger one and having to
>concentrate on the supporting elements.

That is for the players to find out, if they want to be profitable they
need to diversify

Charles

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 18:59:16 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well taking Marc sugestion of using the number of dice as the skill
prerequisite
(why didn't I think of that, its just so neat).

To remove an appendix under "field" conditions
  (dex+med) -4 for lack of proper equipment < average (2d)
  15 minutes

Now this is a 2d task so the prerequisite is med-2 (any reasonably
advanced
med student should be able to remove an appendix), but because its being

done without proper facilities it has a -4 on the target.

Eneri has med 3 and dex 8 (an average surgeon) he will succead on a 7-
Sharik has med 1 and dex 10 (a talented 1st year student) normally she
would
  have the same chance as Eneri, but because she has only med 1 and the
  task has a prerequisite of 2 difficulty is increased one level to
difficult
(2.5d);
  again she will succead on a 7- but due to the increase in difficulty
her
chance
  of success is less than Eneri.
Rojl has med 1, JoT 2 and dex 9 (a scout paramedic). While he only has
med 1
  his JoT skill boosts it to 3 _for the purposes of prerequisites_ only
so he
does
  not suffer the same increase in difficulty as Sharik. Also his JoT
skill
reduces
  the penalty due to insufficent facilities to -2. Thus Rojl's target
number on
2d
  will be: 1 + 9 - 2 = 8- (his JoT does not add to his med skill for the
chance
of
  success, but it does negate half the penalty). If Rojl had JoT 6 he
would
  negate the entire penalty, but the "extra" 2 points of JoT would have
no
effect.
<snip other good examples>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I like this, copied to game mods folder.  (Marc please note)

Charles

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:57:50 -0400
From: "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>
Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2

- -----Original Message-----
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
>So in order to understand page 36 you need to have read page 123 first?
>That is an very interesting [other words supressed to maintain the tone
>of the list] design theory.  Using this same logic a cars instruction
>manual would define driving the car on page 36 and starting the car on
>page 123, with this sort of friendly design I am sure you have a great


Before starting this car (i.e. my Trav campaign) I want to know fully how
the car works- so I read the entire manual before starting up. To even try
to run it without fully knowing the material is non-productive.
>
>Moreover page 123 states "Planets - Thousands of planets have been
>created for Traveller and hundreds for GURPS Space.  These tables allow
>conversion between the two systems."  Notice that it does _not_ say
>"This book will ocassionally use Traveller terminology without bothering
>to define it or tell you when it is being used."  The use of the term
>"size 6 world" will be perfectly understandable to thosee that knwo
>Traveller and meaningless to those who do not - this is a BAD thing.


After years of gaming i have come to learn that game books have these
problems. i read it all and learn it. Besides- Steve Jackson Games has been
better with easy to use layout and language than many game companies. Just
look how confusing some of the white wolf books are. Your complaint about
the book is minor compared to some of their problems. Yet the game is still
good. That is what's important.

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:51:27 -0400
From: "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>
Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2

- -----Original Message-----
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
The explanation on pg 123 and pg 107 does not tell a GURPS player that
>the numbers in the library data mean _anything_ or what order they are
>in.  If you do not know that the numbers are a UPP and it is in the
>Starport, Planetary Size, Atmosphere, Population, Government, Law Level,
>(hyphen), Tech Level format the conversion notes will do you no good at
>all.  Moreover as UPP's are not a GURPS concept they must be explained
>away as something the _Imperium_ uses to classify planets or what the
>heck are they doing in a GURPS product anyway (other than for we
>Traveller grognards)?
>

Maybe you are right. Its for people that already have the Traveller books
and are looking to convert them. My guess is that this will all be covered
in the Spinward Marches book (I HAD BETTER BE!<G>).

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 20:23:57 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: SDB 

> In a message dated 10/9/98 12:28:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> kurt@blazenet.net writes:
> 
> << Does anyone have deckplans of the System Defense Boat on the net?  I'm
>  looking for the 'standard' 400dton Dragon class SDB. >>
> 
> I have not seen any. I know the plans are in LBB Supplement #9, and Seeker
> games printed a set in 15 and 25mm. Sooner or later someone will scan
> them...hint, hint. BTW; who knows where the jump shuttle crews sleep. I once
> saw a deckplan, and the shuttle had no staterooms. This is strange, as the
> shuttle could operate on its' own without an SDB attached.

LBB Supp 9 was Fighting Ships.  There weren't any plans in it, just USP's & 
descriptions & a rendering of the boat itself.  There's a 400 ton SDB in LBB 
Supp 7 "Traders & Gunboats", but it's not *specifically* refered to as 
Dragon-Class, unless you're refering to the dragon logo on the external view 
of the boat...

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep




- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #924
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest       Friday, October 9 1998       Volume 1998 : Number 925



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: The RoM coup (Was: Limits to tech advancement)
Got Trava Java?
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: What I would like to see in T5.
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Planetology 101 Part 1 (medium)
Computers in Traveller
OFF TOPIC - SFB
Re STRPG's Bridge Simulation
AUCTION: GDW SF/Traveller Boardgames Update 6
ArchivalStorage
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Archival Materials
Re: Archival Materials
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 00:29:16 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: The RoM coup (Was: Limits to tech advancement)

On Fri, 9 Oct 1998 10:25:25 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 22:10:25 +1300
>From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
>Subject: The RoM coup (Was: Limits to tech advancement)
>
>The Interstellar Wars period is currently under development on the TWG.
>
>The Late Terran Confederation was not a "true" democracy by any standard. 
>Even at its formation its response to vocal critics was to quietly remove them to 
>the distant colonies. From its beginning it was dealing with dissidents by 
>"unpleasant" means.

You see, Grandfather and the Templars were *already* at it!

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 20:47:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: neo@total.net
Subject: Got Trava Java?

I've been scouring the Web for Traveller-related Java scripts and applets.
I've found a few useful tidbits here and there - Ethan Henry's sector
viewer, for instance. But I've been frustrated by a lot of obsolete or
malformed URLs.

If anybody has any nifty Trav-Java, can you post URLs, please?

(BTW, I'm using Navigator 3, so I can't use Java 1.1. I've got Jo Grant's
"TTG" app, which looks like it might be cool, but I can't get it to run. Is
it in Java 1.1? Or is Microsoft Java not truly cross-platform, or is there
some trick to it I can't figure out, or what?)

Thanks in advance,

 + GMG +

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <neo@total.net>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
    "Sex times Technology equals The Future." -- J.G. Ballard

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 98 19:11:41 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

On 10/09/98 at 09:24 PM,  "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> said:

>>Andrew, this looks interesting. Could you give a couple of specific
>>examples of how you would write up Task Descriptions with one or more
>>prerequisites and walk through how you would resolve the tasks?  

>Well taking Marc sugestion of using the number of dice as the skill
>prerequisite  (why didn't I think of that, its just so neat).

>To remove an appendix under "field" conditions
>  (dex+med) -4 for lack of proper equipment < average (2d)
>  15 minutes

Thanks, Andrew! This is an interesting take on the tasks, and JOT too.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 98 19:29:43 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5.

On 10/09/98 at 09:23 AM,  "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@citnet.com> said:

>It was a chapter of the original FASA rule book in the boxed set I
>have (shows a drawing of Spock and Kirk on the cover). The book is
>still packed since I moved so I can qoute any details. The boxed set
>also included several paper "console" representing
>Communications/Sensors, Engineering, Help, Weapons, and Captains
>display if I remember correctly.

Hum, I've got the second edition Basic game boxed set and it doesn't
have the features you are mentioning.  I got my copy used and if
might not be complete, I suppose.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 98 20:15:55 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

On 10/09/98 at 07:17 PM,  Sethkimmel@aol.com said:

> 	The character must roll equal to or less than Dex + Demolitions on
>2.5D.

>Dear Mr. Miller:

>My personal taste leans away from 1/2 dice. Is there a way to do this
>without half dice?

Seth, you aren't the only one that doesn't like that lonely 1/2 die.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 21:19:40 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: Planetology 101 Part 1 (medium)

Rather than post this in one >huge< message, I'm putting it in several
medium sized parts and spreading it out over a few days.
 
In my World Building posts about two years ago on this list, I
got it wrong in one major respect. This is a corrected version.

The physical conditions on a planet, the cosmic abundances of the
elements, and the laws of chemistry practically dictate not only
what kind of envelope (atmosphere and hydrosphere) a planet has,
but what kinds of life are most likely to develop.

The principal physical conditions are size and temperature. Small
planets, moons, and so forth, are likely to be more abundant than
large ones.  Temperature is principally governed by how close the
planet is to its star and what kind of star that is, although it
it is also influenced by the atmosphere.

The abundances of the elements are also important. Hydrogen is
the most abundant element in the galaxy, followed by helium,
oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen in that order. Helium is a noble gas and will
be neglected.  The others are the Big Four of planetary
chemistry. Sulfur is the only element that comes anywhere near the Big
Four in importance. Halogens such as chlorine and fluorine are both much
less inportant and more likely to be locked into chemical combination; the
noble gases can be dismissed, and the rest of the elements are chiefly
rock-formers and metals.

The physical conditions shape the chemical composition of the
planet's atmosphere. Substances that have a low molecular weight
are most volatile and are easily driven off small or high
temperature planet. If they freeze, liquefy, or enter
into chemical combination, they may be retained on the planet's
crust and not affect its atmosphere. The average speed of a
molecule depends on its molecular weight and the atmospheric
temperature: while escape velocity depends on the worlds gravity.
Molecules with greater average speed than the world's escape
velocity will only be present in trace amounts. Those with
average speeds over about 10% of escape velocity are very
likely to be lost over geologic time periods.

Escape Velocity = sqrt(2 * gravitation * world radius)
(use 1 g = 10 m/sec^2 and world radius in meters) 
Most probable molecular speed = 105 * sqrt(absolute
temperature/molecular weight)

Randomly generated Traveller UPP's don't quite fit with this
closer analysis. You may have to tinker with either the numbers you
generate or with planetary history and conditions to get a believable
world.  YMMV: natural conditions often surprise us anyway.

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 17:18:45 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Computers in Traveller

>ObTraveller(1): There has been some talk of `manuals on holocrystal' as
>a starship maintenance policy. I've never liked this idea, since the
>time you most need the manuals is when the computer (and thus
>holoreader) is down.

IMTU, most ships have full data on Holocrystals. Many carry some form of
reduced size hardcopy (Microfiche is common... with a "Binocular"-style
hand-held reader. A few will carry most important ones in directly
human-readable formats as well. In almost all cases, the holocrystals are
also loaded into the "secured file area" of the library data.

>ObTraveller(2): How do ppl deal with operating systems for Traveller?
>Assume that someone eventually got a monopoly; or are nasty referees
>making players deal with incompatible software/hardware et al?

IMTU: Imperial Virtual Machine. A basic implementation of TL7 computing
which is required to be a supplier for Imperial Contracts. The IVM has
certain TL "Upgrade otpions" which require that the IVM have the correct TL
extensions. Local worlds may require IVM as the open standard, others have
multiple proprietary OS's... IVM itself is a virtual computational machine
with an integral OS match. IVM can handle text, voice, or GUI inputs and
outputs. The authorities don't care whether the physical machine is IVM or
emulator based, so long as IVM software runs on the machine without the
operator having to do anything special. IVM also requires a 4byte character
(32 bits), and supports  the IPA (Imperial Phonetic Alphabet), anglic, and
vilani character sets in native mode, with code page changes for other
character sets available. IVM includes IPLS (eye-plus, Imperaial Program
Language Stadard), which is often available for non-IVM platforms. I assume
that computer-1 skill includes some knowledge of basic IPLS, and each
additional level of computer or JoT allows one other programing
language/environment. MilSpec programs use the IPLS+ (eye-plus-plus)
extension (related to IPLS like C++ is to C), and  each skill possesed by a
character that could use with a computer inclused some knowledge of the
IPLS standard extension for that field IF the character has computer 2+ or
Computer 1 & JoT 1+. Research skill includes knowledge of the ISE search
system (comparable to any of the modern search/database engines/query
languages). Since few player characters tend to settle down IMTU, I haven't
needed much more detail. I assume that IVM includes a basic multi-language
capable text engine/browser, and support for multiple sound and image
formats, and, at TL 9+, holographic imaging formats.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:25:50 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: OFF TOPIC - SFB

>Actually, you should be OK, as long as the Tigress' legal team has a copy
>of 'Early Years', which deals with sublight laser-armed ships *grin* I
>think it's module Y ... the Y sequence of rules is reserved to deal with
>it. Like all sublight ships, the Tigress will get to move a hex and turn,
>or do sublight TACs.
>
>Ian Whitchuch
Sorry Ian, but you wanted to say Module Q. Module Y is Early Years, but
covers warp and phasers... Max Phas II, Phas I on bases, No overloads,
speed seldom exceed 24. Module Q is destined for Sublight Wars. An no,
neither has come out yer (but Y is in public playtest).

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 16:58:34 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re STRPG's Bridge Simulation

>Eris,
>
>It was a chapter of the original FASA rule book in the boxed set I have
>(shows a drawing of Spock and Kirk on the cover). The book is still packed
>since I moved so I can qoute any details. The boxed set also included
>several paper "console" representing Communications/Sensors, Engineering,
>Help, Weapons, and Captains display if I remember correctly.

If it was a one-book set, it was the first ed.
Having both, Second Ed doesn't have it, but the starship combat simulator
for 2nd ed did.

LUG's TNG RPG doesn't explicitly have a bridge simulator, but since ship
combat is task based (and who makes the rolls is listed), it comes fairly
close.

IMHO, the bridge simulator approach worked well IF thoroughly (and
ruthlessly) implemented. I did one for SFB at one point (was running a ST
RPG with homegrown rules, and using SFU of SFB)... Here's how I'd break
down the setup for Traveller:

Captain: Tactics rolls (for descriptions of probable courses of enemy
action and initiative). Captasin prohibited from using rules mechanics
terminologies... everything from the skipper MUST BE IN CHARACTER.
Helm: Actual maneuvering, all the maneuvering rolls.
Navigator: not much in combat, may help with certain helm tasks. May double
as sensor and/or commo.
Sensors (or navigator if no Sensor Officer): all detection rolls, sensor
settings.
Commo: makes all communications rolls for coordination with NPC ships.
Usually seconded to either sensor or navigator.
Master Gunner: Allocating Targets to batteries, making all the rolls for
NPC run batteries and/or the one battery at his control.
Chief Engineer: allocation of engineering tasks, and making all NPC
Engineering rolls.
Security Chief: Allocation of security forces, making all needed "loans" of
NPC's to others.
Purser: Keeps track of passenger and cargo losses. Loans personell to other
departments.

For trek, I had several other positions.... ForEx, the CEngr did power
allocation to other officers, who used their cut for their tasks. He had to
have new plot ready by time new SFB turn came around....

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:44:33 -0700
From: Joel Pratt <jpratt@ucla.edu>
Subject: AUCTION: GDW SF/Traveller Boardgames Update 6

AUCTION: GDW SF/Traveller Boardgames Update 6
Featuring: Striker 1ed., Azhanti High Lightning, Bloodtree Rebellion,
Invasion Earth

1) Email all bids to jpratt@ucla.edu
2) Purchaser pays ALL shipping charges (USPS Priority or Global Priority).
3) American funds only, please, as check or money order.
4) Items will be held until check clears.
5) Bidding will continue until price stops rising. Going/Goingx2/Gone.
6) Email me (jpratt@ucla.edu) if you have any questions.
7) All items are in Excellent to Near Mint condition unless otherwise noted
8) Frequent status updates will be emailed to bidders, usually 2-3x/week.
9) No trades, buy-outs, or group bids.
10) Tie bids will be settled by a coin-toss.
11) Thanks for looking.


BLOODTREE REBELLION
* Superb game of guerrila combat
* Complete, excellent condition, punched
* Not Traveller-related
(Minimum Bid: $12)
Current Bid: $15 Thom (GOINGx2)

BELTER
* Complete, excellent condition, punched
* Not Traveller-related
(Minimum Bid: $10)
Current Bid: $20 Eveland (GOINGx2)

DOUBLE STAR
* Two planets go to war
* Complete, unpunched, excellent condition
* Not Traveller-related
(Minimum Bid: $12)
Current Bid: $23 Thom (GOINGx2)

TRIPLANETARY
* Classic
* Complete, near-mint condition, mapboard unused
* Unpunched, contains die, unused original grease pencil
* Not Traveller-related
(Minimum Bid: $12)
Current Bid: $18 Thom (GOINGx2)

ASTEROID
* Series 120 Edition
* Complete, punched, very good condition
* Not Traveller-related
(Mimimum Bid: $10)
Current Bid: $15 Thom (GOINGx2)

SNAPSHOT
* Series 120 Edition
* Complete, punched, very good condition
(Mimimum Bid: $10)
Current Bid: $20 DanE (GOINGx2)

IMPERIUM
* Second Edition (1990) - Bookshelf Sized
* Complete, excellent condition, punched
(Minimum Bid: $9)
Current Bid: $14 Dhalgren

INVASION EARTH
* Complete, excellent condition, punched
(Minimum Bid: $20)
Current Bid: $25 Thom (GOINGx2)

STRIKER (First Edition)
* Contains Book 1/Book 2/Book 3 and charts
* Excellent Condition
(Minimum Bid: $20)
Current Bid: $21 Terry (GOINGx2)

AZHANTI HIGH LIGHTNING
* Box is beat-up, with water damage and one split corner
* Components are in excellent shape
* Punched, two sets of counters (don't ask)
Minimum Bid: $35
Current Bid: $40 Thom (GOINGx2)

FIFTH FRONTIER WAR
* Box is in good shape, with one split corner
* Components are in excellent shape
* Punched, ships are in sorted tray
Minimum Bid: $35
Current Bid: $55 Thom (GOINGx2)

- --Joel Pratt
jpratt@ucla.edu

"Bill Clinton does not have the moral fiber to be a mass murderer."
 -- Nobel Peace Prize recipient Dr. Henry Kissinger, Spring 1997

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 17:46:06 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: ArchivalStorage

>William F. Hostman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Funny, but at the national archives, the training manual said 200, not
>2000, years for archival acid-free bond. Assuming correct humidity, temp,
>and not near any acid bearing paper. I've seen 20 YO archival bond as brown
>as Michael Jordan's Skin. I've also seen 130 YO legal bond that was still
>white and pliable.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Mebbe the paper quality has improved since then?  <g>
>
>2000yrs was on their handout, I didn't see any supporting materials -
>I thought it interesting at the time.
>
>I'm thinking a laminated plastic sheet for futuristic archival storage,
>if not some kind of crystal sheet.
>
IMTU, it's gold laminated onto a non-metalic substrate for "Original".

as for the US National Archives, I assure you (as a former employee) that
they don't even tell the truth about all their holdings.... and most
offices (on the pre-archival side, which simply means the originating
agency still owns it, also known as the "Recod Center" side) have vaults
with classified materials which often are not on the pulically available
finding aids, but are in the staff-only ones...

I've seen a finding aid (unclassified, BTW) which included "Roswell, 1947,
50CF" held in one of the record centers.... in the army air corps files,
IIRC. But, since it was in the record center, it is technically still
property of the US ARMY!!! The USAF cannot get to it, as it is an army
record, save through the army. So the aair force legitimately can say they
don't have the records. Since the army owns them, the archives doesn't and
says "we don't have them", even tho physical custody is with the National
Archives, since they are on "Courtesy Storage". And the records themselves
ARE clasified. But not the finding aid. I think somebody slipped (they were
not at the office I was at, which had nothing classified except student
records) and put them on the master list of record series (which was always
at least two years behind).

Makes me wonder... How much can be gleaned by a good search of the finding
aids in the various imperial archives. Even if you don't get access to the
documents themselves.... If they are anything like the US National Archives
system, finding anything will be hard to do... you have to know what you're
looking for, what finding aids to look in, what euphamisms will be used on
the finding aid, and who generated it in the first place to find anything.
But boy howdy, you can find out just how much they DON'T want you to know
by what is listed as "restricted access".



William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 22:49:20 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

In a message dated 10/9/98 8:22:29 PM Central Daylight Time, eris@gulf.net
writes:

<< 
 >My personal taste leans away from 1/2 dice. Is there a way to do this
 >without half dice?
>>
This was discussed to death six months ago.

Marc

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:04:36 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Archival Materials

In mail you write:

> I'm thinking a laminated plastic sheet for futuristic archival storage,
> if not some kind of crystal sheet.

Laminated is *bad*, because the differing materials *will* delaminate
given enough time. And "crystal" is bad because it will break give
quite minimal stresses in the wrong directions.

I'd be interested in something like that stuff they make some envelopes
out of. Something-tex. It's a "spun" plastic. Get something like that,
but with a fluorocarbon base. Then the hard part is what you use to
mark it with. My best guess would be impregnating it with some stable
but colored compound at the time of manufacture. 

For *really* long term, you want characters chiseled/molded into some
sort of *durable* rock/metal. 

My idea of a "long term" archive (intended to survive past some great
disaster) would be built into a *stable* rock formation. Here on Earth,
the Canadian Shield would be good. 

You mark the location with everything from large scale rock/earth
formations, to embeded radioactives and magnetic markers in the rocks. 
Which gives me a thought. Once we have a suifficiently active presence
on the moon, we *really* need to check out the center of the Mare
Oreintalis basin. That giant "bullseye" is probably natural, but it's
also a *natural* place to bury something to be found later. I'd want to
check it for alien artifacts.

Anyway, once you get into the well sealed vault, you'd have the rock
carvings or inscribed metal plates. They'd contain enough info to
(hopefully) enable the finders to decode the more compact media, which
would be the bulk of the archives. 

Alas, you *can't* use even molecular level (much less atomic level)
encoding in anything intended to be readable after millions of years.
That's because the atoms and molecules will *migrate* on such time
scales. Items in contact will merge/weld.

So the "smaller" sheets would be in some sort of racks, so that they
won't be in contact. And they'll have an ample margin, so that if
necessary they can be *cut* free from the frames (which they'll have
merged into).

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

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 19:23:01 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Archival Materials

In mail you write:

> At 16:26 9/10/98 -0400, Walt Smith wrote:
>
>>I'm thinking a laminated plastic sheet for futuristic archival storage,
>>if not some kind of crystal sheet.
>
> Let's go back to damp clay as a medium :) This means that you can let it
> dry once you've got the text right, and it won't be accidentally erased,
> and if it's intended for permanent archiving you can fire it. As long as
> it's not dropped it'll last for a very, very long time.

But you can do the say with various sorts of "cast rock" or metal, and
it'll be *much* harder to break. Rock is more brittle, but has better
corrosion resistance than most metals. Platinum/iridium alloy is both
strong *and* stable. But *expensive*. 

I rather like the artifacts from Footfall. Giant granite(?) cubes with
writing cut *completely* thru the block.

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

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:16:19 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

From:           	CardSharks@aol.com
Date sent:      	Fri, 9 Oct 1998 10:24:31 EDT

>Try applying the concept to the following examples drawn from the draft text
>for the Task Chapter of T5.

>Marc

>TASKS IN ACTION

>Demolitions is a skill governing the use of explosives; it is associated with
>Dexterity. A character with low dexterity has a low aptitude for demolitions
>work; a character with high dexterity has a high aptitude for demolitions
>work. When a character contemplates career skills, a low dexterity character
>would rightly decide to avoid learning that skill. 

>Three Characters Learn Demolitions
>Consider three characters: Three (with Dex 3); Seven (with an average Dex 7),
>and Eleven (with Dex 11). Eleven has the best aptitude for the skill, but
>without training is unable to safely interact with explosives; Three has the
>worst aptitude. All three are selected to attend a class on explosives; all
>three successfully complete the training, and all three receive Demolitions-1.
>	Now consider three tasks involving explosives and Demolitions skill. 

>	To disarm a simple device.
>	(Dex + Demolitions) > Easy (1D)

>	The character must roll equal to or less than Dex + Demolitions on 1D.

>Easy Demolitions Tasks. When Eleven tries the Easy task, he automatically
>succeeds (since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 = 12, and the worst roll possible on
>1D is only 6). When Seven tries the Easy task, she automatically succeeds
>(since Dex 7 plus Demolitions-1 = 8, and the worst roll possible on 1D is only
>6). Three, however is at a disadvantage: his low Dexterity 3 plus
>Demolitions-1 = 4 means that even on this Easy task, he has a 33% chance of
>failure.

No changes here

>	To disarm a complex device.
>	(Dex + Demolitions) > Average (2D)

>	The character must roll equal to or less than Dex + Demolitions on 2D

>Average Demolitions Tasks. When Eleven tries the Average task, he
>automatically succeeds (since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 = 12, and the worst
>roll possible on 2D is still 12). When Seven tries the Average task, she
>succeeds 72% of the time and fails 28% of the time (since Dex 7 plus
>Demolitions-1 = 8, and the possible rolls extend up to 12). Three knows (or
>should know) better than to try an Average task (his low Dexterity 3 plus
>Demolitions-1 = 4 means that on this Average task, he has an 83% chance of
>failure).

Here the change is that all the characters (with only demo 1) have the difficulty 
increased by one level (2.5d) so their chances of success are
Three - 3%
Seven - 43%
Eleven - 91%

>	To disarm a bobby-trapped device.
>	(Dex + Demolitions) > Difficult (2.5D)

>	The character must roll equal to or less than Dex + Demolitions on 2.5D.

>Difficult Demolitions Tasks. When Eleven tries the Difficult task, he
>succeeds 91% of the time (since Dex 11 plus Demolitions-1 = 12 and the highest
>roll possible is 15). When Seven tries the Difficult task, she succeeds 43% of
>the time and fails 57% of the time (since Dex 7 plus Demolitions-1 = 8). Three
>knows (or should know) better than to try an Difficult task (his low Dexterity
>3 plus Demolitions-1 = 4 means that on this Difficult task, he has an 96%
>chance of failure). Spectacular Failure happens if the roll is three 1’s.
>There is, for each of these characters, a 1% chance of Spectacular Failure;
>and a 1% chance of Spectacular Success regardless of skill.

This requires skill 3 (hum, maybe the half die shouldn't count as a skill level). 
so the task gos up two levels to 4d, giving chances
Three - 0.1%
Seven - 5%
Eleven - 34%

>	More Demolitions Training. Three may decide that regardless of his aptitude,
>he wants to be a Demolitions Expert and he pursues nine years of study and
>practice and eventually reaches the same level of achievement as Eleven (since
>Dex 3+ Demolitions-9 is the same as Dex 11 and Demolitions-1 when we consider
>the bomb defusing aspect of Demolitions as a Dexterity based activity). If
>Eleven made no improvements in his skill, and Three made these major
>improvements, than Three would certainly be more of an expert, with more
>knowledge, theoretical experience, and even practical experience; but when it
>came to defusing bombs, the Eleven (with Demolitions-1) and Three (with
>Demolitions-9) would be about equal. They might make a good team: Three giving
>instructions and advice and Eleven doing the actual nimble finger work.

With the extra training Eleven is as good as Three at simple tasks, but as the 
tasks increase in complexity (requiring greater skill and experience) Eleven's 
chances will start to drop off dramatically. Assuming Three increased his skill 
to 9 his chances for the three tasks would be
Easy - 100%
Average - 100%
Difficult - 91%
Formidable - 74%
Staggering - 34%

By comparision Eleven's chances are:
Easy - 100%
Average - 91%
Difficult - 34%
Formidable - 12- on 6d (I haven't caculated the percentage chance)
Staggering - 12- on  8d (ditto)

Obviously Eleven's raw talent can compensate for his lack of skill and 
experience at most Easy and Average tasks, and give him a shot at difficult 
tasks. Beyond that point his lack of training and experience result in his 
chance of success effectively dropping to zero. Also due to the half die, the 
penalty for attempting a difficult task with skill 2 (professional level) is relatively 
minor.

>Three Characters Become Deep Space Fighter Pilots
>Consider the same three characters (Three (with Dex 3); Seven (with an
>average Dex 7), and Eleven (with Dex 11)) after they have received training in
>deep space fighter piloting (the skill is Ship’s Boat). Eleven has the best
>aptitude; Three has the worst. All three ultimately receive Ship’s Boat-3.
>Each character is otherwise average and has a UPP 7X7777 (X is Dexterity).
>Now consider the range of tasks for a deep space fighter: Preflight. Launch.
>Transit. Maneuver. Encounter. Dogfight. Mission Profile. Return. Landing.

However in these examples there is no change since they all have skill 3 
(sufficent for difficult tasks)

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #925
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Saturday, October 10 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 926



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Got Trava Java?
US EW aircraft
Migrating Planets
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #924
Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2
Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 1
Big-ass dot map on the web?
Re: Paperless Imperium
Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Trade and Economics (sorry Loren)
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)
Re: Paperless Imperium
Planetology 101 part 2
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)
Re:101 Vehicles
Re: SDB
Re: A Proposition

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:20:20 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

From:           	CardSharks@aol.com
Date sent:      	Fri, 9 Oct 1998 22:49:20 EDT

>In a message dated 10/9/98 8:22:29 PM Central Daylight Time, eris@gulf.net
>writes:

>>My personal taste leans away from 1/2 dice. Is there a way to do this
>>without half dice?

>This was discussed to death six months ago.

I found using my system of prerequisites you need to have the half die there for 
difficult tasks or they become too hard for characters with professional level 
(level-2) skills.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 22:14:33 -0500
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: Got Trava Java?

>(BTW, I'm using Navigator 3, so I can't use Java 1.1. I've got Jo Grant's
>"TTG" app, which looks like it might be cool, but I can't get it to run. Is
>it in Java 1.1? Or is Microsoft Java not truly cross-platform, or is there
>some trick to it I can't figure out, or what?)


From what I have read, MS Java is not a truly crossplatform product.
They have altered Java for their needs and I think this has caused them yet
another lawsuit
from Java's creators who licensed it to them.

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 14:50:55 +1000 (EST)
From: JEFFREY MALONE <j1.malone@student.qut.edu.au>
Subject: US EW aircraft

As I understand it, the only dedicated offensive EW aircraft in US service
is at present the E6B - which is doing the hard EW job for all the
services.  There was a C2W variant of the FA-18 moooted a few years back,
but I am unsure of its status.  One of the reasons that you need a fairly
roomy airframe to do these sorts of tasks (E6B, Viking if employed in that
role) is that the sheer complexity of the EW environment means that you
need a fair number of operators working to have a good broad-spectrum
capability (E6B has 2 dedicated EW op positions, by contrast the old USAF
EF-111 had the EW op also acting as a nav officer, I assume).  Much of
this work can be done electronically, but you still need the 'human in the
loop' to make it work effectively.

Anyway, I ramble

Jeff Malone (aka Academician Boris Kalashnikov)

*******************************************************************************
Jeff Malone
PhD Student - Department of Justice Studies, Kelvin Grove Campus, QUT
              Kelvin Grove  QLD  4052
Phone:        (07) 3864-3597
Fax:          (07) 3864-3991/2 
*******************************************************************************

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 01:49:16 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: Migrating Planets

> << Capital/Core is located in the wrong place.  The dot immediately under
>  the word Capital is located at aproximately 3220 Core, right on the
>  border with Fornast Sector.  Capital/Core is actually located at 2118
>  Core about 1.5 subsectors to spinward. Reference/Core's location is also
>  several parsecs off.  Terra?Spinward Marches appears on the map at about
>  2321 Spinward Marches not at 1827 where it should be.
>  I think many of the other stars are also slightly off.  I believe that
>  when this map was created a dot was placed near the name on the map but
>  the exact location the dots should be in was not checked (each sector
>  map is about 15mm x 21mm & each mm of error on the map is therefore
>  about 2 parsecs of error). >>

This seems to be an SJG tradition; on the map of Autoduel America in GURPS
Autoduel, Grand Rapids MI has migrated from the west side of the state all
the way over to the east side near where Flint used to be.
I guess when the Food riots hit, Flint must have become depopulated and
Grand Rapids must have been loaded onto a BIG flatbed truck and moved down
I-69....

Allen 
 

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 16:38:19
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #924

>From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
>Subject: Re: Trade and Nuke Dampers
>
>Ian Whitchurch wrote:
>
>They think that scooping and refining on the ship is more cost
>effective.

Hmmm, have they ever thought of the phrase 'Time is Money' ?

>Shhhhh   don't give them to many hints (I told them that they had to
>have a shuttle meet them when they hit orbit, i.e. minimize down time)
>an orbit capible grav truck would work if you could get autorization
>from the port authority to leave cargo in orbit until the truck could
>get it all down.

Gee, if they try leaving it in orbit, someone might try to match velocities
with it and nick it.

>That is for the players to find out, if they want to be profitable they
>need to diversify
>

Not neccessarily, you can build a very nice little business by sticking to
what you do well, but diversifying well.

Ian

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 12:00:10 -0400
From: "Chauncey Smith" <csmith@ICDC.com>
Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 2

Ok... you've moved on and hit paydirt and now you're being constructive.. 

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:57:05 -0400
From: "Chauncey Smith" <csmith@ICDC.com>
Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 1

OK.. we are talking about an error of milimeters aren't we picking knits
now?
I was never able to figure out the exact location of the planets from those
big maps anyway and I've been playing since 87. it's not a big problem..
you should spend your time on something more productive like writeing an
adventure or building some gear or something then pointing out a milimeter.
 For the scale of the map that error is in exceptable ranges.

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:07:14 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: Big-ass dot map on the web?

Those of you who use the current version of GALACTIC from Jim
Vassilakos know that you can get a dot map of a region of the
galaxy centered on the sector you're currently viewing.  I seem
to recall a massive version of this type of map, covering pretty
much the entire Imperium, and possibly some of the surrounds,
accessible on the Web.

WHERE?  I didn't think to bookmark it at the time, and now I
haven't a clue as to how to find it again.
- --
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 13:21:37 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium

Walter Smith wrote:

> Right now our Viking Mars mission data tapes are useless
> because no one can find a machine that can still read them.

It's quite sad to think that somewhere in a junk shop lies just such a
machine with a price tag of about $20!!

Paul Bendall

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 14:50:44 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

>>The Interstellar Wars period is currently under development on the TWG.
>>
>>The Late Terran Confederation was not a "true" democracy by any standard. 
>>Even at its formation its response to vocal critics was to quietly remove them to 
>>the distant colonies. From its beginning it was dealing with dissidents by 
>>"unpleasant" means.

This is a sort of a philosophical post. Just some things that are (sort of,
allowing for the fact that, in theory, its all a game) disturbing about
Traveller's background and the way it has developed.

Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as expressed in
Traveller is anti-democratic?

The Imperium is a repressive dictatorial authoritarian regime based on a mix of
might makes right, power based on social stratification, divine right of kings
etc. Sure, *in theory* the Imperium is all sweetness and light ... but it allows
(and encourages) the Megacorps to rip off the people for a Credit, as long as
the Emperor gets his share. It suppresses technological development. It
manipulates and destabilises member regimes (sure, the ones they do it to in
published adventures are ones that you and I would probably say deserve it, but
look at what the Ine Givar supposedly wanted ... per their manifesto/background
on Pyramid). It rips off innocents for its own socio-political ends (as per
Milieu 0, but not limited to that Milieu by any means). It promotes the worst
sort of radical laissez faire capitalism coupled with organised monopolistic
practices.

Worst of all, the underlying assumption of everything that has been published in
recent years is that all of this is inevitable.

MTrav and the TNE sequel to it was about how decadent all the power groups
within the imperium were, at their base. All of them. Even Norris.

Milieu 0 is about the worst sort of might makes right dictatorship, with real
parallels to european fascism in the 1930's in attitude (if nothing else).

GURPS Traveller and CTrav are not as tainted, but the underlaying assumptions
are still there, just not as obvious.

Now we are being told that the Late Terran Federation was a repressive regime at
least as bad as that of the Vilani Ziru Sirka.

And we all sit back and accept it.

I mean, doesn't anyone out there realise that the way things are going is that
*you* are playing the Imperial Stormtroopers and supporting the "Dark Side"? The
Emperor is *not* a nice guy. The Imperium is even actively (if unintentionally)
malevolent in its release of Virus.

Everything in the game is becoming tainted by this.

What is wrong with the people out there? Do they think that democracy is so
useless and fragile that it cannot last ... well, its been around almost as long
as authoritarianism, and keeps on keeping on. Our current democratic traditions
owe much to the ideals of Greece and Rome (especially the Republic), ideals that
never died even under centuries of authoritarian rule.

In countries all around the world, countries where there has never been a
democratic tradition, people are struggling even as we speak to build democratic
institutions ... some paying with their liberty and some even with their lives.

It seems fairly obvious that, once you reach a certain level of education and
material prosperity, the much despised "people" start wanting more than the
generosity of authoritarian regimes. They want a real say in power, they want
some control over it themselves. Look at Iran and the Shah, Indonesia and
Suharto, probably Malaysia and Mahatir. Look at Taiwan and its rejection of KMT
authoritarianism.

And look at India. A democracy since 1947 ... with mass illiteracy and mass
poverty on a scale that is really staggering. Yet, despite Pakistan's example of
what can happen in such a developing situation, India has remained a democracy.

Of course, the idea of a powerful stellar empire is an old one, dating back to
the golden age of SF ... an age when democratic ideals were under attack
throughout the world, and it looked like democracies were in retreat. But the
idea of powerful stellar federations/leagues/confederacies etc. is at least as
old.

Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an American
thing? Why?

Other SF RPGs are not so backward ...

The Jovian Chronicles: A mix of democracies and non-democracies.
Heavy Gear: Ditto
ST:TNG RPG: The Federation is a democracy.
The Babylon Project: A democracy of sorts
FTL:2448: Democracies.
That Awful Rolemaster SF Game whose name escapes me: Democracies and
non-democracies
Star Wars: The struggle between the Rebels (who are democratic) vs the Evil
Empire
Space 1889: Mix of democracies and non democracies
Space Opera: The main guys, the Terrans, are democratic. The Mercantile League
is a sort of oligarchic democracy. The Confederacy are democratic (or would be
if they could throw off the evil Korellian empire)
Fading Suns: Well, you got me here!

Sure, you *could* argue that some of the planetary governments in Traveller are
democratic. So what? The main game is with the big boys. The Imperium. The Evil
Empire.

There is an assumption, evidently deeply rooted, that democracy dies out at some
time in the near future (or during the early Interstellar Wars) and that it
never re-emerges. That it cannot, it seems.

Admiral Estigaribbia stages his coup to supposedly protect the Vilani from
Terran exploitation, but declares himself emperor rather than, say, President.

Nope, there's something seriously wrong with this line of thinking, or so it
seems to me.

What do the rest of you think?

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 15:04:42 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

At 10:24 AM 10/9/98 EDT, you wrote:
>Try applying the concept to the following examples drawn from the draft text
>for the Task Chapter of T5.

If I may make a humble suggestion...

It needs to made explicit that different characteristics can be used with
each skill.  In the example given, Three might be a clumsy genius (INT 10
and EDU 12).  With his Demolitions-1 skill, he might be able to complete
the floowing tasks:

To identify a booby-trapped package:
Int+Demo, Average (2d6)

To recognize the characteristics of the explosive used:
Edu+Deom, Difficult (2.5d6)

Thus Three can still be a useful character even at low levels of talent..
his strengths lay more towards the theoretical end of the spectrum.  When
partnered with Eleven, who is a bit of a dunce (INT 5, EDU 3) they make a
good team.  Three tells Eleven what wires to cut.
- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 08:26:25 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Trade and Economics (sorry Loren)

At 05:04 PM 10/8/98 -0400, you wrote:

>dberry@hooked.net wrote:
>
>> This is why I'm hoping to get a hold of 101 Cargos and the GURPS Traveller
>> Merchants book.  Being a gearhead, I would really enjoy a more detailed
>> trade system.
>
>Patience.  I would really enjoy a more detailed "close quarters" combat system.
>Hint, hint.   ;-)

San francisco gets close to 20% of it's tourist trade in September.  I work
in the tourism industry.  Hint right back at you.  :P

- --

+--------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net  |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/    |
+--------------------------------------+
| "Oh, My God.. they killed STREPHON!  | 
|  You Bastards!!!!                    |
|                -Grand Admiral Kyle   |
+--------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 04:41:29 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

From:           	aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Date sent:      	Sat, 10 Oct 1998 14:50:44 GMT

>>>The Interstellar Wars period is currently under development on the TWG.

>>>The Late Terran Confederation was not a "true" democracy by any standard. 
>>>Even at its formation its response to vocal critics was to quietly remove them to 
>>>the distant colonies. From its beginning it was dealing with dissidents by 
>>>"unpleasant" means.

>This is a sort of a philosophical post. Just some things that are (sort of,
>allowing for the fact that, in theory, its all a game) disturbing about
>Traveller's background and the way it has developed.

Sometime yes. When I read 76 patrons I find adventurers kidnapping, breaking 
and entering, engaged in fraud, murder etc.

[snip]

>Now we are being told that the Late Terran Federation was a repressive regime at
>least as bad as that of the Vilani Ziru Sirka.

Since I'm sort of the person responsible I'll explain its not all quite as "black" as 
it seems. When it was founded the TC was faced with the overwhelming 
juggernaut of the ZS, a state so big it could crush them without blinking. The 
Terrans only chance was unity, therefore it didn't seem so bad to its early 
government that those who vocally called for the preservation of the crazy 
patchwork of soverign nations be "gently" silenced; it was wartime after all and 
they were just removed to the colonies or interned for the duration. Then as the 
Wars started to bite and the society gradually became more austere and 
authoritarian and the Vilani threat became more real; their responses slowly got 
more draconian. At its foundation the TC was a democracy, and even when it 
fell it was still a democracy of sorts (pre 1st WW Germany or current day 
Singapore would be good examples). It was certainly more democratic than the 
military dicatorship which followed it. And it was as a response to the 
subversion of the Terran democracy that the very democratic Old Earth Union 
was founded during the long night and survived until it was incorporated by the 
Imperium.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 08:45:51 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium

Actually, the problem is more complex than just finding the machine to read
them, its finding the machine to read them accurately as they disintegrate
going across the heads. The tapes are in terrible shape, and you only get ONE
chance to recover the data.

Magnetic media is terrible archival material, and tape, due to the stresses
the surface is put on as it's wound and unwound during normal ops, is probably
the worst of all.

If I had some money for every time someone's come crying into our office (I do
computer support for a college) with a floppy disk in hand saying "All my
works on this disk  and now it says it won't read it!!!" I'd not have to pay
for my lunch out my own pocket most weeks.

And half the time, it's the _only_ copy they have...once it was someone's
dissertation. You can bet that after they spent the time retyping it from
their last printed copy (various drafts of different ages for many parts, and
a bibliography they had _never_ printed out) that person had a _number_ of
copies floating around.

ObTrav...the ONLY way to ensure effective archival of data is to have it
_duplicated_ in _several_ forms. That way when parts of one copy are degraded,
you can go to another and recover the data from it, hoping that the same data
isn't degraded on both.

Paul Bendall wrote:
> 
> Walter Smith wrote:
> 
> > Right now our Viking Mars mission data tapes are useless
> > because no one can find a machine that can still read them.
> 
> It's quite sad to think that somewhere in a junk shop lies just such a
> machine with a price tag of about $20!!
> 
> Paul Bendall

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 12:14:21 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: Planetology 101 part 2

Hydrogen 

   Hydrogen rules: it is more abundant by far than any of the
other elements.  
   It also has the lowest molecular weight of any ordinary gas,
and the lowest boiling point of any except helium.
This makes it the most volatile. The smaller or hotter a planet
is, the faster it will lose hydrogen from its atmosphere.  
   Compounds of hydrogen and other elements, for instance water,
methane, ammonia, and hydrogen sulfide, also tend to be light 
and to have low boiling points. These are also easily lost from 
small or hot planets.  
   Finally, hydrogen may be driven from its compounds by ultraviolet
radiation. The hydrogen escapes, leaving the heavier element to combine
with something else.  Any planet smaller than a gas giant is likely to lose
hydrogen as it ages.

   All this means that hydrogen content makes a good yardstick
for comparison of planets.
   At the high end of the scale are the gas giants, which are
mostly hydrogen. As a matter of fact, any planet than can retain
substantial free hydrogen is likely to belong in the gas giant
class. Small gas giants, such as Neptune and Uranus, become
progressively more enriched in the less volatile elements and
compounds. 
   At some point smaller than these but somewhat larger or cooler
than the earth, there is a cutoff point, where a planet cannot
retain its hydrogen but can retain its heavier volatiles. These
are "middle hydrogen" planets, and are the most likely places for
life to originate.
   At some point only a little smaller or hotter than the earth,
a planet loses all its hydrogen-containing compounds unless they are in a
frozen state. These are hydrogen poor planets, though some are poorer than
others. The earth itself is a borderline case: although it has retained
substantial water, like the middle hydrogen planets, most of it is liquid,
a condensed state.
   This has little to do with atmospheric density. For example,
Mars and Venus are both hydrogen poor, but one has a very thin,
and the other a very dense atmosphere.

    Helium is next most abundant, but since it is chemically
unreactive, it will be ignored. It is very nearly as volatile as
hydrogen, but since it does not combine chemically, it is
virtually absent from any but gas giants.
   Helium is important in cryogenics and superconductors, which
are used heavily by high-tech societies. This makes gas giants a
vital industrial resource for such worlds.

  

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 13:27:31 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

In a message dated 10/10/98 10:39:24 AM Central Daylight Time,
dberry@hooked.net writes:

<< 
 If I may make a humble suggestion...
 
  >>
I like humble suggestions. I even use them sometimes.

Thanks

Marc

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 14:00:22 -0400
From: John Macek <macek@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

Phillip McGregor wrote:
> 
> >>The Interstellar Wars period is currently under development on the TWG.
> >>
> >>The Late Terran Confederation was not a "true" democracy by any standard.
> >>Even at its formation its response to vocal critics was to quietly remove them to
> >>the distant colonies. From its beginning it was dealing with dissidents by
> >>"unpleasant" means.
> 
> This is a sort of a philosophical post. Just some things that are (sort of,
> allowing for the fact that, in theory, its all a game) disturbing about
> Traveller's background and the way it has developed.
> 
> Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as expressed in
> Traveller is anti-democratic?
> 

Yes.  The ZS was a totalitarian state.  The TC *became* a totalitarian
state.  

<snip>

> 
> Now we are being told that the Late Terran Federation was a repressive regime at
> least as bad as that of the Vilani Ziru Sirka.
>

I don't know that this can be considered "canon."  Same goes for the Ine
Givar write-up on Pyramid.  Even if it is, if you don't like it, don't
use it.  

> 
> Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an American
> thing? Why?
> 

I think part of it is due to the basic assumption that the speed of
communication is limited by travel times.  That Democracies are
inefficient under such circumstances, over such vast distances, and are
therefore not feasible for controlling an area of space greater than a
subsector or two.  

An American Thing?  I beg your pardon.  As one who has stood guard over
George Washington's Tomb, I can tell you that democracy is still alive
in the U.S.

IMTU, it is still alive on countless worlds both inside and outside of
the 3I.  

John

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 11:23:02 PDT
From: "Paul Zumstein" <pzumstein@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

Great comments!  This subject is just too deep for me on a saturday 
morning. Sorry!

PZ


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 15:45:43 -0400
From: John Macek <macek@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

Phillip McGregor wrote:

[snip]

> 
> GURPS Traveller and CTrav are not as tainted, but the underlaying assumptions
> are still there, just not as obvious.
> 

CT not tainted?  Consult Adventure 1 Kinunir, specifically the situation
titled The Gash.

:)

John

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 17:26:49 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re:101 Vehicles

Sethkimmel@aol.com writes:
><< PS. Actually there's more than 101 vehicles. I've already up past
>150... >>
>
>Please do me a favor and title it 201 vehicles, since there was already a
>101
>vehicles published (DGP?). I am easily confused...:-)

Well, titling is actually Andy's call. And 201 Vehicles would require a
larger book (although I suppose it would save space if I left out such
minor details as prices and tech levels... :-)

What about 102 Vehicles? Hereby also neatly establishing a precident for
sequals to other 101 books.

More to the point, if you want to see it you could write to Andy Lilly
asking him for it.

Alternately, I suppose I could publish it as a PDF file (having finally
got Acrobat) with the printing turned off.

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 17:29:32 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: SDB

Sethkimmel@aol.com writes:
><< Does anyone have deckplans of the System Defense Boat on the net?  I'm
> looking for the 'standard' 400dton Dragon class SDB.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Kurt Feltenberger
> 
> “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
> habit.”
> --- Aristotle ---
>  >>
>
>I have not seen any. I know the plans are in LBB Supplement #9, and Seeker
>games printed a set in 15 and 25mm. Sooner or later someone will scan
>them...hint, hint. BTW; who knows where the jump shuttle crews sleep. I
>once
>saw a deckplan, and the shuttle had no staterooms. This is strange, as the
>shuttle could operate on its' own without an SDB attached.

I've got them draw to 1/2 inch squares (ie. suitable for 15mm miniatures).
I had GDW's permission to send them to people free-of-charge, but with the
rights reverting to Marc I don't want to do this without his clearance. So
if Marc gives his OK I'll post them...

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 17:57:08 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: A Proposition

>Megacorps have salaried brokers at every port that they visit and buy
>products (as far in advance as economically feasable) for shipment to
>the next system.  Therefore the Megacorps take maximum advantage of the
>speculative trade, leaving the poor speculative trade for the free
>traders (tramp traders).  the rules in the books are what is left after
>the megacorps are finished with the market.

This has been my take on things for years. 

Mind you, it may have been suggested to me in a letter from either Loren
or Marc when I wrote to them back in the early 80s. (And thanks, guys.
Having a game's authors telling me to ignore the rules if I didn't like
them gave me the confidence to stand up to the munchkins and become a
role-player, not a rule-player.)

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #926
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Saturday, October 10 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 927



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
RE: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 
Planetology 101 part 3
Democracy and the Imperium
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)
Re: Traveller CD
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Betazoid Language 
democracy
Re: Military History (was re: Ironclads)
Re: Military History (was re: Ironclads)

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 18:02:32 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

"Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> writes:
>The recent discussion on wishes for T5 and JoT skill has prompted me to
>post 
>my house rules modifying the basic T4 task system.

My own house rule was to limit the attribute to a multiplier of the skill.
Ordinarily this was 2, but it ranged from 1-3.

This meant that a chap with medic-1 and dex-12 would only have an asset of
3 for most tasks. "Obvious" tasks could use an asset of 4, while for brain
surgery he would have an asset of 2.

This meant that having a great attribute gave you more potential ability,
and made each level of training more effective (compared to someone with
lower natural ability).

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 17:14:15 -0500
From: "Moody, Danny M." <DMoody@bridge.com>
Subject: RE: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

On Friday, 09 October 1998 16:18, Bruce Johnson
[SMTP:johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu] wrote:
> Moody, Danny M. wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > SHADEs also act as eye and hearing protective devices in hazardous
> > environs by automatically blocking out loud sounds and very bright
> > lights.
> > 
> 
> Ooh! Ooh! Do they come with Extreme Danger Sens-O-Matic shades? You
> know, they go completely black in the presence of danger, so you don't
> undergo the stress and wear and tear on your autonomic nevous system
> that comes with the stress? Zaphod Beeblbrox swore by 'em...

How'd you guess?

- -vargr1                                                  UPP-8D9B85
Traveller ----------------------------------- The Future is in Beta
Meyers-Briggs personality type: ENTJ         |   vargr1@jcn1.com
"...the ENTJ is not one to be trifled with." |   dmoody@bridge.com

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 18:43:00 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 

aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor) writes:
>Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as
>expressed in
>Traveller is anti-democratic?

Yup. The Imperium has always been a fuedal system, _not_ a democracy.
Taken as a gaming background it makes internal sense, which is all I ask
my games to do.
>
>The Imperium is a repressive dictatorial authoritarian regime based on a
>mix of
>might makes right, power based on social stratification, divine right of
>kings
>etc.
[snip]
> It promotes the worst
>sort of radical laissez faire capitalism coupled with organised
>monopolistic
>practices.
[more snipping]
>
>Milieu 0 is about the worst sort of might makes right dictatorship, with
>real
>parallels to european fascism in the 1930's in attitude (if nothing else).

Yes.

This, from my perspective, is good. It explains why the players in many
published adventures have been routinely at odds with the Imperium. Not
for mere selfish motives, but from an honest belief in personal freedom!
(OK, so I'm revisionist, but then so is Traveller "history".)
>
>And we all sit back and accept it.
>
>I mean, doesn't anyone out there realise that the way things are going is
>that
>*you* are playing the Imperial Stormtroopers and supporting the "Dark
>Side"? 

Or I'm playing the Nazi diplomat who saved 20 000 Chinese during the Rape
of Nanking. Or the students in the White Rose resistance group.  Or a
miner struggling to organize against the combined forces of company and
state police. Or...

I _like_ playing the underdog.  I like players who take morals into
account when gaming, and a mortally B&W universe takes away this aspect of
gaming.
>
>Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an
>American
>thing? Why?
[snip]
>
>Sure, you *could* argue that some of the planetary governments in
>Traveller are
>democratic. So what? The main game is with the big boys. The Imperium.
>The Evil
>Empire.
>
>There is an assumption, evidently deeply rooted, that democracy dies out
>at some
>time in the near future (or during the early Interstellar Wars) and that
>it

That it _does_ not, not that it _can_ not. Besides, the Vargr are the
ultimate democrats: you gain influence only through the support of your
followers :-)
>
>What do the rest of you think?

I think you're (a) reading too much into a game background, and (b) about
20 years too late to complain about Traveller's Imperium.

On gaming: I'm quite certain that Traveller (and other games) are
fictional, and I'm also certain that any Traveller players that can't tell
the difference have psychological problems that a different game
background won't cure.

Off gaming: I'm seriously worried about the resurgence of corporatism
around the world.  The MAI (as it stands) scares the shit out of me. 
Being told "work harder for less money, because our company must be more
competitive" by a man earning millions in "productivity bonuses" while our
stock plunges makes me look for convenient lampposts and some spare rope.
While democracy has its flaws, I've seen nothing better, and I would live
under no other system. (And, for the record, I do not equate "democracy"
with "the American system of government". There are many forms of
democracy, but I believe that all of them are better than any other
alternative.)

In summary: While I'm disturbed by world events, I don't see a trend in
Traveller, and I'm not worried about the game's "history".

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 19:34:06 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: Planetology 101 part 3

Oxygen
    The next most abundant substance is oxygen. There is enough
oxygen in the galaxy to combine with all less abundant elements
with some left over. For the most part, oxygen also combines with
these other elements better than hydrogen does, and its compounds
are much less volatile. Rock is chiefly oxides of the metallic
elements. Hydrogen-poor usually means oxygen-rich.
   Free hydrogen and free oxygen are never found together in
nature for very long. Given a few microseconds to a few thousand
years, depending on conditions, they combine to form water.
    The good news for us water-drinkers is that water is the
single most abundant compound in the universe. The bad news is
the old spaceman's lament...water, water, everywhere, and not a
drop to drink.
     Stars are far too hot for water to exist as a compound. It's
present in gas giants, but since it's denser than hydrogen, you can expect
to find it mostly in their lower layers. (These are no place for for beings
with ideas of space travel to go looking for it). If you don't mind it
being strictly a mineral, there's plenty of it in the outer reaches of most
star systems. If you want to melt it, find a place with some atmospheric
pressure. In vacuum, water behaves like dry ice and sublimes instead of
melting. Since water vapor is a volatile, fairly lightweight gas, it's easy
for asteroids, moonlets, and anything else that gets close enough to a star
to lose its supply to space. (There's plenty of it there too, if you have a
few thousand years to spare collecting it from a few cubic AUs of excellent
vacuum.) 

Thus far, we can expect:
     The high-hydrogen class of worlds will have a mostly
hydrogen atmosphere with some water. Since water in any state is
denser than hydrogen, it can be expected fairly deep within it.
   The middle class may have water with a little hydrogen, water
and other gases, or water and a little oxygen.
   The hydrogen poor class will have little or no water in the atmosphere
and more free oxygen than water vapor in any case.

This classification is still too crude, and life needs more than just
water. The next of the Big Four is needed.  
  

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:33:02 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: Democracy and the Imperium

> Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as
expressed in
> Traveller is anti-democratic?

This was an excellent post, and crystallised for me some things that I had
been thinking about regarding the role of the Imperium in a Traveller
campaign. Good job, Phil. I'll add a few comments here about certain
points.

> 
> The Imperium is a repressive dictatorial authoritarian regime based on a
mix of
> might makes right, power based on social stratification, divine right of
kings
> etc. Sure, *in theory* the Imperium is all sweetness and light ... but it
allows
> (and encourages) the Megacorps to rip off the people for a Credit, as
long as
> the Emperor gets his share. It suppresses technological development. 

This last one especially occured to me after reading all the things in
GURPS Traveller from other science-fiction sources that DON'T exist in
Traveller. Now, some of those things were developed as concepts in sci-fi
long after Traveller was first published...but some were not. And yet,
Traveller does not have them...or do they? Vilani "conservatism" is often
blamed for why certain advancements, such as artificial intelligence, are
not pursued...maybe the same thing is true when it comes to, oh say,
faster-than-light radio? What if the plans and specifications for Jump
Radio DO exist...and have for centuries...buried in a warehouse somewhere,
because of the obvious difficulties such communication would cause for the
Imperial hold on power?

> Milieu 0, but not limited to that Milieu by any means). It promotes the
worst
> sort of radical laissez faire capitalism coupled with organised
monopolistic
> practices.

Yes, many of the business practices of the Imperium would not stand up
under today's anti-trust laws.


> Worst of all, the underlying assumption of everything that has been
published in
> recent years is that all of this is inevitable.

Well, the Reformation Coalition as seen in TNE were attempting to aspire to
democratic ideals...whether they could have survived when faced with the
Regency is a matter of some debate..and the Regency did seem to be moving
toward having some kinds of democratic reforms, although that could have
been just "throwing the people a bone".

> MTrav and the TNE sequel to it was about how decadent all the power
groups
> within the imperium were, at their base. All of them. Even Norris.

As I said, Norris did seem to want to take at least some power out of the
hands of the nobles and put it into the people's reach, in TNE at
least..but your statement is fundamentally accurate, IMO.
 
> Milieu 0 is about the worst sort of might makes right dictatorship, with
real
> parallels to european fascism in the 1930's in attitude (if nothing
else).

I've gone back and re-read the Mileau 0 Campaign Book, and I have to agree
that Cleon I comes off as far more ruthless and unpleasant than he does
honorable, and maybe that's the only way a government like the Imperium
gets established...

> I mean, doesn't anyone out there realise that the way things are going is
that
> *you* are playing the Imperial Stormtroopers and supporting the "Dark
Side"? The
> Emperor is *not* a nice guy. The Imperium is even actively (if
unintentionally)
> malevolent in its release of Virus.

Well, my players, particularly my wife the history/poli sci person, have
definitley noticed this, and she has commented that she doesn't much like
the Imperium. She plays Traveller and enjoys the adventure, but vastly
prefers Star Trek as a background because she sees the Federation as a
democratic ideal (and I think she also enjoys the break from long travel
times and too much "real science" <g>) They seem to be moving in the
direction of playing "Robin Hood" and aiding people against the Imperium
from time to time..and therein may lie the reasons that so many Traveller
campaigns seem to drift in the direction of lawbreaking...if the society is
not just, people will rebel against it, even in small ways. (Admittedly,
this doesn't cover most merc/pirate campaigns, but it seems to be what is
happening with ours.)

> as authoritarianism, and keeps on keeping on. Our current democratic
traditions
> owe much to the ideals of Greece and Rome (especially the Republic),
ideals that
> never died even under centuries of authoritarian rule.

Well, both Greece and Rome had certain problems with their "democratic
ideals", such as it only extending to men, only to "citizens" (and the
concept of who was and was not a citizen was fairly narrow) etc. But it was
a start. Actually, the Vikings had the closest to our democratic ideal,
IMO.

> Of course, the idea of a powerful stellar empire is an old one, dating
back to
> the golden age of SF ... an age when democratic ideals were under attack
> throughout the world, and it looked like democracies were in retreat. But
the
> idea of powerful stellar federations/leagues/confederacies etc. is at
least as
> old.

Traveller reflects the thinking of people like Asimov, etc. in the fact
that it's Imperium resemples many of those empires. What interests me is
that in books like Asimov's, Poul Anderson's Flandry series, etc. these
governments are almost always born to die..it is SHOWN that such an empire
cannot last. And yet, people got really upset when the Imperium fell, as it
inevitibly WILL fall someday. It was very likely the WAY it fell which
annoyed people, but still, it does make me wonder sometimes...IMTU, the
Imperium is rotting and decaying from within, and it's days are most
definitley numbered unless VERY REAL change happens very quickly...which it
likely will not.

 
> Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an
American
> thing? Why?

I do think we Americans (at least many of us) have far less confidence in
our government, and therefore our democracy, than we used to, when it seems
like all our leaders are corrupt and you can almost watch the whole thing
collapsing from within sometimes...it isn't too late YET to stop this
trend, but it might soon be...

> Sure, you *could* argue that some of the planetary governments in
Traveller are
> democratic. So what? The main game is with the big boys. The Imperium.
The Evil
> Empire.

And allowing democratic planets to exist within the Imperium may eventually
be the cause of it's downfall....because it is there that free-thinkers can
spread their ideas, where rebellions can be born. The Imperium would have
to begin quashing such worlds eventually..and this could lead to even
greater problems.


Allen
 

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 14:48:53 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

At 14:50 10/10/98 GMT, Phillip McGregor wrote:

>Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as
expressed in
>Traveller is anti-democratic?

>Worst of all, the underlying assumption of everything that has been
published in
>recent years is that all of this is inevitable.
>
>MTrav and the TNE sequel to it was about how decadent all the power groups
>within the imperium were, at their base. All of them. Even Norris.

However TNE was also about how the collapse gave everyone another chance.
The Rengency is much more democratic than the Imperium ever was, and the
Coalition is most definately a democracy (though not all its members are).

>Milieu 0 is about the worst sort of might makes right dictatorship, with real
>parallels to european fascism in the 1930's in attitude (if nothing else).

That is one of biggest gripes with M:0. I don't have a problem with the
lack of democracy, but I did find the almost total lack of morals in the
early 3I's leaders disturbing.

>GURPS Traveller and CTrav are not as tainted, but the underlaying assumptions
>are still there, just not as obvious.

The lack of scruples and accountabilty of nobles and megacorportaions was
pretty obvious in The Traveller Adventure.

>Now we are being told that the Late Terran Federation was a repressive
regime at
>least as bad as that of the Vilani Ziru Sirka.
>
>And we all sit back and accept it.
>
>I mean, doesn't anyone out there realise that the way things are going is
that
>*you* are playing the Imperial Stormtroopers and supporting the "Dark
Side"? The
>Emperor is *not* a nice guy. The Imperium is even actively (if
unintentionally)
>malevolent in its release of Virus.
>
>Everything in the game is becoming tainted by this.
>
>What is wrong with the people out there? Do they think that democracy is so
>useless and fragile that it cannot last ... well, its been around almost
as long
>as authoritarianism, and keeps on keeping on. Our current democratic
traditions
>owe much to the ideals of Greece and Rome (especially the Republic),
ideals that
>never died even under centuries of authoritarian rule.

From what I've read I would suggest that these ideals were honoured more in
the breach than in reality in Rome, and in Greece (only Athens, really)
they were only for a small minority. Even the most open Greek democracies
were really just unusually open oligharcies. IMO democratic government is a
fragile thing, though the ideals are not. However I don't think that it
will fade away and die, never to return, as the ideals are just too strong.

>Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an
American
>thing? Why?
>
>Other SF RPGs are not so backward ...
>
>The Jovian Chronicles: A mix of democracies and non-democracies.
>Heavy Gear: Ditto
>ST:TNG RPG: The Federation is a democracy.
>The Babylon Project: A democracy of sorts

If it's anything like the TV series it's (IMO) little more a democracy than
a number of so-called democracies in the thrid world today are.

>FTL:2448: Democracies.
>That Awful Rolemaster SF Game whose name escapes me: Democracies and
>non-democracies

If you mean SpaceMaster it had a democratic state, but it was a small and
struggling backwater compared to the Imperium. This was actually another
reason I was so dissappointed with M:0 - SM already had an empire built by
an alliance of greedy power hungry megacorps and would be nobles, so to me
M:0 felt very much like a clone. I had always felt that at least Trav's
Imperium, for all its faults didn't start as an exercise in profiteering
and repression, and that it was at least a bit better than the alternatives
(well the Solomani, anyway).

>Star Wars: The struggle between the Rebels (who are democratic) vs the Evil
>Empire
>Space 1889: Mix of democracies and non democracies
>Space Opera: The main guys, the Terrans, are democratic. The Mercantile
League
>is a sort of oligarchic democracy. The Confederacy are democratic (or
would be
>if they could throw off the evil Korellian empire)

IIRC even the there was a large (49%) faction of the Terrans who wanted to
turn the Terran holdings into an empire and take over the UFP on the basis
that it would be a better way to run things. I always found it cuirous that
for the same TL being a democracy seemed to allow you to have better gear,
and being a non-democracy tended to give you a lower TL.

>Fading Suns: Well, you got me here!
>
>Sure, you *could* argue that some of the planetary governments in
Traveller are
>democratic. So what? The main game is with the big boys. The Imperium. The
Evil
>Empire.
>
>There is an assumption, evidently deeply rooted, that democracy dies out
at some
>time in the near future (or during the early Interstellar Wars) and that it
>never re-emerges. That it cannot, it seems.

Well in The Traveller Book it states that an empire is assumed because of
the size of the state and the slow rate of communications. I would suggest
that no matter what type of government you had there would be a fair amount
of corruption in a state that size (so what we see in The Traveller
Adventure could happen), but really didn't like the way the 3I was made
'evil', in MT to a degree and more so in TNE (but at least TNE only looked
at the late Imperium that had disintergrated into the Rebellion), and then
in M:0 we found that the 3I was explictly morally bankrupt right from its
inception. Because of M:0 I feel that even in G:T's no assassination
timeline the 3I must inevitibly come apart, because if it doesn't the bad
guys win.

>Admiral Estigaribbia stages his coup to supposedly protect the Vilani from
>Terran exploitation, but declares himself emperor rather than, say,
President.

I never read it this way. I always felt that it was a power grab by the
Terran Navy's high command.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:15:33 -0400
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

>Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as
expressed in
>Traveller is anti-democratic?


Yes, 100%. It would be foolish to disagree.

The government of the Imperium seems heavily based on that from the Asimov's
"Foundation" series. Both the Foundation series and Traveller say that this
method is the natural progression for an interstellar community with
"hyperspace"/jump travel in the fashion that both implement it.

Not that I agree with it.

I don't find it to be disturbing though. First of all, it's a game, and it
really doesn't get to me. Second, I can shape it to my will as game master.
It can be relatively benevolent in some areas, or completely corrupt.
Sometimes, it can just merely be functional with no real leanings one way or
the other (the way I perceive my own government usually).

Just because my players are running characters in a game world doesn't mean
that I (or they) have to agree with it. In fact, not agreeing with it can
make adventures far more fun.

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:30:04 EDT
From: Kagehira@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller CD

In a message dated 10/5/98 9:28:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, tomt@scri.fsu.edu
writes:

> 1)  Galactic 2.3 and 2.4 will not run.  Starting Gal2.3 gives an error
>  #75 detected around line 5460.  Now at least with this problem I know it
>  is not my systems incombatability with the program....the Gal2.3 that I
>  have on my hard drive was a download from Jim's page and works just
>  fine...so I think something is wrong.
>  
>  2)  Galactic 2.4 runs until it asks that you pick from the "galaxy
>  menu"  (i.e.  classic era galaxy, new era galaxy, etc...) and then
>  crashes with error #75 detected around line 5722.
>  


	I need to know if anyone else is having these problems.

Bryan

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:50:41 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

In a message dated 10/10/98 10:39:24 AM Central Daylight Time,
dberry@hooked.net writes:

<< It needs to made explicit that different characteristics >>

Thanks. I have incorporated your suggestion as:

	Using Other Characteristics With Demolitions. There are instances where other
characteristics can be used with a skill (even though it specifies its prime
characteristic is Dex).. Three might be a clumsy genius (735AC9). With his
Demolitions-1 skill, he would still be well-suited to the following tasks.
might be able to complete the floowing tasks:

	To identify a booby-trapped package:
	(Int + Demo) > Average (2D)

	To recognize the characteristics of the explosive used:
	(Edu + Demo) > Difficult (2.5D)

	Three can still be a very useful character on a Demolitions Team… but the
team mates know they should not let him actually touch the bombs. When
partnered with Eleven (a bit of a dunce as 7B7536), they make a good team.
Three tells Eleven what wires to cut.

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 18:41:02 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Betazoid Language 

>Message text written by Don
>>why do Betazoids have their own language? I mean, why would a race of
>telepaths have their own native language, especially if they "speak" in
>pure thoughts, images, and emotions?<
>
>You've answered your own question.  Telepathy is pure thought, images and
>emotion.  Very difficult to discern.  Humans have a hard time describing
>what we're thinking - even knowing what we are thinking sometimes - it
>needs to be expressed.

Looking at the rules, the capabilities of various Psi's in various shows,
it would seem that non-linguistic communication requires a mind meld, and
as a corollary, surface thoughts are at least semi-linguistic.

>When we've overheard Lwaxanna and Deanna Troi use telepathy, they formed
>sentences - not pure thought.  If they had used pure feelings, the elder
>Troi would have understood that she was not welcome.  So language can
>convey manners.

this reinforces the idea that surface thoughts are linguistically oriented.

>Language would have been developed to speak with those who were not
>telepathic also, either other races, or those born handicapped.
>
or the language could be a holdover from before the telepahtic gene became
prevalent in the population.

another thought: betazoids, by the LUG TNG rules, get RECEPTIVE telepathy.
So, you'd need to get someone's attention if you want them to hear your
thoughts. How many betazoids are also projective telepaths (Tam Elbrun pops
to mind).

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 18:54:39 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: democracy

>Everything in the game is becoming tainted by this.
>
>What is wrong with the people out there? Do they think that democracy is so
>useless and fragile that it cannot last ... well, its been around almost
>as long
>as authoritarianism, and keeps on keeping on. Our current democratic
>traditions
>owe much to the ideals of Greece and Rome (especially the Republic),
>ideals that
>never died even under centuries of authoritarian rule.
>
>In countries all around the world, countries where there has never been a
>democratic tradition, people are struggling even as we speak to build
>democratic
>institutions ... some paying with their liberty and some even with their
>lives.
>
Democracy is a short-lived thing in history. No democracy has ever lasted
more than 300 years of unbroken democratic rule without breaks of autocracy
or violent rebellion that breaks away. Even Great Brittain has had periods
where their "democracy" has been temporarily shelved for autocratic rule
(especially the war of the roses, IIRC). Britain's form is the most stable
yet seen. The US is coming close. Both have strong autocratic tendancies...
CF GB/North Ireland, and the US and it's colonial dependancies (Am Samoa,
US VI, PR, Marshal Islands), and the US and any third world it thinks it
can get away with "Policing".

The great greek democracies weren't really total demos either... they would
elect an autocrat during time of war.

The US and UK, while they have democratic principles, are actually
parliamentary systems, with indirect (and occasionally virtual)
representation.

AFAIK, Switzerland is the most democratic gov't of more than 10K people
governed. and I'm not really sure about that.

In 200 years, will the rash of democratic gov'ts still have any democratic
features left?

What about "Soviet Democracy" - Yea or nay for the candidate. And, if the
nays have it, a new candidate.

What about Weimar Deutchland, where the Chancellor was transferred
autocratic rule, then proclaimed himself Fuhrer...

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:11:09 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Military History (was re: Ironclads)

>> Seventh Cavalry (Solomani Grav Infantry, "Boots & Saddles") claims to 
>> trace it's history back to pre-American Civil War Terra, but their lineage
>> has been challenged by some post-Invasion-Earth Solomani units. This 
>> makes for a good intra or inter-service barfight excuse.  >>
>  
> I remember that some of the Solomani counters in Invasion Earth represented
> the 82nd and 101st Airborne (Grav-mobile?). I think some other units were
> represented, but I don't have my game in front of me...

There are 82nd and 101st Jump Troop Lift divsions (20-Factor, TL14).  Awhile
ago, I was interested in seeing what exactly was present and wrote down the
ids and pertinent info on every unit chit for I:E...

Anyone notice there's a TL12  1C-Factor Lift Corps of Ihatei fighting for the
Solomani?  That's certainly interesting.  There were quite a few of those that
I was unable to identify.  Some of the Imperial (and Mercenary) units were
meaningless to me (the name the leader, maybe?) ...

Gary

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:55:45 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Military History (was re: Ironclads)

TravelrTNE@aol.com wrote:
> 
> >> Seventh Cavalry (Solomani Grav Infantry, "Boots & Saddles") claims to
> >> trace it's history back to pre-American Civil War Terra, but their lineage
> >> has been challenged by some post-Invasion-Earth Solomani units. This
> >> makes for a good intra or inter-service barfight excuse.  >>
> >
It gets even stickier than that, IMTU.  Let's use the 504th Parachute
Infantry Regiment (one of my personal favorites, the "Devils in Baggy
Pants", I went to Sinai with them) as an example:

Early in the First Interstellar War, when most TC ground units (and
naval units, for that matter) were from national contingents, the 82d
Airborne Division [hereafter simply "the 82d"] was trained and equipped
for meteoric assault (Jump Troops).  At the time, the US Army had
reverted to a regimental, rather than brigade, system for maneuver
elements in a division.  The 82d had, as it has now, three regiments: 
the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment [hereafter "the 504th PIR"], the
325th Airborne Infantry Regiment ["325th AIR"], and the 505th Parachute
Infantry Regiment ["505th PIR"].

By the end of the Nth IW, the 82d had each of its regiments on a
different world, spread from Terra (Divison HQ at Ft. Bragg, NC, USA)
throughout the former Ziru Sirka, each still identified as 82d Airborne
units.  This remained true throughout the Rule of Man.

Fast forward...

It's now the M:0 setting.  The 504th PIR (which, BTW, hadn't conducted
an aircraft-based parachute assault since AD 1989 [Panama/Just Cause],
happened to be stationed on Sylea when things fell apart all those
centuries ago.  As military organizations are wont to do, the 504th PIR
maintained its traditions, and still identified with the 82d.  It was
used, with its number and designation intact, as the basis for the 82d
Jump Troop Division, Imperial Army.  Later on, as other worlds were
recontacted, the 325th AIR was located and integrated into the 82d JT
Div, IA.

Meanwhile...

The 82d's Division HQ, along with the 505th PIR, remained on Earth when
things fell apart, and formed one of the combat divisions of the Old
Earth Union.  When the Solomani Autonomous Region became the Solomani
Confederation, the 82d JT Division, Confederation Army, was one of its
most prized units.

Thus, you run into the chance of two divisions, each carrying the same
designation and lineage, with equivalent capabilities, wearing the
_same_ division patch, engaging each other in combat.

> > I remember that some of the Solomani counters in Invasion Earth represented
> > the 82nd and 101st Airborne (Grav-mobile?). I think some other units were
> > represented, but I don't have my game in front of me...
> 
<<snip>>

BTW, this is the kind of trivia that actually is important in our
current Traveller campaign; YTUMV.

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #927
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Sunday, October 11 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 928



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Democracy in Traveller
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #927
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Re: democracy
Re: SDB
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Trade and Nuke Dampers
Re: Paperless Imperium
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM co...
Re Democracy in Traveller
Oops
Re: Ironclads
[none]
Re: Traveller CD
The Warehouse (was Re: Democracy and the Imperium)

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 00:12:39 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: Democracy in Traveller

Phillip McGregor wrote:

>Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy
>as expressed in Traveller is anti-democratic?

Yes, but IMTU, there is a long-standing minority democratic
faction in the Moot. As long as they don't incite armed rebellion
against the Emperor or his officials, they are tolerated as mostly
harmless.

Could a group that is in principle opposed to the whole idea of the
Imperium actually support it?

 

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 04:44:47 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #927

On Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:57:26 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 18:43:00 -0400
>From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
>Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 
>
>aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor) writes:
>>Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as
>>expressed in
>>Traveller is anti-democratic?
>
>Yup. The Imperium has always been a fuedal system, _not_ a democracy.
>Taken as a gaming background it makes internal sense, which is all I ask
>my games to do.

Yes, I realise Traveller has always been an Imperial Government. However, in the
TLBB days, there was so little detail about exactly what the Imperium *was* that
it could have been a "democratic" Imperium.

The "dark side" is very much a creation of the MTrav and later rules and related
supplementary materials. So, in a sense, we can blame DGP and, to some unknown
extent, GDW of the DGP era, for the trend.

>>The Imperium is a repressive dictatorial authoritarian regime based on a
>>mix of
>>might makes right, power based on social stratification, divine right of
>>kings
>>etc.
>[snip]
>> It promotes the worst
>>sort of radical laissez faire capitalism coupled with organised
>>monopolistic
>>practices.
>[more snipping]
>>
>>Milieu 0 is about the worst sort of might makes right dictatorship, with
>>real
>>parallels to european fascism in the 1930's in attitude (if nothing else).
>
>Yes.
>
>This, from my perspective, is good. It explains why the players in many
>published adventures have been routinely at odds with the Imperium. Not
>for mere selfish motives, but from an honest belief in personal freedom!
>(OK, so I'm revisionist, but then so is Traveller "history".)

In that case, yes, I agree with you ... but there is also the assumption that,
as far as the basic rules and non-adventure specific supplements are concerned
that the players will be *part* of the system.

This is what I find *very* disturbing. If, somewhere, it was laid out plainly
that the Imperium was *not* a nice place, and that Imperials are the good guys
only occasionally, more or less by accident, and only ever in comparison to
*really* black evil, well, I could go along with it.

The assumption all through the material available is, however, the Imperium are
the "good guys", the "white knights" ... when they manifestly are *not*.

>>And we all sit back and accept it.
>>
>>I mean, doesn't anyone out there realise that the way things are going is
>>that
>>*you* are playing the Imperial Stormtroopers and supporting the "Dark
>>Side"? 
>
>Or I'm playing the Nazi diplomat who saved 20 000 Chinese during the Rape
>of Nanking. Or the students in the White Rose resistance group.  Or a
>miner struggling to organize against the combined forces of company and
>state police. Or...

Yes, and I have no doubt that some do (I always did) ... but there are going to
be a *lot* of people out there who, while not killing 20,000 innocents (well, on
second thoughts, maybe they are? <sigh>), *are* playing the Stormtrooper and
"just following orders".

>I _like_ playing the underdog.  I like players who take morals into
>account when gaming, and a mortally B&W universe takes away this aspect of
>gaming.

How unusual are you and your campaign? That's what I really want to know.

How many people out there *do* play the "Resistance" and *do* make it plain that
the Imperium is *not* the "white knight"?

>>Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an
>>American
>>thing? Why?
>[snip]
>>
>>Sure, you *could* argue that some of the planetary governments in
>>Traveller are
>>democratic. So what? The main game is with the big boys. The Imperium.
>>The Evil
>>Empire.
>>
>>There is an assumption, evidently deeply rooted, that democracy dies out
>>at some
>>time in the near future (or during the early Interstellar Wars) and that
>>it
>
>That it _does_ not, not that it _can_ not. Besides, the Vargr are the
>ultimate democrats: you gain influence only through the support of your
>followers :-)

I don't get the first sentence there ... are you saying that Traveller says that
Democracy cannot die out? Or that it doesn't die out? I would, personally,
dispute both assumptions.

There is ample evidence in the published material to support my feeling, too.

>>What do the rest of you think?
>
>I think you're (a) reading too much into a game background, and (b) about
>20 years too late to complain about Traveller's Imperium.

a) Hey, I freely admitted it to begin with!

b) No. The Empire of TLBB Traveller was *not* the "evil empire" ... this only
starts with the Rebellion (perhaps the very late CTrav stuff).

And the reason for complain is that it seems to be getting worse. More
ingrained.

>On gaming: I'm quite certain that Traveller (and other games) are
>fictional, and I'm also certain that any Traveller players that can't tell
>the difference have psychological problems that a different game
>background won't cure.

True. I'm simply commenting that no-one has commented on the trend in Traveller
so far, that I'm aware of.

For example, at the time of its original release, I deplored the *stated fact*
in "Warhammer" that chaos (= evil) WAS *GOING* TO WIN. That there was, quite
literally, NOTHING the players could do about it. I thought it was in
questionable taste at best (but, then, I've never liked Moorcock's work,
either). There was no point ... everyone and everything was tainted and doomed.

Warhammer 40K was worse, it was actively *sick* ... the idea of the Emperor
there was, well, frankly disgusting. It would have been right at home in Nazi
Germany.

It worries me that Traveller seems to be, perhaps, going the same way (but not
that far, of course!).

>Off gaming: I'm seriously worried about the resurgence of corporatism
>around the world.  The MAI (as it stands) scares the shit out of me. 
>Being told "work harder for less money, because our company must be more
>competitive" by a man earning millions in "productivity bonuses" while our
>stock plunges makes me look for convenient lampposts and some spare rope.
>While democracy has its flaws, I've seen nothing better, and I would live
>under no other system. (And, for the record, I do not equate "democracy"
>with "the American system of government". There are many forms of
>democracy, but I believe that all of them are better than any other
>alternative.)

And there are a lot of people, within and without governments, that are coming
to realise that the resurgence of American inspired laissez faire capitalism is
*NOT* a good thing. That because the US won the Cold War does *NOT* mean that
the American economic and political structures are suitable for the rest of the
world (or even for America). And I suspect that there will be a severe reaction
- -- even George Soros seems to have finally figured this out, and is probably
worried that *his* head is lined up in that noose (figuratively speaking).

>In summary: While I'm disturbed by world events, I don't see a trend in
>Traveller, and I'm not worried about the game's "history".

OK. It was just a thought.

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 01:09:06 -0400
From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

At 05:58 PM 10/10/98 -0400, Phillip McGregor wrote:

>>>The Interstellar Wars period is currently under development on the TWG.
>>>
>>>The Late Terran Confederation was not a "true" democracy by any standard. 
>>>Even at its formation its response to vocal critics was to quietly
remove them >>>to the distant colonies. From its beginning it was dealing
with dissidents by 
>>>"unpleasant" means.
>
>This is a sort of a philosophical post. Just some things that are (sort of,
>allowing for the fact that, in theory, its all a game) disturbing about
>Traveller's background and the way it has developed.
>
>Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as
expressed in
>Traveller is anti-democratic?

   The Third Imperium was founded on the premise that central authority is
the only proper way to run an interstellar government.  Sure, local people
can make local decisions about local problems, but there needs to be
someone overall in charge.  This is what seperates a crazy, chaotic sea of
disparate star systems from an interstellar government that has a uniform
system of trade regulations and a centrally controlled military force that
can protect all the systems more efficently from outside invasions. 

>The Imperium is a repressive dictatorial authoritarian regime based on a
mix of
>might makes right, power based on social stratification, divine right of
kings
>etc. 

   As with any hereditary monarchy, the degree of freedom that individuals
have is dependent upon the virtuousness of the ruler's offspring.  It
should be noted however that levels of oppression in a particular region of
a large empire will always be relative.

>Sure, *in theory* the Imperium is all sweetness and light ... but it allows
>(and encourages) the Megacorps to rip off the people for a Credit, as long as
>the Emperor gets his share. 

   That the person who is ultimately in charge of the very regulatory
agencies that would prevent unnecessary exploitation of the masses also
stands to gain monetarily from that exploitation (thus is put into the
ultimate conflict of interest) has not escaped my attention.

   It would take a *very* special kind of service oriented individual not
to exploit such a situation.  You might even get one about every other
generation...

>It suppresses technological development.

   To insure standards are being kept or to help the megacorps maintain
their monopolies.  You decide.

>It manipulates and destabilises member regimes (sure, the ones they do it
to in
>published adventures are ones that you and I would probably say deserve
it, but
>look at what the Ine Givar supposedly wanted ... per their
manifesto/background
>on Pyramid). It rips off innocents for its own socio-political ends (as per
>Milieu 0, but not limited to that Milieu by any means). It promotes the worst
>sort of radical laissez faire capitalism coupled with organised monopolistic
>practices.

   Name one government that doesn't.  OK the USSR had a socialist economy,
but if you think that the people really benefited from the exploitation of
their labor that took place under central planning, I'd like to suggest
that you have your medication changed.

>Worst of all, the underlying assumption of everything that has been
published in
>recent years is that all of this is inevitable.

   Just as the fall the Galatic Empire is inevitable in the Star Wars
triology, no?   Story arc is a personal decision of the author(s).

>MTrav and the TNE sequel to it was about how decadent all the power groups
>within the imperium were, at their base. All of them. Even Norris.

   Decadent power groups, or people caught up in the whirlwind of events?
If Norris took his cues from Machiavelli, he can hardly be blamed, IMHO.

>Milieu 0 is about the worst sort of might makes right dictatorship, with real
>parallels to european fascism in the 1930's in attitude (if nothing else).

   As I generally take everything in "T4" with a large grain of salt (no
more than would be found in a typical salt mine), I think not sure that
what you are reading is necessarily completely authoritative.  I prefer to
think of it as one point of view or interpretation of a complex historical
issue (similar to the American expansion into western North America).

>GURPS Traveller and CTrav are not as tainted, but the underlaying assumptions
>are still there, just not as obvious.

   Again, different takes on the same complex issue.  I'd *prefer* a canon
explanation, but...

>Now we are being told that the Late Terran Federation was a repressive
regime at
>least as bad as that of the Vilani Ziru Sirka.

   Confederation.  Anyway, you are talking about a government and a people
that had been in a state of emergency martial law for generations.
Eventually the masses think of the rationing and the curbs on freedoms as
being normal, and all that nonsense about inalienable rights as being so
much philosopher's BS.

>And we all sit back and accept it.
>
>I mean, doesn't anyone out there realise that the way things are going is
that
>*you* are playing the Imperial Stormtroopers and supporting the "Dark
Side"? The
>Emperor is *not* a nice guy. The Imperium is even actively (if
unintentionally)
>malevolent in its release of Virus.
>
>Everything in the game is becoming tainted by this.

   Outside the context of the game, the Imperium (and the Solomani
Confederation, Aslan Hierate, etc.) are only as good or as evil as you want
them to be.

>What is wrong with the people out there? Do they think that democracy is so
>useless and fragile that it cannot last ... well, its been around almost
as long
>as authoritarianism, and keeps on keeping on. Our current democratic
traditions
>owe much to the ideals of Greece and Rome (especially the Republic),
ideals that
>never died even under centuries of authoritarian rule.

   Authoritarian regimes called monarchies were around long before
democracy.  Democracy in the sense that we think of it (universal suffrage,
etc.) is a 20th century concept.  Yes, I *know* what the US Constitution
says, but certain minority groups (African-Americans in particular) had
their voting rights routinely taken away as late as the 1960s, whereas
women didn't get the right to vote nationally until the 1920s.

   Democracy is a fragile thing that can only exist in the most stable
countries.  Democracy is failing in Russia right now because it is becomng
unstable.  Revolutionary France (obstensively democratic) was highly
unstable and therefore Napoleon was the result.  Thousands of years of
human history show us that authoritarian rule or benevolent dictatorship
have been the rule and democracy (or anything resembling it) is the exception.

   Democracy therefore is a precious gift of modern technology and thinking
and not to be taken for granted, or surrendered lightly.

>In countries all around the world, countries where there has never been a
>democratic tradition, people are struggling even as we speak to build
democratic
>institutions ... some paying with their liberty and some even with their
lives.

   Most in vain I'm afraid.  You can't grow orange trees in Alaska for a
reason.

>It seems fairly obvious that, once you reach a certain level of education and
>material prosperity, the much despised "people" start wanting more than the
>generosity of authoritarian regimes. They want a real say in power, they want
>some control over it themselves. Look at Iran and the Shah, Indonesia and
>Suharto, probably Malaysia and Mahatir. Look at Taiwan and its rejection
of KMT
>authoritarianism.

   Iran traded the dictatorship of the Shah for the dictatorship of a
religious elite.  Yes, Suharto is gone, but those that will replace him for
the next few years will likely only be transitional figure until the next
strongman takes charge.  While Taiwan *is* democratic, that democracy will
vanish if/when the government in Taipei decides to move closer to the
central government in Beijing.

>And look at India. A democracy since 1947 ... with mass illiteracy and mass
>poverty on a scale that is really staggering. Yet, despite Pakistan's
example of
>what can happen in such a developing situation, India has remained a
democracy.

   India has a corrupt government in which the bureaucracy has too much
power and politicans take far too many bribes.  That's not me speaking,
that is individuals from India I've talked to speaking.

>Of course, the idea of a powerful stellar empire is an old one, dating
back to
>the golden age of SF ... an age when democratic ideals were under attack
>throughout the world, and it looked like democracies were in retreat. But the
>idea of powerful stellar federations/leagues/confederacies etc. is at
least as
>old.

   Traveller was written with the former concept, not the latter one in mind.

>Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an
American
>thing? Why?

   Why are people so fascinated by the British, Dutch, Swedish, etc.
"royals"?  Answer the question and you'll know. 

>Other SF RPGs are not so backward ...

   Cyberpunk: Oligarchy exploiting the masses

   GURPS: depends upon your take

   TORG: Terran Empire versus everyone else

   There are other examples as well, but suffice to say that democracy is
not necessarily a universal concept.

>Nope, there's something seriously wrong with this line of thinking, or so it
>seems to me.
>
>What do the rest of you think?

   I'm not sure where you are going with this.  Are you recommending a more
generous interpretation of the Imperium as in CT, or are you suggesting
that perhaps the whole concept of the Imperium be scrapped?

   If you read the TNE material, you saw that things *were* headed in the
direction of democracy in many regions.  The Reformation Coalition is a
democracy for the most part, or at least it has a representative from of
government.  The Regency is also headed in that direction as well.  It
would have been interesting to see what would have developed in the end,
but oh well....

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 00:22:57 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: democracy

William F. Hostman wrote:

>Democracy is a short-lived thing in history. No democracy has ever
lasted
>more than 300 years of unbroken democratic rule without breaks of
autocracy
>or violent rebellion that breaks away. Even Great Brittain has had
periods

Iceland  930 - 1662

>where their "democracy" has been temporarily shelved for autocratic
rule
>(especially the war of the roses, IIRC). Britain's form is the most
stable

for Iceland, this was forced from the outside (Denmark in 1662
and England in 1941)

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 01:34:36 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: SDB

In a message dated 10/9/98 5:32:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jamstar@glasscity.net writes:

<< LBB Supp 9 was Fighting Ships.  There weren't any plans in it, just USP's &
 descriptions & a rendering of the boat itself.  There's a 400 ton SDB in LBB 
 Supp 7 "Traders & Gunboats", but it's not *specifically* refered to as 
 Dragon-Class, unless you're refering to the dragon logo on the external view 
 of the boat...
 
 Keven >>

Yeah; I mixed the two up...

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 01:44:37 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

In a message dated 10/9/98 7:59:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
CardSharks@aol.com writes:

<< >My personal taste leans away from 1/2 dice. Is there a way to do this
  >without half dice?
 >>
 This was discussed to death six months ago.
 
 Marc
  >>

Ok...

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:10:18 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Trade and Nuke Dampers

In mail you write:

> Ian Whitchurch wrote:
>
>>>From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
>>>Subject: Re: Corsairs, economic analysis
>>>
>>> IMTU I allow PCs to get the jumps/year benifit IF they buy a
>>> shuttle for every port on thier route, rent a warehouse and office
>>> at every port, Hire a broker, warehouseman, shuttle crew, and a
>>> secratary.  diliveries are orbit to orbit, buy fuel at every port.
>>> They have not found the startup to be economical yet.

>> I can understand making them put a broker on retainer, hiring an
>> office and staff and so on, and buying fuel at starports is just
>> more efficient (*hint* try buying a small fuel refinery unit, and
>> refining fuel in your warehouse. Be prepared to apologise and sign
>> it over if fuel refining is some sort of Imperial-sanctioned
>> monopoly).

> They think that scooping and refining on the ship is more cost
> effective.
>
>> Cargo contracys being orbit to orbit I can also understand, but why
>> do you make them buy a shuttle ? In any case, if it is orbit to
>> orbit, you should be able to get away with a vacuum-proofed grav
>> truck.  At the least, let them rent one when their ship comes in.

> Shhhhh   don't give them to many hints (I told them that they had to
> have a shuttle meet them when they hit orbit, i.e. minimize down time)
> an orbit capible grav truck would work if you could get autorization
> from the port authority to leave cargo in orbit until the truck could
> get it all down.

Heck, have the contract be "FOB xxxx orbit". That means it's up to the
*customer* to arrange for orbit to ground transport. :-)

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

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:44:45 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium

In mail you write:

> Walter Smith wrote:
>
>> Right now our Viking Mars mission data tapes are useless
>> because no one can find a machine that can still read them.
>
> It's quite sad to think that somewhere in a junk shop lies just such a
> machine with a price tag of about $20!!

No such luck. Minis and mainframes go to scrap metal dealers, not junk
shops. 

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

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 01:56:52 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM co...

In a message dated 10/10/98 7:59:12 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au writes:

<< Nope, there's something seriously wrong with this line of thinking, or so
it
 seems to me.
 
 What do the rest of you think?
 
 Phil >>

Well; according to the rest of the world, us Yanks are trying to take over the
world through economic exploitation...:-). Seriously, though I think that most
gamers are like me. I just thought of it as an enjoyable game, with an
extensive history. This is the first time that I thought of the Imperium as
the evil empire. I guess it is really up to the SM to decide how to run the
Imperium.

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 02:08:38 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Democracy in Traveller

>Well in The Traveller Book it states that an empire is assumed because of
>the size of the state and the slow rate of communications. I would suggest
>that no matter what type of government you had there would be a fair amount
>of corruption in a state that size (so what we see in The Traveller
>Adventure could happen), but really didn't like the way the 3I was made
>'evil', in MT to a degree and more so in TNE (but at least TNE only looked
>at the late Imperium that had disintergrated into the Rebellion), and then
>in M:0 we found that the 3I was explictly morally bankrupt right from its
>inception. Because of M:0 I feel that even in G:T's no assassination
>timeline the 3I must inevitibly come apart, because if it doesn't the bad
>guys win.

I never got the impression of the 3I as the bad guys from MT. Misguided,
perhaps. Fragile, definitely. Fractured, Absolutely. Irreperable, No. Hell,
based upon careful placement of certain quotes, and good manipulation, I
even caused several "Pro-Lucan" players to have their CHARACTERS become pro
Dulinor. I would much rather there have been the shatter, and a resolution
to the civil war followed by rebuilding the shattered imperium.

I did always have the impression of the 3I as a morally bankrupt but
thoroughly ethical government. They DON'T violate their own rules, and
don't allow violations to go unpunished. They Do uphold a series of values:
the Credit, the Nobility, Noblesse Oblige, A strong military is the best
defense, Personal Honor is a requirement of leaders. They don't dictate
morality, nor any other ethical standards, to wit, they do NOT actively
support "Lazze Faire" capitalism at all... (no tax base there) nor do they
support command economies. They allow anything that keeps the imperial
nobility and credit afloat....

Also, IMTU, nobles tend to maintain dueling codes, especially for dealing
with nobles who lack a sense of Noblesse oblige.


William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 02:10:52 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Oops

sorry bout the message posted to the wrong list.... I'll correct that snafu
in my mailer to prevent further ones.

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 07:39:49 -0400
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: Ironclads

- -----Original Message-----
From: jim clem <travmind@hotmail.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: Ironclads
>----Original Message Follows----
>Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 11:14:50 +1300
>To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
>Subject: Ironclads
>Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
>
>At 23:31 5/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:
>>At 01:27 PM 10/2/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>While the latter was true of the Monitor and the Merrimak (IIRC the
>Monitor
>did sink while at sea in mild weather),
>
>===================
>
>Monitor sank off the Carolinas in a storm.
>
>
>
>Jim Clem, B.S.E.


It's true that the Monitor sank off the Carolina's in a "moderate" storm
(almost gale conditions.)  She was found and was declared a "National
Historical Monument" in the mid 80's. There was an attempt to lift her
"intact" from the sea floor that failed miserably about 10 years ago.  I
believe that they eventually recovered the bulk of the "metal" parts and
they are still being processed for preservation.  It is against the law to
dive on the sight and especially remove something from there.  This is very
difficult to enforce because as it turns out she was in way less than a
hundred feet of water, somewhere around 65' - 85' IIRC.   Even though the
"metal" parts are removed there are still thousands of pieces on the ocean
floor just in case you feel like breaking the law.  The article was "Cover
Story" in National Geographic about 10 years ago if you want to look it up.
Thom Harris <Amateur Historian>

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 12:52:03 +0100
From: "Marc Davison" <marc.davison@virgin.net>
Subject: [none]



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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 07:55:17 -0500
From: warlock@imagin.net
Subject: Re: Traveller CD

Bryan posted:
>
>> 1)  Galactic 2.3 and 2.4 will not run.  Starting Gal2.3 gives an error
>>  #75 detected around line 5460.  Now at least with this problem I know it
>>  is not my systems incombatability with the program....the Gal2.3 that I
>>  have on my hard drive was a download from Jim's page and works just
>>  fine...so I think something is wrong.
>>  
>>  2)  Galactic 2.4 runs until it asks that you pick from the "galaxy
>>  menu"  (i.e.  classic era galaxy, new era galaxy, etc...) and then
>>  crashes with error #75 detected around line 5722.
>>  
>
>      I need to know if anyone else is having these problems.
>
>Bryan

Bryan, although I don't have the CD (waiting for the next release),
I downloaded 2.4 from Jim's site and installed it when it was first
available. I also downloaded it Friday and installed it to a new
machine 2 days ago. Both installs are working perfectly with the
old install running under Win98 and Friday's install running
under Win95.

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 08:16:51 -0600
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com>
Subject: The Warehouse (was Re: Democracy and the Imperium)

>
>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:33:02 -0400
>From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
>Subject: Democracy and the Imperium
>
>> The Imperium is a repressive dictatorial authoritarian regime based on a
>mix of
>> might makes right, power based on social stratification, divine right of
>kings
>> etc. Sure, *in theory* the Imperium is all sweetness and light ... but it
>allows
>> (and encourages) the Megacorps to rip off the people for a Credit, as
>long as
>> the Emperor gets his share. It suppresses technological development. 
>
>This last one especially occured to me after reading all the things in
>GURPS Traveller from other science-fiction sources that DON'T exist in
>Traveller. Now, some of those things were developed as concepts in sci-fi
>long after Traveller was first published...but some were not. And yet,
>Traveller does not have them...or do they? Vilani "conservatism" is often
>blamed for why certain advancements, such as artificial intelligence, are
>not pursued...maybe the same thing is true when it comes to, oh say,
>faster-than-light radio? What if the plans and specifications for Jump
>Radio DO exist...and have for centuries...buried in a warehouse somewhere,
>because of the obvious difficulties such communication would cause for the
>Imperial hold on power?
>

The beauty of GURPS Traveller is that there is already a GURPS supplement
covering that warehouse.  It was originally located on Terra (remember the
end of Raiders of the Lost Ark?) but it could be anywhere by now - even the
Spinward Marches.  

It's called Warehouse 23 . . .

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #928
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Sunday, October 11 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 929



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Military History 
Re: Traveller CD
Re: Traveller CD
Re: Red Zones (was Ironclads)
thanks to New Jersey TMLers!
Info on Galactic 2.x and other stuff
Scientific's American Article on Space Effects (long)
Rolnam sector (was Malorn) and where it is.
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM co...
Re: Trade and Nuke Dampers
0-Grav Health (was -Re: Scientific's American Article on Space Effects  (long))
FOB & FAS (Was Trade & Nuke Dampers)
Re: Traveller CD
Planetology 101 part 4 (longish)
Re:Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 
Re: Info on Galactic 2.x and other stuff
Re: Planetology 101 part 3
Re: Big-ass dot map on the web?
Re: Big-ass dot map on the web?
Re: Planetology 101 part 3 
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (long)

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 08:26:24 -0600
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com>
Subject: Re: Military History 

Apologies for coming late to this thread - ironclads aren't my thing.

>
>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:11:09 EDT
>From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Military History (was re: Ironclads)
>
>>> Seventh Cavalry (Solomani Grav Infantry, "Boots & Saddles") claims to 
>>> trace it's history back to pre-American Civil War Terra, but their lineage
>>> has been challenged by some post-Invasion-Earth Solomani units. This 
>>> makes for a good intra or inter-service barfight excuse.  >>

And they should get their butts kicked for it.  The Seventh United States
Cavalry Regiment was established in AD 1866 - *after* the American Civil War.

The regiment's official motto is "Seventh First".  They are usually called
"Garryowen" for the word on their crest, which was one of their more
infamous commander's favorite Irish drinking songs.

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 16:27:40 +0000
From: "Jens Maskus" <Jens.Maskus@stud.uni-hannover.de>
Subject: Re: Traveller CD

That's no Problem, if get it from CD all files are write proctected, you must only 
remove WP from every file, command depends on Operation System.

Jens


On Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:30:04 EDT, Kagehira@aol.com wrote:

>In a message dated 10/5/98 9:28:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, tomt@scri.fsu.edu
>writes:
>
>> 1)  Galactic 2.3 and 2.4 will not run.  Starting Gal2.3 gives an error
>>  #75 detected around line 5460.  Now at least with this problem I know it
>>  is not my systems incombatability with the program....the Gal2.3 that I
>>  have on my hard drive was a download from Jim's page and works just
>>  fine...so I think something is wrong.
>>  
>>  2)  Galactic 2.4 runs until it asks that you pick from the "galaxy
>>  menu"  (i.e.  classic era galaxy, new era galaxy, etc...) and then
>>  crashes with error #75 detected around line 5722.
>>  
>
>
>	I need to know if anyone else is having these problems.
>
>Bryan
>

Jens Maskus

Jens.Maskus@stud.uni-hannover.de

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 16:27:40 +0000
From: "Jens Maskus" <Jens.Maskus@stud.uni-hannover.de>
Subject: Re: Traveller CD

That's no Problem, if get it from CD all files are write proctected, you must only 
remove WP from every file, command depends on Operation System.

Jens


On Sat, 10 Oct 1998 22:30:04 EDT, Kagehira@aol.com wrote:

>In a message dated 10/5/98 9:28:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, tomt@scri.fsu.edu
>writes:
>
>> 1)  Galactic 2.3 and 2.4 will not run.  Starting Gal2.3 gives an error
>>  #75 detected around line 5460.  Now at least with this problem I know it
>>  is not my systems incombatability with the program....the Gal2.3 that I
>>  have on my hard drive was a download from Jim's page and works just
>>  fine...so I think something is wrong.
>>  
>>  2)  Galactic 2.4 runs until it asks that you pick from the "galaxy
>>  menu"  (i.e.  classic era galaxy, new era galaxy, etc...) and then
>>  crashes with error #75 detected around line 5722.
>>  
>
>
>	I need to know if anyone else is having these problems.
>
>Bryan
>

Jens Maskus

Jens.Maskus@stud.uni-hannover.de

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 10:48:23 -0400
From: John Macek <macek@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Red Zones (was Ironclads)

Thom Harris wrote:

...snip...

> 
> they are still being processed for preservation.  It is against the law to
> dive on the sight and especially remove something from there.  This is very
> difficult to enforce because as it turns out she was in way less than a
> hundred feet of water, somewhere around 65' - 85' IIRC.   Even though the
> "metal" parts are removed there are still thousands of pieces on the ocean
> floor just in case you feel like breaking the law.  

I work for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - the
guys responsible for maintaining the Monitor Marine Sanctuary.  Besides
the Monitor, there are quite a few other marine sanctuaries, and places
declared off limits.  
With today's budget, I'm sure the number of patrols through these areas
aren't what they used to be.  

NOAA is in some ways similar to the IISS (even more so if you add the
Coast Guard too).  I would imagine budget cuts at the IISS would result
in reduced patrols and reduced maintaince of warning buoys around Red
Zones. 

John

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 10:56:53 -0700
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: thanks to New Jersey TMLers!

I was able to pick up a copy of GURPS:T last weekend due to directions to a
FLGS in the Mahwah, NJ area.  Thanks guys!


- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com -- These opinions are mine, no one else wants `em.
"Driving a Hudson Hornet on the disinformation triple bypass: cruising for 
burgers & garage sales. Hooks baited, lines entangled, roadkill cooked" 
                 http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 11:05:14 -0400
From: "Jeff/Michelle Norton" <jmnorton@earthlink.net>
Subject: Info on Galactic 2.x and other stuff

Hi,

Been off the list for several months (new ISP, iminate release from the
Army, new daughter, studying for my MCSE, ect, ect) and, finally, am
returning.

What is Galactic? I mean, I know it maps the Trav galaxy, but, where do you
get it?

Second, who was the member who posted all the crazy weapons from some arms
making family. After my HD died, I lost all the good addresses from most of
you all and would like to get in contact with him. I think his name was
Rodrick, tho I'm not sure.

Thanks for the bandwidth, (and, back to the TCP/IP studying...)

Jeff Norton

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:47:47 +0200
From: Guillem Plasencia <guillemp@ciberia.es>
Subject: Scientific's American Article on Space Effects (long)

I read last day on Scientific American (september 1998, pg. 39-43) an
article on the effects on the health of the astronauts of ungravity
(mainly, and also psichological effects) which are pretty nice to
roleplay (i know, i know... some device called gravplat or the like
creates a gravity field so people don't float in Trav. ships...but, what
if your civilization is enough low tech level? GM should then take a
look, just for some nice ideas :)

These are some of them :

- - visual-orientation illusions and feelings of self-inversion (Who has
putted myself upside down? :) specially when main engines are cutted
off.

- - in half or more space travelers, some motion sickness as headache,
impaired concentration, (Why did i just occupied my battlestation? :)
loss of appetite, stomach awareness (Hey,i didn't liked last pepperoni
pizza :) vomiting (Why do you return it?, or maybe worse), and these
usually do not last beyond the first three days of so of weightlessness.

- - Within minutes of being weightless, traveler's neck veins begin to
bulge, and the face begins to fill out and becomes puffy (TNE GM tip:
one difficulty level higher to flirting attempts).

- - Also, as fluid migrates to the chest and head, sinus and nasal
congestions results ( <two fingers pincering the nose> Did you see that
megaKleenex pack somewhere?).

- - Senses of taste and smell are altered, spicy food retains its appeal
best (Someone remembers Pizza Hot number? :P  ).

- - Kidney filtration rate increases by nearly 20 percent and remains at
that level for the first week (Naval Architect remind: add an extra WC
for every five crew at the ship).

- - And muscle atrophy, bone reduction from lower vertebrae, hips and
upper femur at 1 percent per month (elevated calcium levels potencially
causes kidney stones), immunological deficiency probably by
psychological stresses, and higher levels of radiation (i know, i
know...your spaceship has some high tech materials that prevents it :)

Just some ideas to GMs that play low tech civilizations.

Guillem Plasencia
guillemp@ciberia.es

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 16:55:49 +0200
From: Guillem Plasencia <guillemp@ciberia.es>
Subject: Rolnam sector (was Malorn) and where it is.

After some emailing traffic about where sector Malorn should be to be
unaware of the existence of the Imperium, and untouched by the Virus,
this is the place where i've decided to put it:

One sector coreward Kring Noor sector, or five sectors trailing and two
sectors coreward of Amdukan sector, the corewardest and trailingest
sector of imperium charted space (as in TNE rulebook).

If someone is already developing this sector for Galactic (which i
doubt), please email me and i'll move it.

Thank you to all of you for your comments and for your help to find it a
place.

P.S. My web site is almost finished...Just i can't send the files to my
server. When i can, i'll post its adress.

Guillem Plasencia
guillemp@ciberia.es

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 11:05:16 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM co...

In a message dated 10/10/98 7:59:12 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au writes:

<< Nope, there's something seriously wrong with this line of thinking,
or so
it
 seems to me.

 What do the rest of you think?

 Phil >>

I think ALL large governments are evil.  IMTU the Imperium is one of the
lesser evils. (depending on which Emperor is in charge)

Charles

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 11:05:26 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Trade and Nuke Dampers

Leonard Erickson wrote:

>> Shhhhh   don't give them to many hints (I told them that they had to
>> have a shuttle meet them when they hit orbit, i.e. minimize down
time)
>> an orbit capible grav truck would work if you could get autorization
>> from the port authority to leave cargo in orbit until the truck could

>> get it all down.
>
>Heck, have the contract be "FOB xxxx orbit". That means it's up to the
>*customer* to arrange for orbit to ground transport. :-)

Their brokers are buying and selling goods for them, thus they are thier
own customer.  You don't want to leave a cargo in orbit until the broker
can sell it, some morally-challanged individual would pick it up.  Or
the port authority would pick it up for littering the parking orbits.

Charles

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 12:54:10 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: 0-Grav Health (was -Re: Scientific's American Article on Space Effects  (long))

Guillem Plasencia wrote:

> - And muscle atrophy, bone reduction from lower vertebrae, hips and
> upper femur at 1 percent per month (elevated calcium levels potencially
> causes kidney stones), immunological deficiency probably by
> psychological stresses, and higher levels of radiation (i know, i
> know...your spaceship has some high tech materials that prevents it :)

Hmm.
Perhaps temporary -1 Str and -1 End per month in micrograv?
(-1 ST, -1 HT for G:T)
With one week in standard grav to recover each point?

This reminds me:  Are there radiation sickness rules for Trav,
somewhere?  I was thinking of converting the stuff from
the Morow Project.

Bloo

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 13:14:03 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: FOB & FAS (Was Trade & Nuke Dampers)

Leonard Erickson wrote:

> Heck, have the contract be "FOB xxxx orbit". That means it's up to the
> *customer* to arrange for orbit to ground transport. :-)

Well, from orbit, FAS (Free Along Side) might be a more appropriate
term. But if you want to get this detailed, check out the Uniform Commercial

Code.  Here is the relevant portion.  If you go to the source URL,
you can click to more detailed information on particular terms and other
Code references.

Bloo


http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-319.html


§ 2-319. F.O.B. and F.A.S. Terms.

(1) Unless otherwise agreed the term F.O.B. (which means "free on board") at
a named place, even though used only in connection with the stated price, is

a delivery term under which

     (a) when the term is F.O.B. the place of shipment, the seller must at
that place ship the goods in the manner provided in this Article (Section
2-504)
     and bear the expense and risk of putting them into the possession of
the carrier; or
     (b) when the term is F.O.B. the place of destination, the seller must
at his own expense and risk transport the goods to that place and there
tender
     delivery of them in the manner provided in this Article (Section
2-503);
     (c) when under either (a) or (b) the term is also F.O.B. vessel, car or
other vehicle, the seller must in addition at his own expense and risk load
the
     goods on board. If the term is F.O.B. vessel the buyer must name the
vessel and in an appropriate case the seller must comply with the provisions
of
     this Article on the form of bill of lading (Section 2-323).

(2) Unless otherwise agreed the term F.A.S. vessel (which means "free
alongside") at a named port, even though used only in connection with the
stated
price, is a delivery term under which the seller must

     (a) at his own expense and risk deliver the goods alongside the vessel
in the manner usual in that port or on a dock designated and provided by the

     buyer; and
     (b) obtain and tender a receipt for the goods in exchange for which the
carrier is under a duty to issue a bill of lading.

(3) Unless otherwise agreed in any case falling within subsection (1)(a) or
(c) or subsection (2) the buyer must seasonably give any needed instructions
for
making delivery, including when the term is F.A.S. or F.O.B. the loading
berth of the vessel and in an appropriate case its name and sailing date.
The seller
may treat the failure of needed instructions as a failure of cooperation
under this Article (Section 2-311). He may also at his option move the goods
in any
reasonable manner preparatory to delivery or shipment.

(4) Under the term F.O.B. vessel or F.A.S. unless otherwise agreed the buyer
must make payment against tender of the required documents and the seller
may not tender nor the buyer demand delivery of the goods in substitution
for the documents.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:50:55 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller CD

Kagehira@aol.com wrote:

> > 1)  Galactic 2.3 and 2.4 will not run.  Starting Gal2.3 gives an error
> >  #75 detected around line 5460.

Mine worked OK from the CD

> >  2)  Galactic 2.4 runs until it asks that you pick from the "galaxy
> >  menu"  (i.e.  classic era galaxy, new era galaxy, etc...) and then
> >  crashes with error #75 detected around line 5722.

I got the same problem with 2.4

Paul Bendall

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 14:19:00 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: Planetology 101 part 4 (longish)

Carbon 
    We can expect most life in this galaxy to be carbon based,
for two reasons. First, carbon is better suited for forming
complex organized structures than most other elements. Second, it
is thousands of times more abundant than any of its potential competitors. 

   On Hydrogen rich worlds, carbon is likely to be found in the
form of methane.  Methane has a lower atomic weight than
water and a much lower melting and boiling point, so it is more
volatile. It can be expected most in the atmospheres of gas
giants or in the ices of outer systems. Only the larger or cooler
of middle hydrogen worlds can be expected to retain much methane.
   Carbon and oxygen react better with each other better than
either does with hydrogen. A planet that can't hold its hydrogen will start
losing it from methane as well, as

methane + water = carbon dioxide + hydrogen.

The hydrogen is also easily stripped from methane by ultraviolet light:
Given half a chance, methane containing bodies tend to develop carbon
coatings.
A complex series of hydrocarbons and carbohydrates may also occur as
intermediates in these processes. As long as there is water available, life
can be supported:

1) water + energy = hydrogen + oxygen.
2) methane + oxygen = water + carbon dioxide
3) methane + water + energy = complex hydrocarbons + hydrogen
4) carbon dioxide + water + energy = complex hydrocarbons

   Methane and free oxygen will not coexist for long. The rate of 
reaction may be slow by human standards, but is rapid by planetary ones.
   Carbon dioxide is more stable than the monoxide and there is
almost always sufficient oxygen to convert the monoxide to the
dioxide, so carbon monoxide will seldom be seen.  It is also by
far the heaviest molecule yet considered, and will be retained in
a planet's atmosphere better than any other common gas. It is likely to
dominate the atmospheres of hydrogen-poor worlds unless there is some means
of removing it.  It may escape, be frozen out, (as almost, on Mars) or get
locked in the crust (as on Earth).  This last option requires liquid water
to help dissolve it and the metallic ions it can combine with: dry worlds
(like Mars and Venus) get stuck with it in the atmosphere.

  The third equation suggest that the methane breathers of science fiction
are actually plants! The animals would be hydrogen breathers. The odds are
stacked against methane-hydrogen ecologies, except on gas giants or in very
young planets. Not only is methane one of the more volatile gases, but an
extensive methane-consuming, hydrogen-generating plant life would tend to
drive a planet's evolution toward the hydrogen-poor end of the scale.
However, it is possible. On earth, there is a group of terrestrial bacteria
(methanogens) that use cheaper sources of hydrogen than water and convert
complex hydrocarbons into methane and water, extracting the energy for
their own use.  Higher forms of life are imaginable.
   The last reaction is familiar to us. Terrestrial organisms
run it both ways. Water is still required, but life processes can still
take place on otherwise hydrogen-poor worlds.
  

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 15:21:20 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re:Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 

>>That it _does_ not, not that it _can_ not. Besides, the Vargr are the
>>ultimate democrats: you gain influence only through the support of your
>>followers :-)
>
>I don't get the first sentence there ... are you saying that Traveller
>says that
>Democracy cannot die out? Or that it doesn't die out? I would, personally,
>dispute both assumptions.

Snipped a bit too much. Sorry.

Traveller history is only _one_ future history. The fact that a democratic
interstellar government doesn't last in the Traveller history is a
statement of historical fact (from a fictional Traveller perspective). I
don't see it as translating into Travller implying that a democratic
interstelar government is impossible. Although I'll admit that, given the
limits on communications, any democratic interstellar government would
have to rely on trusted representatives or take a _long_ time to make
decisions.

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 12:08:37 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Info on Galactic 2.x and other stuff

At 11:05 AM 10/11/98 -0400, you wrote:

>Second, who was the member who posted all the crazy weapons from some arms
>making family. After my HD died, I lost all the good addresses from most of
>you all and would like to get in contact with him. I think his name was
>Rodrick, tho I'm not sure.

You are referring to those dangerous fools at Famile Spofalum.  No quality
control whatsover.

If you'd like a good list of weapons for T4, go to:

http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gridlore.html
- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 13:09:20 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Planetology 101 part 3

Thad Coons wrote:
> 
>      Stars are far too hot for water to exist as a compound. It's
> present in gas giants, but since it's denser than hydrogen, you can expect
> to find it mostly in their lower layers. (These are no place for for beings
> with ideas of space travel to go looking for it).

Oooohhh NAAAaaarrrrrrrffff!

What a setting: "drilling" rigs floating in a GG atmosphere, sucking water and
other valuable materials from the depths...

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 15:14:44 -0500
From: warlock@imagin.net
Subject: Re: Big-ass dot map on the web?

Jeff Zeitlin wrote
> 
> Those of you who use the current version of GALACTIC from Jim
> Vassilakos know that you can get a dot map of a region of the
> galaxy centered on the sector you're currently viewing.  I seem
> to recall a massive version of this type of map, covering pretty
> much the entire Imperium, and possibly some of the surrounds,
> accessible on the Web.
> 
> WHERE?  I didn't think to bookmark it at the time, and now I
> haven't a clue as to how to find it again.

I have a copy I can email you. It's a 23k .GIF file using
multiple colors. Unfortunately I didn't keep the accompanying
text so I don't know what the colors represent. Let me know
if you want it. Anyone else want a copy?

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 15:30:23 -0500
From: warlock@imagin.net
Subject: Re: Big-ass dot map on the web?

Found the URL! The dot map is at:

http://ouray.cudenver.edu/~lwlguatn/IISS.html

(Thanks, Leroy, for keeping it available)

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:02:40 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Planetology 101 part 3 

> Thad Coons wrote:
> > 
> >      Stars are far too hot for water to exist as a compound. It's
> > present in gas giants, but since it's denser than hydrogen, you can expect
> > to find it mostly in their lower layers. (These are no place for for beings
> > with ideas of space travel to go looking for it).
> 
> Oooohhh NAAAaaarrrrrrrffff!
> 
> What a setting: "drilling" rigs floating in a GG atmosphere, sucking water and
> other valuable materials from the depths...

Three's been a couple of CT adventures that used that theme.  AAMOF, I used 
something like that in my very first campaign as the first adventure.  <grin>

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:08:21 +0100
From: Mark Watson <markw@antares.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (long)

Phillip McGregor wrote:

> Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as expressed in
> Traveller is anti-democratic?

Well, yes, it probably is, but Traveller should not be seen as an expression of
political philosophy.

I think that in terms of providing a background for a far flung interstellar empire
it's quite reasonable (in terms of "it could work this way", rather than "I'll vote for
that"), at least by the time of MTrav. The various people who run the imperium, and
those who could challenge them, all have a vested interest in the stability of the
imperium. They will do whatever is possible to maintain that stability, which includes
some fairly underhand tricks.

As a result, the imperium runs as a loose confederacy for general purposes. Worlds can
maintain their own governmental systems and legal systems, can even manage other worlds
as (very) miniature empires, but must submit to the authority of the imperial agencies
- - the army, the navy, the ministry of justice, even self-proclaimed agencies like IRIS.
They also effectively submit to the private agencies of the MegaCorps, since the
MegaCorps are each more powerful than any individual world.

The nobility system, at the system level, can only mean anything within the context of
the local government type - many nobles will be like today's King of Greece - he gets
invited to the royal occasions of other royal families, but has zero standing in Greece
itself.

Now, at some point this imperium has to establish itself, hence Milieu 0. The other
method would be for the individually settled worlds to come together at some point,
like the European Union or (presumably) the Star Trek federation. The Federation, by
the way, seems to be entirely run by Starfleet (with the exception of the doddery old
fool whose assassination was prevented in Star Trek VI) and if you want to look at an
anti-democratic organisation in Science Fiction, that gets my vote.

>
> MTrav and the TNE sequel to it was about how decadent all the power groups
> within the imperium were, at their base. All of them. Even Norris.

MTrav was an attempt to destabilise the Imperium using the old Raymond Chandler plot
technique of "man walks in with gun". All the stuff about decadence (and there wasn't
much) was just post-rationalisation. But I think MTrav (and the Digest material
published shortly before it) did a good job of fleshing out the Imperium and showing
how it had to work, although it still erred too far towards the noblesse oblige of the
nobility. I think in general the nobility are not so much motivated by high principle,
than by power, comfort and money.

TNE's main aim, from my perspective, was to make the Traveller setting one which was
appropriate to the construction of miniatures rules. But one of the other things it
tried to do was discredit the imperial setting and "fix" some things, like the
democracy issue. I think that had some interesting implications in the regency (where
the noble tier was extracted, but a hereditary monarchy was sustained), but for the
Coalition, you just ended up with Twilight 2000 in space. As predicted.

>
> Milieu 0 is about the worst sort of might makes right dictatorship, with real
> parallels to european fascism in the 1930's in attitude (if nothing else).

This is a poor analogy. Fascism was distinguished (if that is the word) by its
irrationalism. Milieu 0 is just realpolitik - it's "great power" empire building.

> Our current democratic traditions
> owe much to the ideals of Greece and Rome (especially the Republic), ideals that
> never died even under centuries of authoritarian rule.

You need to read more history. Our current democratic tradition (yours and mine) owes
little to the "democratic tradition" of Greece and Rome and more to the philosophical
thread that runs back through Paine, Rousseau, Locke and Hobbes. And that was mostly
based on Christian ideas of original sin. Parliamentary traditions trace back to the
Viking and Saxon assemblies, to feudal diets and medieval republics like Venice. Some
of the names, I'll grant you, trace back to ancient times, but were taken up by 18th
century liberals who romanticised Greece and Rome, rather than being directly descended
as part of a grander tradition.

Most of classical Greece had nothing like democracy. Athens, the principal and best
known democracy, was not a representative democracy in the modern representative sense
- - each citizen had a direct vote, and the general effect was of mob rule. To qualify
for a vote, you had to be a freeman. Athens' female population, and its very large
slave population (even Aristotle realised the Athenian economy was dependent on slaves)
did not qualify.

Roman political philosophers generally denigrated Athenian democracy. Under the Roman
Republic, the senate was made up of the members of patrician (ie noble) families, and
the senate elected the consuls. From 494 BC a veto was introduced which could be used
by the tribunes (elected by the plebeians) to constrain the executive power of the
consuls, but this hardly constitutes a representative democracy.

Both Athens and Rome would establish authoritarian regimes in times of crisis - these
were the original meanings of the words "tyrant" and "dictator". Both Athens and Rome
attempted to construct empires. Athens foundered as a result, whereas Rome succeeded.

And the idea of democracy did die out for very long periods of time, even in Western
Europe, and in parts of the world has never existed at all. For most of European
history since the fall of Rome I'd bet the average Western European's idea of a perfect
government was one which strictly imposed the tenets of Christianity, rather than one
which reintroduced ideas which were effectively lost until the Renaissance.

> Of course, the idea of a powerful stellar empire is an old one, dating back to
> the golden age of SF ... an age when democratic ideals were under attack
> throughout the world, and it looked like democracies were in retreat. But the
> idea of powerful stellar federations/leagues/confederacies etc. is at least as
> old.
>
> Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an American
> thing? Why?

Traveller's just a setting. It's a good setting, which makes for interesting
adventures. The political setting is just realistic enough to have genuine political
adventures. And the characters can question the politics if they like (unless it's TNE,
where that would get them vented).

I don't think you can portray history as a golden procession from autocracy to
democracy, or even as a natural progression. In a couple of hundred years time the
spread of parliamentary democracy will probably be seen as something imposed by the
cultural and military dominance, initially of Britain and France, and then of America,
and enabled by considerable improvements in global communication. Traveller
reintroduces the communications issues which make global resistance difficult; while I
think it conceivable that democracy would prevail, I don't think that an effective
democracy could be sustained across Imperial space in the face of the communications
issues raised by jumpspace - ie a large state covering the space of the imperium would
be difficult to govern as a single entity by democratic means - it would keep falling
apart, like Italy. (;-))

> Other SF RPGs are not so backward ...
>
> The Jovian Chronicles: A mix of democracies and non-democracies.
> Heavy Gear: Ditto
> ST:TNG RPG: The Federation is a democracy.

Not in practice, as far as I can see. It doesn't seem to make the producers idea of
good television.

>
> The Babylon Project: A democracy of sorts
> FTL:2448: Democracies.
> That Awful Rolemaster SF Game whose name escapes me: Democracies and
> non-democracies

Spacemaster. Guess what, it's an empire ("The Terran Star Empire"). And I actually
thought the background was OK, parts of it even better than Traveller, though I dislike
Rolemaster rules.

>
> Star Wars: The struggle between the Rebels (who are democratic) vs the Evil
> Empire

I'll have to assume the episode where Leia is elected princess is going to be in the
prequel.

>
> Space 1889: Mix of democracies and non democracies

Surely thou jesteth. It's a mix of what was around in 1889. The main terran powers are
Germany (monarchy) and Britain (theoretically a constitutional monarchy, effectively an
imperial bureaucracy).

> Space Opera: The main guys, the Terrans, are democratic. The Mercantile League
> is a sort of oligarchic democracy. The Confederacy are democratic (or would be
> if they could throw off the evil Korellian empire)
> Fading Suns: Well, you got me here!

You forgot:
2300AD: mostly democracies. Britain gets a romanticised monarchy.
Twilight 2000: anarchy. Groups of stranded American soldiers forcibly impose their idea
of order on the still smouldering remnants of Western civilisation. Most reprehensible
game setting ever.

>
> Nope, there's something seriously wrong with this line of thinking, or so it
> seems to me.
>
> What do the rest of you think?
>

I think idealising your system of government is a bad idea, because it stops you from
questioning it. To look at 2300, if you're playing "America good; France/China bad"
you're missing a chunk of the game, as well as a chunk of reality. In the real world,
governments are not directed by good and evil, but by means, ends and interests.
Remember that, and you'll have a more interesting game.

Whatever, with Traveller, if you don't like it - make your own universe.

I'll finish with a quote from Virgil:

"Make it your task, Roman, to rule the peoples by your command; and these are your
skills: to impose the habit of peace, to spare those who submit, and to conquer the
proud"

They should put that on the front of Milieu 0.

M

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #929
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Sunday, October 11 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 930



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: RW US aircraft
Re: Paperless Imperium
Re: SDB
Re: More Seattle Times Tech
Re Demos Impericus
Re: Planetology 101 part 3
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)
Re: 0-Grav Health 
Re Radiation
Re: MT Task System
Re: Running GURPS:Traveller
Re: Pets of the future
Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)
Re: T5 Wants
Re: Info on Galactic 2.x and other stuff
Re: Running G:T 
Re: "Dogs" in traveller
PING Leroy Guatney
re: Military History
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller...
Planetology 101 part 5

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 21:24:15 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

Rob Prior wrote:

>>You can't grep hardcopy.
>
>True. But you can get electronic paper. Saw it in a recent Scientific
>American. Stuff was invented years ago, but Xerox decided there was no
>market... SOund familiar?

I heard mention of some `electric paper' that Sony was investigating for
labelling of VCR tapes; but no details.

>>ObTraveller(1): There has been some talk of `manuals on holocrystal' as
>>a starship maintenance policy. I've never liked this idea, since the
>>time you most need the manuals is when the computer (and thus
>>holoreader) is down.
>
>I'll buy this. But hten, I'll also buy some self-contained, milspec
>standalone datacrystal viewers as well :-)

Better make sure that they're included in the Damage Control drills then
- - it would be irratating to discover that the last upgrade to your ships
mainframe made the datacrystals incompatible with your portable readers.

>>ObTraveller(2): How do ppl deal with operating systems for Traveller?
>>Assume that someone eventually got a monopoly; or are nasty referees
>>making players deal with incompatible software/hardware et al? 
>
>Microsoft eventually won. This also neatly explains Virus: it was actually
>Windows 1120 :-)

<LOL> - except that, true to form, the Virus would not have been ready
for beta-release until 1125.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 21:31:16 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: RW US aircraft

Seth wrote:

>As an ex-Long Islander, I follow Grumman closely. I was very sad when they got
>snapped up by Northrup (and sadder when Republic closed. The P-47 and F-105
>were very rugged "bring em home alive" birds. I used to commute THROUGH the
>Factory complex in Farmingdale- yes a public street ran through it! I remember
>the desolate vandalised buildings...:-(   ). EVERY A-6 is now a coral reef in
>Florida. The Navy decided that the F-18's were better because the maintenance
>hours were MUCH lower. They will have to shortly decide what to do with their
>support birds. My guess will be F-18 and S-3 Viking frames as a stop gap,
>until new aircraft are procured. 

It's far worse than you thought. The Navy is still dithering over the
CSA (Common Support Airframe), that will pick up the load from the
(gone) KA-6B tanker; the EA-6B EW aircraft; S-3 ASW aircraft and C-1
delivery a/c.

Currently, the S-3s are doing mostly tanker work, along with F/A-18s
carrying buddy stores.

>The only ones happy about this are the Viking
>drivers. They now have something to do besides ASW. They are bringing back the
>30's Scout-Bomber concept. 

However, the S-3 has actually lost the ASW role. This really diminishes
the carrier's contribution to task force ASW.

>This is a good idea, as the F-18 while an excellent
>bird, has very short legs. They are also adapting the F-14 into a Fighter-
>Bomber. I am not crazy about this, as these planes are too large and old to go
>low and slow, and they are the only planes in the fleet to carry the Phoenix
>(still vital despite AAMRAM), and there are NO more replacement frames in the
>pipeline.

The F-14 is going... to be replaced with more F/A-18s.

ObTraveller: Has anyone considered using multiple types of small craft
from the capital ships - strikers configured to attack capital ships;
fighters to fight small craft; and some form of EW aircraft to help get
past the capital ship's defences?

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 21:20:12 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium

Walter Smith wrote:

>Ever see the data retrieval system from the opening of
>"The Prisoner", or "Brazil"? Records were kept on paper or
>cards, automated systems would move them around like
>robots arms load tapes today. Wonderfully clunky... <g>

1960s Technology. There are already some companies that scan all
incoming (snail) mail, to minimise paper in the office. IMHO, they are
setting up for an almighty fall unless they have their disaster recovery
down pat.

(We looked at this kind of system for a part of where I work a couple of
years back, but it was seen as too high a risk - and manpower intensive
for the scanning!)

IMTU, there is a time and a place for paper. That time is when the
computer is broken; and the place is wherever you can't get a spare
computer.

>Seriously, OCR (optical character recognition) tech is workable
>today, should be usable in the future. Moving things from paper
>back to computer storage should be relatively easy, even without
>use of "smart watermarks" (a tech being tested today, little marks
>on the paper almost invisible to us that mean all kinds of page
>formatting stuff to the right kind of computer OCR system).

Why bother in future? People have already cut out the paper in fax.
transmissions - PC-fax-PC. Especially if you have a non-volatile, robust
storage medium like crystals.

>I could imagine some very important things (like Cleon's articles
>of Imperium, or whatever they called that document) being kept
>on paper as well as in computer storage, just in case.

Perhaps some documents can only be binding on a hard medium. Personally,
I'd be having those articles inscribed on platinum or somesuch, rather
than on paper (one careless laser discharge...)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>ObTraveller(1): There has been some talk of `manuals on holocrystal' as
>a starship maintenance policy. I've never liked this idea, since the
>time you most need the manuals is when the computer (and thus
>holoreader) is down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>The computer would be down, but I'd imagine the starship would
>have some portable holoreaders available.

Hopefully. If some, erm, person has just EMPd your ship, perhaps the
backup readers are not in such a good state either.

>My military and scout ships often have a mini-microfiche reader
>tucked away in a cabinet somewhere, just in case, with a stack
>of microfiches containing at least enough info to get the computer
>running again.

Good plan.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>ObTraveller(2): How do ppl deal with operating systems for Traveller?
>Assume that someone eventually got a monopoly; or are nasty referees
>making players deal with incompatible software/hardware et al? 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Since my CT computers are described as "very reliable" (work on a
>1 or better on 2d6), I'm assuming Microsoft didn't get the monopoly. <G>

:>

>IMTU, enforcement of technological compatibility (a jump-2 civilian
>starship must be able to work with any Model/1bis or Model/2 computer,
>for example) is one of those things that slows down tech advances 
>in a multi-sector interstellar state. 

That works both ways, too - it's hard to go ahead with your TL16
computer when it has to be backward compatible with those TL11
dinosaurs. Look how crippled Windows 95 is by even vestigial backward
compatibility.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:32:48 EDT
From: GypsyComet@aol.com
Subject: Re: SDB

The commonly known SDB is called "Dragon" in some places, "Shukugan" in
others. I recall seeing somewhere that Shukugan is the Vilani equivalent for
Dragon.
 That said, there is only one set of deckplans for this thing.  Traders &
Gunboats was the first place they appeared, and Seeker also did a set.  The
only other SDB in print was FASAs Freedonian SDB, the Condor...

GypsyComet

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:41:37 -0400
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: More Seattle Times Tech

- -----Original Message-----
From: Smart, David J (David) <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
To: 'traveller@mpgn.com' <traveller@MPGN.COM>; 'Home' <dsmart@imagin.net>
Date: Thursday, October 08, 1998 3:52 PM
Subject: More Seattle Times Tech

>
>Security For Your Eyes Only
>October 4, 1998
>
>Envision if you will a keyless world in which your house gets locked, your
>car secured and your bank and credit cards protected by an ironclad
>identification system that can't be fooled.
>
>The process, called iris identification, converts the ring of color in eyes
into
>a human bar code that is unique to every man, woman and child on the
>planet. This is not to be confused with the much older retina
identification
>technology, long used to control access to nuclear weapons, which
>compares the pattern of veins in the back of the eye. Unlike retina
>identification, which requires the eye to be placed practically against the
>camera lens, the iris method can work from up to 2 feet away.
>
>Exclusive worldwide patents on iris recognition are held by New
>Jersey-based IriScan, a company formed by a pair of ophthalmologists. A
>Cambridge University specialist developed the software that turns the flood
>of patterns, shapes and colors in an iris into the bar code.
>


My wife's eyes change color (green to brown and vice versa) how would this
work for her?  Enquiring minds want to know!!!!
Thom Harris

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 13:50:23 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Demos Impericus

>How unusual are you and your campaign? That's what I really want to know.
>
>How many people out there *do* play the "Resistance" and *do* make it
>plain that
>the Imperium is *not* the "white knight"?

My players are quite often either agents of the imperium, loyal citizens
with a slight criminal bent, or spys for the others (Solomani or Zhodani,
who are worse by far).


William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:52:43 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Planetology 101 part 3

At 01:09 PM 10/11/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Thad Coons wrote:
>> 
>>      Stars are far too hot for water to exist as a compound. It's
>> present in gas giants, but since it's denser than hydrogen, you can expect
>> to find it mostly in their lower layers. (These are no place for for beings
>> with ideas of space travel to go looking for it).
>
>Oooohhh NAAAaaarrrrrrrffff!
>
>What a setting: "drilling" rigs floating in a GG atmosphere, sucking water and
>other valuable materials from the depths...

Try reading "The Clouds of Saturn" by Michael McCollum.  He has vast
floating cities in the atmosphere of Saturn.  Due to a solar disruption the
population of Earth had to relocate or die, and they came up with living in
an inhabitable area of the GG's atmosphere in sealed cities.

Pretty cool, and ripe for a Traveller setting.  No FTL drives, and the
Maneuver drives were mostly inatmosphre.

Enjoy!




Kurt Feltenberger
kurt@blazenet.net


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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 23:53:38 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Jens \"Spacejens\" Rydholm" <spacejens@h72.ryd.student.liu.se>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

On Sat, 10 Oct 1998, Phillip McGregor wrote:

<snip>
> etc. Sure, *in theory* the Imperium is all sweetness and light ... but it allows
> (and encourages) the Megacorps to rip off the people for a Credit, as long as
> the Emperor gets his share. It suppresses technological development. It

The Imperium is _evil_, and the corporations certainly rip off the
commoners (or more likely, rip apart, if needed). I like the background
this way.

<snip>
> Milieu 0 is about the worst sort of might makes right dictatorship, with real
> parallels to european fascism in the 1930's in attitude (if nothing else).

The bottom line: Credits   (not an exact quote, but from the M:0 book)

<snip>
> I mean, doesn't anyone out there realise that the way things are going is that
> *you* are playing the Imperial Stormtroopers and supporting the "Dark Side"? The
> Emperor is *not* a nice guy. The Imperium is even actively (if unintentionally)
> malevolent in its release of Virus.

I do not have characters in my campaigns playing Imperial military. They
are more like rogue traders, making a profit where they can, and
occassionally helping people. Sort of like Han Solo in Star Wars, but in
the Traveller setting. The Imperium and the corporations IMTU are evil,
greedy entities who only really care about money and themselves.

I guess my Imperium is a really dark place to live in, but I do not have a
problem with that. Things get more interesting this way, since the major
force in the known universe is NOT on the characters' side. This promotes
running, quick-thinking and trickery, instead of calling for backup from
the friendly government. The characters probably hate it, but the game
gets _much_ more interesting this way. I and the players in my group like
it anyway.

+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Jens "Spacejens" Rydholm    http://spacejens.ml.org     |
| jenry023@student.liu.se     Telephone: +46(0)13-4730961 |
| ICQ UIN: 3844745            Linköping, Sweden           |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU ?tc t4 ru ge+ 3i- jt+ a ?st ls kk++ hi+ as++ va++  |
|      ?dr so- zh ?da sy+                                 |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
|               In politics, left is right!               |
+---------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 15:38:14 -0600
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com>
Subject: Re: 0-Grav Health 

>
>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 12:54:10 -0400
>From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
>Subject: 0-Grav Health (was -Re: Scientific's American Article on Space
Effects  (long))
>
>This reminds me:  Are there radiation sickness rules for Trav,
>somewhere?  I was thinking of converting the stuff from
>the Morow Project.

GURPS Space, pp. 76-77.  Reprinted and expanded in GURPS Compendium II, pp.
145-148.

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 13:58:57 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Radiation

>This reminds me:  Are there radiation sickness rules for Trav,
>somewhere?  I was thinking of converting the stuff from
>the Morow Project.
>
>Bloo
There were some excellent ones for MT in an Travellers digest (somewhere
between issue 15 and end)


William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 23:33:13 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: MT Task System

aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)  wrote:

>Yes, DGP stuff *was* (at least generally) great ... when you could get it here
>in Oz (the dsitribution channel was mildly broken and got worse as the years
>progressed) ... but their Task System turned me off. What can I say? It was
>probably a personal thing.


I like the MT task system, but prefer the T4.1 one. As for playing the
game, I use T4 merged with CT (background and starships) and MT
(background) with a dash of TNE (for Survival Margin - the best MT
supplement, ever).

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 23:21:08 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Running GURPS:Traveller

Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@concentric.net> wrote:

>Keven R. Pittsinger wrote:
>> Nor would they have the necessary world generation system to generate
>>homebrew sectors.  Planetary and system generation rules are in G:Space.
>>As is, G:T isn't standalone even with the core rules.  The LBB's *were*.
>
>Yea, So, MT wasn't. Unless you bought the boxed set.

Both the LBBs and MT were standalone if you bought the boxed sets. CT had
the starter edition if you wanted it in one book.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 00:03:29 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Pets of the future

steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com> wrote:

>I think a small a "Pets & Pests" or "101 Critters" might be a great
>resource.  Everything from Cats to Rats, Dogs to Parrots, and . . .
>(cue shark music from Jaws) . . . the dreaded . . . the feared . . .
>. . .
>. . .
>Space Hamster!

Blatent Plug -  101 Lifeforms (published by BITS) has plenty of creatures
which could be used for pets. Some are nastier than others...... such as
the dreaded Pandyflo. Indeed, you can have fun trying to spot the
inspirations for the various creatures in the book.

Dom (biased as he wrote 1/3 of this one).

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 00:18:46 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in T5. (Not Quite Long)

 "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net> wrote:

>This is the *very* thing that Joe Walsh and I had in mind with
>RPSCS.

Which is excellent. I would have liked to see a few notes in it on how to
run it abstractly though....

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 00:12:59 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: T5 Wants

DustyLV769@aol.com wrote:

>And definately Larry Elmore!  He did a lot of the B&W art in T4

Hear! Hear! We spend too much time slagging of the poor Foss art in T4 and
not noticing the good material. I liked the Elmore stuff - it had a real
flavour to it.

To be a little heretical, I *liked* the cover on the T4 rules, and some of
the other books (NAM, FFS2, MoS, PI, TAR, IS). The T4 cover looked like a
low tech type A free trader. Shame about much of the rest of Chris Foss'
material.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 20:24:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: neo@total.net
Subject: Re: Info on Galactic 2.x and other stuff

>Second, who was the member who posted all the crazy weapons from some arms
>making family. After my HD died, I lost all the good addresses from most of
>you all and would like to get in contact with him. I think his name was
>Rodrick, tho I'm not sure.

That would be Roderick Derroch Elliot, member of my currently-moribund
Traveller group. (Can you imagine playing in Derroch's campaign - where
every NPC is as morally corrupt and borderline psychotic as the Famille
Spofulam Weapons Division?)

I have forwarded your query to him. He's pretty busy these days, since
becoming a fully-fledged lawyer, but I'm sure he'll get in touch if he can.

Best,

Glenn

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <neo@total.net>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
    "Sex times Technology equals The Future." -- J.G. Ballard

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 21:43:53 -0400
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
Subject: Re: Running G:T 

At 01:33 PM 10/8/98 -0500, Keven wrote:
<Snip>...
>Simple.  Every previous incarnation of Traveller included starship & star 
>system generation rules as well as all the rules you need to have a
standalone 
>game.  GURPS doesn't do this.
>
>The supplements to CT and MT (having practically *zero* experience with TNE 
>and *absolutely* none with T4) were nice to have, but were not *necessary*
for 
>play as the basic set was standalone.  G:T is *NOT* standalone.  What is so 
>difficult to understand here?
>

Supplement is not rules set!  

Comparison is not valid!  

I'm gonna sit back and listen awhile; several, more eloquent than me, are
presenting these two thoughts, even as I write...  ;-)





Bill Rutherford
worj@topgun.cinecom.com

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 21:44:17 -0400
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
Subject: Re: "Dogs" in traveller

At 01:35 PM 10/8/98 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
>Does anybody have ideas about what 'companion' animals would be like in the
>Traveller universe?  What 'Biological' inhancemant would good old shep go
>through to become the pet of tomarrow?  What about felus dimesticus?  What
>new 'pets' and gaurd animals would there be?  I think such animal could add
>some interesting color to traveller ships passengers and adventures.  How do
>the aventures deal the the 'gaurd beast' protecting the warehouse where
>their confiscated cargo is stored?
>

There's a thought.  Your trader docks with a Vargr to - trade - and your
pet dog gets loose...  "Slavers!" cry the Vargr, going for their guns...



Bill Rutherford
worj@topgun.cinecom.com

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 02:41:10 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: PING Leroy Guatney

Leroy, do you read this list (I don't recall any recent posts
from you)?  If so, I've got a question about your dot map with
the mains colored in:

How did you decide whether a particular chain should be colored
as a significant main?  In a workup I did for GAL of Fornast
sector, I named as a main a chain of stars that you didn't color
in, "connecting" the Antares Main (cyan on your map) with the
main that on your map is colored brown, leading from that area to
connect with the Vilani Main (purple on your map).  The chain in
question is longer than some of the chains you _did_ opt to
color, which is why I'm curious.

Also, are you planning on expanding on this map? (It's COOL!)

If you're _not_ reading the list, would someone who is be so kind
as to either forward this to him, or send me his email address,
or both?
- --
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:34:06 -0400
From: "Walter G. Smith" <smithw@hartwick.edu>
Subject: re: Military History

Christopher Thrash wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> Seventh Cavalry (Solomani Grav Infantry, "Boots & Saddles") claims to 
>>> trace it's history back to pre-American Civil War Terra, but their lineage
>>> has been challenged by some post-Invasion-Earth Solomani units. This 
>>> makes for a good intra or inter-service barfight excuse.  >>

And they should get their butts kicked for it.  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Many of them are drop commando types. There is little justice in
inter/intra-service rivalries.

Chris again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Seventh United States
Cavalry Regiment was established in AD 1866 - *after* the American Civil War.

The regiment's official motto is "Seventh First".  They are usually called
"Garryowen" for the word on their crest, which was one of their more
infamous commander's favorite Irish drinking songs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As a 20th c. individual lords his knowledge of 19th c. military history
over some people piecing things together 50+ centuries later... <G>

Are you sure of the found date? I'd thought the 7th was around during
the early "Indian Wars" (when a lot of Civil War cavalry commanders
earned their combat experience). If not, no big deal - an occaisional
running gag in my Traveller campaign was glaring errors in ancient
Terran history. What, you didn't know that the Irish painted their
bodies green and invaded New York City?

Walt Smith

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 23:00:06 -0400
From: "Walter G. Smith" <smithw@hartwick.edu>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller...

Was reading one of Weber's books, _A Short Victorious War_, when
I saw Weber's take on the scariest thing that can happen to a
democracy: what happens when the mob realizes they can get more
bread and circuses just by voting for it.

The Republic of Haven is painted as a corrupt democracy. The leaders
rule, but only as long as they propitiate the howling masses. At every
level the leaders care only for their own advancement, at the expense
of the people they despise yet claim to represent. The only thing keeping
it from being an oligarchy is the facade that must be preserved, lest
the mob rise and rip apart those at the top.

The scary part to me was the way the corruptions, the bad decisions 
accumulated into an unstoppable force. The leaders could see how
their actions were not making things better, even making things
worse. Their earlier actions, and the actions of leaders before them,
had painted them into a corner that shrank almost daily. As long as
they could keep up appearances, they could be in charge of a large
interstellar state. When things started to slip, they could very well
be dead. And it did not appear, even if they had the knowledge and
the will, that there was anything to be done about it.


Walt Smith

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 23:03:10 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: Planetology 101 part 5

Nitrogen 

     Ammonia lovers find that the universe is biased against
them, too.
     Nitrogen is less than a tenth as abundant as carbon. On gas
giant types, it is commonly found in combined form, as ammonia.
If there were no oxygen or carbon to be considered, this would
force a ammonia-in-excess hydrogen or ammonia-in-excess nitrogen
split, just as oxygen does. Nitrogen has an odd atomic number and
odd number of combining electrons, which makes its combinations
with oxygen a bit complicated and those with carbon even worse.
    Unlike hydrogen compounds and carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides require
energy to form: they are not normally present in large amounts. If they do
form, they tend to spontaneously decompose to a mixture of oxygen and
nitrogen. (Sound familiar, Terrans?)  The nitrogen oxides can be stabilized
somewhat by reacting with water (as in nitric and nitrous acids) or with
hydrocarbons.
   Nitrogen can combine with carbon, but not easily. A little bit of
hydrogen stabilizes the compounds, as in hydrogen cyanide. These are fairly
easily oxidized to nitrogen and carbon dioxide if oxygen is present.
      Ammonia is somewhat more volatile than water, (lighter and
lower-boiling) but somewhat less than methane. This puts it more on the
high-hydrogen end of the scale. 
     As with methane, a planet that can't hold its hydrogen is likely to
start losing it from its ammonia as well, with nitrogen as the remainder.
(as on Titan and Earth). Ammonia is somewhat closer to water in its
properties, so it might stick around a bit better than methane.
    The difficulty is that a planet that can keep its ammonia is even more
likely to keep its water, which is up to a hundred times more abundant in
the first place. Ammonia dissolves quite well in water, and dissolved
ammonia acts as an antifreeze. This could extend the life zone into colder
regions. On the other hand, once dissolved, there are plenty of negative
ions for ammonia to react with: it might get locked up in the crust.
    Ammonia-oxygen atmospheres are unstable: they rapidly evolve to
nitrogen-water instead. (@#$ Terrans again)
   Given that the carbon compound-water reactions are the basis of
life, the inclusions of nitrogen and ammonia broadens the
possibilities somewhat.  The reaction
Nitrogen + water + energy = nitrates + ammonia;
is an interesting possibility. There are terrestrial bacteria
which run modifications of this reaction in both directions. If ammonia is
present, it's likely that some amount of cyanides are, also.
   Nitrogen atmospheres are familiar to us earth-dwellers and probably come
next after carbon dioxide atmospheres in importance on hydrogen-poor
worlds. Nitrogen remains a medium-weight gas even when the hydrogen
containing compounds and carbon dioxide freeze out.

Sulfur
     This is even less abundant than nitrogen, and is a major
component of planetary envelopes only in exceptional cases.
     Sulfur has a volatile compound with hydrogen: hydrogen
sulfide. In a hydrogen poor environment, Sulfur does tend to form
chains as carbon does, but it cannot form the side branches and
multiple rings that make carbon chemistry interesting and
complex.
    In an oxygen rich environment, sulfur combines with oxygen to
form sulfur oxides. These, like carbon dioxide, can be
mineralized and locked up in the crust. When other volatiles are
gone, sulfur and sulfur oxides are next in line. In Sol system,
there is Jupiter's satellite Io with its sulfur volcanoes, or the
sulfuric acid clouds which have scavenged what little water
remains on Venus.
  

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #930
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 12 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 931



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

TravGeekCode
Re: 0-Grav Health (was -Re: Scientific's American Article on Space Effects(long))
Re: Military History 
Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 
Re: Democracy and the Imperium
Re: Re Radiation
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Re: Re Radiation
Re : GURPS Trav power plants
Radiation rules
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: The Warehouse (was Re: Democracy and the Imperium)
Re: Radiation rules
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:31:35 +1000
From: Graeme_Batho@agd.nsw.gov.au
Subject: TravGeekCode

Could someone please let me know an address that explains the TravGeekCode
/ IMTU Code, or re-post the explanation if it's local to the list. I
already know the GeekCode - I just want to know the Traveller variant.
Thanks.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:07:01 +1300
From: "Anson Betts" <Lord.High.Executioner@xtra.co.nz>
Subject: Re: 0-Grav Health (was -Re: Scientific's American Article on Space Effects(long))

>This reminds me:  Are there radiation sickness rules for Trav,
>somewhere?  I was thinking of converting the stuff from
>the Morow Project.
>
There's some stuff in the Cyberpunk supplement Deep Space that's fairly
generic.

Cheers,
 Anson

I want to die in my sleep like my grandfather,
not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 01:18:46 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Military History 

> Christopher Thrash wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> Seventh Cavalry (Solomani Grav Infantry, "Boots & Saddles") claims to 
> >>> trace it's history back to pre-American Civil War Terra, but their lineage
> >>> has been challenged by some post-Invasion-Earth Solomani units. This 
> >>> makes for a good intra or inter-service barfight excuse.  >>
> 
> And they should get their butts kicked for it.  
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> Many of them are drop commando types. There is little justice in
> inter/intra-service rivalries.
> 
> Chris again:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> The Seventh United States
> Cavalry Regiment was established in AD 1866 - *after* the American Civil War.
> 
> The regiment's official motto is "Seventh First".  They are usually called
> "Garryowen" for the word on their crest, which was one of their more
> infamous commander's favorite Irish drinking songs.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> As a 20th c. individual lords his knowledge of 19th c. military history
> over some people piecing things together 50+ centuries later... <G>
> 
> Are you sure of the found date? I'd thought the 7th was around during
> the early "Indian Wars" (when a lot of Civil War cavalry commanders
> earned their combat experience). If not, no big deal - an occaisional
> running gag in my Traveller campaign was glaring errors in ancient
> Terran history. What, you didn't know that the Irish painted their
> bodies green and invaded New York City?

No, but it's been noted that the ancient Terrans dated their calender from the 
Toruture of the Christ Gang: Elvis, Karl, and JFK Marx, a.k.a., the Marx 
Brothers.  On some planets there even is a St Elvis Cathedral, affilliated 
with the One True Roman Catholic Church (Elay Synod).

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:36:34 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 

How you actually run the Imperium in your TU (if the imperium stil exists,
or exists at all) is up to you. On a theoretical level, no form of govt. is
any better athan any other.  The practice of govt. is what counts.  Without
getting into empirical arguments about how things have worked out on earth,
Life under the Sultan of Brunei is sweet, under the German Democrativc
Republic not so.  The UK is a constitutional monarchy without a
constitution, and whilst the US may be a domocracy of sorts - and all
people have rights, not all humans were considered people until quite
recently.  Contrarily I thought the TNE RC seemed gripped with some
fixation about liberal American values, and the slaughtering of 'rag-head'
- - equivalent - targets for our Good 'ole mrines to wup.   
On another level the kind of govt. may well depend upon practical matters
such as size, and distance.  In any case the Imperium consistes of many
worlds with many govt. types.  
Finally What you ought to be concerned with are the values that the various
governments actually hold dear, there is no necesary connection between
govt type (not trav. gov. type) and society values.
At the end of the day it is up to you.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:38:50 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Democracy and the Imperium

>
>And allowing democratic planets to exist within the Imperium may eventually
>be the cause of it's downfall....because it is there that free-thinkers can
>spread their ideas, where rebellions can be born. The Imperium would have
>to begin quashing such worlds eventually..and this could lead to even
>greater problems.
>
>
Free thinkers are not the exclusive preserve of democracies.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:54:17 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Re Radiation

What sort od detail are you looking for?
Colin'

>>This reminds me:  Are there radiation sickness rules for Trav,
>>somewhere?  I was thinking of converting the stuff from
>>the Morow Project.
>>
>>Bloo

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 00:19:23 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

"Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@mindspring.com> wrote

> >In countries all around the world, countries where there has never 
> >been a democratic tradition, people are struggling even as we speak 
> >to build democratic institutions ... some paying with their liberty 
> > and some even with their lives.

> Most in vain I'm afraid.  You can't grow orange trees in Alaska for 
> a reason.

You can grow orange trees in Alaska just fine, as long as they are in a
greenhouse. [I have seen them.]  To continue the analogy freedom is a
fragile plant which needs nurturing but can be made to grow in any type
of political soil.  The notion that an authoritarian culture is destined
to remain autoritarian is a bit of an overstatement it might bw more
acurate (IMNSHO) to say that cultures without traditions of freedom
_tend_ to remain authoritarian.  

- -- 
Peter Newman		pnewman@alaska.net
- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Member in Good Standing of The Society to Turn Wesley Crusher Into 
a Small Styrofoam Dodecahedron

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 04:33:41 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Re Radiation

Colin Hutchinson wrote:

> What sort od detail are you looking for?
> Colin'

I'm just thinking of a table of rads to stat damage
(Endurance primarily, I guess).  And instead of
keeping track of lifetime rad doses, a permanent
Endurance decrease.  Of course, temporary
End damage would generally be much more
debilitating.

Bloo

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 18:32:09 +1000
From: "Robert O'Connor" <Robocon@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Re : GURPS Trav power plants

Joseph Dietrich wrote :-

> Okay, so does someone care to put some real numbers per TL per kW/h for
> GURPS Vehicles-style fusion fuel consumption?
>
Using FF&S2 :-
Fuel rate (m^3/MW-year) is 0.15m^3 liquid deuterium (0.14 tons/m^3), or
0.1m^3 liquid hydrogen (0.07 tons/m^3).

If we 'fuse' deuterium completely to helium-4, 1/5000 of fuel mass is
converted to energy as per E=mc^2.

If we 'fuse' hydrogen (protium) completely to helium-4, 1/1800 of fuel
mass is converted to energy.

The reactors in FF&S2 burn 11.5% (deuterium) or 12.5% (hydrogen)
of their fuel, assuming 80% plant efficiency (50-60% prob'y more
realistic) and 90% efficiency in generating electricity.

So : basic fuel rates - 23 L / MW-year deuterium
                      - 16.6 L / MW-year hydrogen
with an '60/90' power system.

Looking at GURPS Vehicles :-
GURPS TL    Plant Weight (lb)
9           (1 X kW)+ 20000
10+         (0.2 X kW) + 2000
Volume = Weight / 50 (cubic feet) for all plants

Internal tankage isn't going to be a mass problem ; it may be a
volume one, however...

Also on this thread, David Golden wrote regarding reactionless thrusters
:-

>         Sure enough, they do ... constant power input for constant thrust
> (i.e. constant acceleration), therefore the total energy input is
> proportional to time.
>         Thrust leads to a change in velocity, therefore a change in kinetic
> energy. Change in velocity is proportional to the time you thrust ...
> but the change in KE is proportional to the change in velocity
> squared so the input energy is proportional to time, but the
> resulting change in KE is proportional to time squared--so energy is
> being created out of nothing.
>
It's a little more obvious than the above quote would suggest :-
momentum is not being conserved, hence the term
'reactionless thruster'. This is the physical law being mangled.

A rocket accelerates because it throws fuel out the back.
Initial momentum overall is zero.
The rocket moves forward as the fuel moves in the opposite direction.
Overall momentum for the system of rocket and fuel is always zero.

(Snide aside :- As written in FF&S2 :-
High-efficiency AG : 0.0007 MW / kN thrust - 700J (1 Joule = 1
Newton.metre) per second to produce 1000N force ; implied efficiency
1000/700 = 140% - energy for nothing++++)

Robert O'Connor
Medico, Gearhead, Gaming Enthusiast

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 18:32:59 +1000
From: "Robert O'Connor" <Robocon@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Radiation rules

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- --------------C5F5FBCEC0512EB3E0EA0D66
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bloo wanted some rules re radiation exposure.
There are also some DGP rules which appeared in
an issue of the Traveller's Digest way back when,
if you want those.

Hope this is of some use.

Robert O'Connor
Medico, Gearhead, and Gaming Enthusiast


- --------------C5F5FBCEC0512EB3E0EA0D66
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="radiation_rules.txt"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="radiation_rules.txt"

Date: Fri, 29 Sep 1995 12:30:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Muir Macpherson <muirmac@uclink.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Rads

Re: Radiation T:2000 rules

Effects of Exposure:  Exposure to lower levels of radiation will produce 
temporary illness, while higher levels can ckill.  All exposure is 
cumulative.  When a character's accumulated rads reach or surpass 50, he 
must be checked for radiation illness.  Thereafter, each time the 
character accumulates one or more rads he must be checked for radation 
illness.  however, the character is checked for radiation illness only 
once per day on each day that he accumulates additional rads.
	The Radiation Illness Chart (below) gives the multipliers used to 
determine the chances of illness and death from exposure to radiation.  
Use the rad level on the chart that is closest to (without exceeding) his 
accumulated rad level.

Rads	Slight Illness	Serious Illness	Death
50		1.0		nil	nil
100		0.5		1.0	nil
300		0.2		0.5	1.0
400		Auto		0.2	0.5
600		Auto		Auto	0.2
800		Auto		Auto	Auto

	Multiply the character's Constitution by the multiplier to 
determine his target number (round fractions up).  Roll 1D10.  If the 
number rolled is equal to or less than the chance, the character avoids 
the effect.

Slight Illness:  Nausea, vomiting, and headaches.  Onset is 1D6 hours 
after exposure.  The character has strength, agility, and intelligence 
halved for the duration of the illness.  Symptoms last one day at lower 
levels, two days if exposure is greater than 600 rads.

Serious Illness:  First suffers slight illness, as above,.  Then suffers 
serious illness and is incapacitated with severe vomiting and diarrhea, 
spotting on the body caused by bleeding under teh skin, and blood int he 
stool and vomit.  Onset of serious illness is 2D6 days after exposere at 
levels less than 300 rads, 1D6 at levels above that.  Incapacitation 
lasts 1D6 days, plus one day for every two days spent without bed rest 
and medical care.  The amount of medical care required is the same as for 
a character with a serious wound to two body parts -- or two additional 
body parts if the character is already wounded.  General illness, 
approximating the effects of slight illness listed above, will persist 
for 1D6 weeks.

Death:  The character first suffers from slight radiation illness and 
then from serious radiation illness.  During the incapacitation period 
(and usually within 30 days of exposure) the character dies.

	At higher tech levles, presumably an automed could treat slight
and serious illness at increasing levels of exposure, and a full medical
facility could prevent death, and "roll-back" a persons cumulative
exposure.  The description in FF&S of the consequences of getting too
close to a Fusion Drive suggest that bone marrow transplants etc, would be
necessary, so presumably the character is till going to be laid up for
some time. 

	*Apologies to those not interested in radiation, but enough people 
had expressed an interest that I thought it was worthwhile.  
	
	--Muir




- --------------C5F5FBCEC0512EB3E0EA0D66--

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:35:02 +0100 (BST)
From: Ewan Quibell <E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998, Matt Clonfero wrote:

> >Microsoft eventually won. This also neatly explains Virus: it was actually
> >Windows 1120 :-)
> 
> <LOL> - except that, true to form, the Virus would not have been ready
> for beta-release until 1125.

ROTFL, and had to try and explain to my colleges what I was laughing about
...

> Aetherem Vincere
> Matt

Ewan

	Ewan Quibell
	Data Communications Technician        The Game's afoot:
	Computer Centre                       Follow your spirit, and apon
	University of Brighton                  this charge
                                              Cry 'God for Harry, England,
	E.D.Quibell@brighton.ac.uk              and Saint George !'

                                                    Henry V 3:1
	#include<stddisclamer.h>                    W. Shakespeare

	My spelling is entierly due to dyslexia, typoes and poetic license

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 00:55:07 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: The Warehouse (was Re: Democracy and the Imperium)

Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com> wrote

> >This last one especially occured to me after reading all the things 
> >in GURPS Traveller from other science-fiction sources that DON'T 
> >exist in Traveller
> >Traveller does not have them...or do they? Vilani "conservatism" is 
> >often blamed for why certain advancements, such as artificial 
> >intelligence, are not pursued...maybe the same thing is true when it 
> >comes to, oh say, faster-than-light radio? What if the plans and 
> >specifications for Jump Radio DO exist...and have for centuries  
> >...buried in a warehouse somewhere, because of the obvious 
> >difficulties such communication would cause for the Imperial hold on 
> >power?

> The beauty of GURPS Traveller is that there is already a GURPS 
> supplement covering that warehouse.  It was originally located on 
> Terra (remember the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark?) but it could be 
> anywhere by now - even the Spinward Marches.  
> 
> It's called Warehouse 23 . . .

How is this for a location for the Warehouse?

"Tarin Sink/Corridor 1432	D AE3301-6

Tarin Sink is an Imperial client state and site of Corridor Research
Station Epsilon.  The planet was colonized by nine extended families
during the wave of spinward expansion in the late 300's.  Most of Tarin
Sink's modern inhabitants are their descendants.  
Later, the Imperium constructed a seperate research facility staffed by
its opwn personel.  This station grew until it was officially designated
Research Station Epsilon.  Epsilon serves as a clearinghouse for
unexplained phenomena.  Within it are records of bizaare happenings and
mysterious relics dating back tens or hundreds of millenia. 
Untranslated nonhuman acounts and strange engines predating the First
Imperium await the person able to read or operate them.
Many items in the station's collection are so odd that they are freely
displayed to the public, although Tarin Sink's position within the Great
Rift limits the number of visitors.  Imperial researchers, completely
baffled by these objects, hope that someday, someone will pass throug
the station who can shed some light on these mysteries." - Library Data
of the Corridor Sector, Travellers Digest #18 pg 34, DGP 1990.

Tarin Sink has always been one of my favorite potential settings for an
adventure.  Acess to Tarin Sink will require a ship capable of Jump 4 or
a misjump.  The library data already suggest a Warehouse 23ish place
about the only change I might suggest making is establishing that the
Warehouse was moved here earlier, perhaps by the Rule of Man.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 05:40:43 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Radiation rules

Robert O'Connor wrote:

> Bloo wanted some rules re radiation exposure.
> There are also some DGP rules which appeared in
> an issue of the Traveller's Digest way back when,
> if you want those.
>
> Hope this is of some use.
>

Yes. Thanks much.

Bloo

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:50:23 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 10:29:36 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 01:09:06 -0400
>From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@mindspring.com>
>Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
>
>At 05:58 PM 10/10/98 -0400, Phillip McGregor wrote:
>
>>>>The Interstellar Wars period is currently under development on the TWG.
>>>>
>>>>The Late Terran Confederation was not a "true" democracy by any standard. 
>>>>Even at its formation its response to vocal critics was to quietly
>remove them >>>to the distant colonies. From its beginning it was dealing
>with dissidents by 
>>>>"unpleasant" means.
>>
>>This is a sort of a philosophical post. Just some things that are (sort of,
>>allowing for the fact that, in theory, its all a game) disturbing about
>>Traveller's background and the way it has developed.
>>
>>Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as
>expressed in
>>Traveller is anti-democratic?
>
>   The Third Imperium was founded on the premise that central authority is
>the only proper way to run an interstellar government.  Sure, local people

Ah, but is it a *correct* premise? The Terran Government, prior to the current
work of the TWG which is evidently making them out to be just as fascist as the
Vilani and the 3I, was at least assumable to be based on an assumption that it
was possible to have a democratically based interstellar state.

The Old Earth Union (until the TWG changes the existing implications <sigh>) was
also implied to be at least vaguely demorcratic.

There is at least as long a tradition in SF of democratic style interstellar
states being feasible as there is of Imperial states. I would, personally, argue
that the imperialist stuff was OK as an assumption in the 1930's, but I would
have thought that it was not the appropriate ethos for the late 20th century/

Personal opinion, of course.

>can make local decisions about local problems, but there needs to be
>someone overall in charge.  This is what seperates a crazy, chaotic sea of

Don't dispute the idea that some*thing* needs to be in charge. I reject the
assumption that it has to be a dictatorial some*one*. Why not an elected
"someone"?

>disparate star systems from an interstellar government that has a uniform
>system of trade regulations and a centrally controlled military force that
>can protect all the systems more efficently from outside invasions. 

And the World's Postal System works quite well without any dictator in charge?
What is the problem with some sort of interstellar customs agreement ... one
based on either no-one in specific being "in charge", or on a democratic basis?

>>The Imperium is a repressive dictatorial authoritarian regime based on a
>mix of
>>might makes right, power based on social stratification, divine right of
>kings
>>etc. 
>
>   As with any hereditary monarchy, the degree of freedom that individuals
>have is dependent upon the virtuousness of the ruler's offspring.  It
>should be noted however that levels of oppression in a particular region of
>a large empire will always be relative.

But they are *arbitrary* ... which is the universally bad thing about
monarchical regimes. You are relying on *luck* ... at least with some sort of
democratic organisation you can vote the bastards out in something short of an
interstellar civil war!

>>Sure, *in theory* the Imperium is all sweetness and light ... but it allows
>>(and encourages) the Megacorps to rip off the people for a Credit, as long as
>>the Emperor gets his share. 
>
>   That the person who is ultimately in charge of the very regulatory
>agencies that would prevent unnecessary exploitation of the masses also
>stands to gain monetarily from that exploitation (thus is put into the
>ultimate conflict of interest) has not escaped my attention.

Mainly, I guess, what I am saying is that the fact that the Imperium *is* a
suboptimal socio-political system ... the "bad guys", if you will. It should be
spelled out for the morally challenged <grin>.

>   It would take a *very* special kind of service oriented individual not
>to exploit such a situation.  You might even get one about every other
>generation...

And I would guess that it would be less than that!

>>It suppresses technological development.
>
>   To insure standards are being kept or to help the megacorps maintain
>their monopolies.  You decide.

Nope, to keep themselves in power. Technological development is, ultimately,
destabilising ... as the people in charge rely on some sort of technological
limitation to keep themselves in power (arguably in a republican democracy this
is based on the impracticability of a town meeting style situation running the
country ... computers may change this, eventually, which would be a worry to the
current crop of legislators ... if they had enough of a clue to realise the
possible implications!), and occasionally must have enough of a clue to
recognise that new technologies would threaten their position. This is why, I
think at least, the Imperium is so technological backward compared to the
strides the Terrans made before they were corrupted (OK! OK! The TWG now tells
us they were already corrupt, which is part of my kick)

>>It manipulates and destabilises member regimes (sure, the ones they do it
>to in
>>published adventures are ones that you and I would probably say deserve
>it, but
>>look at what the Ine Givar supposedly wanted ... per their
>manifesto/background
>>on Pyramid). It rips off innocents for its own socio-political ends (as per
>>Milieu 0, but not limited to that Milieu by any means). It promotes the worst
>>sort of radical laissez faire capitalism coupled with organised monopolistic
>>practices.
>
>   Name one government that doesn't.  OK the USSR had a socialist economy,
>but if you think that the people really benefited from the exploitation of
>their labor that took place under central planning, I'd like to suggest
>that you have your medication changed.

Did I mention the USSR?

I mentioned radical laissez faire capitalism!

Not something the USSR was reknowned for!

Regardless, I think that there are actually governments, other than the
ex-superpower and current superpower, who actually do *not* promote radical
laissez faire capitalism, do not intentionally rip off innocents etc. Sweden.
Switzerland. Most of the Euro-socialist countries ... Australia, Canada. Lots
more.

Just because the USSR and US don't work <grin> doesn't mean the rest of the
world doesn't!

>>Worst of all, the underlying assumption of everything that has been
>published in
>>recent years is that all of this is inevitable.
>
>   Just as the fall the Galatic Empire is inevitable in the Star Wars
>triology, no?   Story arc is a personal decision of the author(s).

Yes. But the storyline of Traveller is that the Imperium is not being replaced
by anything better ... the Reformation Coalition was suspect, in my opinion, and
seems to have had the makings of a reformed empire in it. The Spinward Marches
were a marginally democratised Imperium.

And, of course, Milieu 0 was fascist through and through. GUPRSTrav is back to
the "good old days" of CTrav, but still has the "eternal empire" assumption ...
though may SJG will change that, who knows?

>>Milieu 0 is about the worst sort of might makes right dictatorship, with real
>>parallels to european fascism in the 1930's in attitude (if nothing else).
>
>   As I generally take everything in "T4" with a large grain of salt (no
>more than would be found in a typical salt mine), I think not sure that
>what you are reading is necessarily completely authoritative.  I prefer to
>think of it as one point of view or interpretation of a complex historical
>issue (similar to the American expansion into western North America).

I take everything supposedly democratic about the RefCol and Spinward Marches of
TNE with the same large grain of salt.

>>GURPS Traveller and CTrav are not as tainted, but the underlaying assumptions
>>are still there, just not as obvious.
>
>   Again, different takes on the same complex issue.  I'd *prefer* a canon
>explanation, but...

It was the "addition" to canon mentioned by TWG that the Terrans were a corrupt
dictatorial mob as bad as the Vilani that triggered off my musings.

There is nothing in previously published material that I am aware of that really
makes this an inevitable conclusion.

It is the *trend* that I find distressing.

>>Now we are being told that the Late Terran Federation was a repressive
>regime at
>>least as bad as that of the Vilani Ziru Sirka.
>
>   Confederation.  Anyway, you are talking about a government and a people
>that had been in a state of emergency martial law for generations.
>Eventually the masses think of the rationing and the curbs on freedoms as
>being normal, and all that nonsense about inalienable rights as being so
>much philosopher's BS.

Look, as bad as the US was prior to the 1960's and Civil Rights, it was a
democracy. And, by and large, it managed to wage WW2 and then the cold war
without too many abuses of democratic power and democratic processes. And it
won. Ditto the UK and Commonwealth.

Why assume that the Confederation has to be that way?

We are told that the Imperials are fighting a limited war, and we have
reasonable evidence that terran tech was much better than Imperial. So it
reasonable to assume that the Terrans could easily manage to outproduce the
Vilani given the limited resources the latter chose to bring to bear.

It is not unreasonable, given productivity increases available in even the last
200 years, extrapolated into the future!

>>And we all sit back and accept it.
>>
>>I mean, doesn't anyone out there realise that the way things are going is
>that
>>*you* are playing the Imperial Stormtroopers and supporting the "Dark
>Side"? The
>>Emperor is *not* a nice guy. The Imperium is even actively (if
>unintentionally)
>>malevolent in its release of Virus.
>>
>>Everything in the game is becoming tainted by this.
>
>   Outside the context of the game, the Imperium (and the Solomani
>Confederation, Aslan Hierate, etc.) are only as good or as evil as you want
>them to be.

The Imperium are absolutists. The Solomani are Fascists. The Alsan are *alien*.
I won't judge them by human standards!

>>What is wrong with the people out there? Do they think that democracy is so
>>useless and fragile that it cannot last ... well, its been around almost
>as long
>>as authoritarianism, and keeps on keeping on. Our current democratic
>traditions
>>owe much to the ideals of Greece and Rome (especially the Republic),
>ideals that
>>never died even under centuries of authoritarian rule.
>
>   Authoritarian regimes called monarchies were around long before
>democracy.  Democracy in the sense that we think of it (universal suffrage,
>etc.) is a 20th century concept.  Yes, I *know* what the US Constitution
>says, but certain minority groups (African-Americans in particular) had
>their voting rights routinely taken away as late as the 1960s, whereas
>women didn't get the right to vote nationally until the 1920s.
>
>   Democracy is a fragile thing that can only exist in the most stable
>countries.  Democracy is failing in Russia right now because it is becomng
>unstable.  Revolutionary France (obstensively democratic) was highly
>unstable and therefore Napoleon was the result.  Thousands of years of
>human history show us that authoritarian rule or benevolent dictatorship
>have been the rule and democracy (or anything resembling it) is the exception.

But democracy has *always* been there, somewhere, as either a reality or as a
desired ideal.

It is nowhere in the Imperium, beyond the borders of a few scattered planets.

>   Democracy therefore is a precious gift of modern technology and thinking
>and not to be taken for granted, or surrendered lightly.

And that, i think, is the key. It is a gift of modern technology ... and, at
least as much, of the level of education that modern technology has made
universal. I do not see how this can be taken away *partly* ... if you have
anything at all democratic in the Imperium, even individual worlds, you
inevitably have an example of something better than the Imperium and its
absolutist beliefs.

>>In countries all around the world, countries where there has never been a
>>democratic tradition, people are struggling even as we speak to build
>democratic
>>institutions ... some paying with their liberty and some even with their
>lives.
>
>   Most in vain I'm afraid.  You can't grow orange trees in Alaska for a
>reason.

But in the countries I gave as examples they are (or have) succeeded. Or, at
worst, will almost certainly succed in the not too distant future. I would say
that even despots like Mahatir and Suharto found that out (or are in the process
of finding it out).

>>It seems fairly obvious that, once you reach a certain level of education and
>>material prosperity, the much despised "people" start wanting more than the
>>generosity of authoritarian regimes. They want a real say in power, they want
>>some control over it themselves. Look at Iran and the Shah, Indonesia and
>>Suharto, probably Malaysia and Mahatir. Look at Taiwan and its rejection
>of KMT
>>authoritarianism.
>
>   Iran traded the dictatorship of the Shah for the dictatorship of a
>religious elite.  Yes, Suharto is gone, but those that will replace him for

Which is, in turn, being moderated by the people chipping away at its absolutist
and anti-democratic principles. And it will continue to happen, slowly, but
inevitably. Just as it is in China. It is unstoppable,  it can be slowed, but
that's all.

>the next few years will likely only be transitional figure until the next
>strongman takes charge.  While Taiwan *is* democratic, that democracy will

Maybe. But once the people have a taste for democracy, it won't go away. And,
being somewhat closer, I suspect that it may not be as you suggest. I suspect
that there will be a democratic government and that it will struggle along. I
don't see the army stepping in, not yet ... or even at all. I suspect that they
have blotted their own copybook obviously and embarrassingly enough that they
will keep a low profile for quite a number of years. All in all, something
*much* more democratic will certainly emerge.

>vanish if/when the government in Taipei decides to move closer to the
>central government in Beijing.

And I would suggest that this is somewhere about the same time hell freezes
over. The Taiwanese government is *Taiwanese* ... they don't see themselves as
being Chinese. The KMT old guard may not like it, and Beijing may not like it,
but it is likely that Taiwan will never be part of China again, unless they gain
what effectively amounts to full independence in some sort of economic union.

The current Beijing regime is not likely to last long enough to retake Taiwan in
any meaningful way, anyhow.

>>And look at India. A democracy since 1947 ... with mass illiteracy and mass
>>poverty on a scale that is really staggering. Yet, despite Pakistan's
>example of
>>what can happen in such a developing situation, India has remained a
>democracy.
>
>   India has a corrupt government in which the bureaucracy has too much
>power and politicans take far too many bribes.  That's not me speaking,
>that is individuals from India I've talked to speaking.

Yes. But you *can* change the individual politicians taking bribes! And there
are democratic freedoms and safeguards to some considerable degree ... no, its
not perfect, but it *is* (say) better than China.

>>Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an
>American
>>thing? Why?
>
>   Why are people so fascinated by the British, Dutch, Swedish, etc.
>"royals"?  Answer the question and you'll know. 

Personally *I* am not. Is this an American thing, too?

>>Other SF RPGs are not so backward ...
>
>   Cyberpunk: Oligarchy exploiting the masses

And V:tM is the same. So?

At least in Cyberpunk there is a struggle against the *obviously* evil
megacorps.

>   GURPS: depends upon your take

Depends on the worldbook. The GURPS Space book allowed for all types of
campaigns.

>   TORG: Terran Empire versus everyone else

Shatterzone.

>   There are other examples as well, but suffice to say that democracy is
>not necessarily a universal concept.

Didn't say it was.

>>Nope, there's something seriously wrong with this line of thinking, or so it
>>seems to me.
>>
>>What do the rest of you think?
>
>   I'm not sure where you are going with this.  Are you recommending a more
>generous interpretation of the Imperium as in CT, or are you suggesting
>that perhaps the whole concept of the Imperium be scrapped?

No. I am really only suggesting that there, perhaps, should be a comment
*somewhere* to the effect that the Imperium is *not* the "good guy", and it
should be spelled out that the PCs might want to consider being part of the
"resistance" ... even if its only by evading Imperial Customs rules.

>   If you read the TNE material, you saw that things *were* headed in the
>direction of democracy in many regions.  The Reformation Coalition is a
>democracy for the most part, or at least it has a representative from of
>government.  The Regency is also headed in that direction as well.  It
>would have been interesting to see what would have developed in the end,
>but oh well....

I'm not sure that I have your confidence in either. Maybe. Its just that Virus
was so stupid <grin>

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #931
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 12 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 932



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM co...
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (long)
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #929
Re: Democratic Traditions
Star Wars Democracy
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #930
Re: Star Wars Democracy
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM co...
Re: Star Wars Democracy
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #931
The Terran Confederation (Was: Democracy etc.)

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:52:40 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM co...

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 10:29:36 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 01:56:52 EDT
>From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM co...
>
>In a message dated 10/10/98 7:59:12 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au writes:
>
><< Nope, there's something seriously wrong with this line of thinking, or so
>it
> seems to me.
> 
> What do the rest of you think?
> 
> Phil >>
>
>Well; according to the rest of the world, us Yanks are trying to take over the
>world through economic exploitation...:-). Seriously, though I think that most

Aren't you? I thought it was obvious <grin>

>gamers are like me. I just thought of it as an enjoyable game, with an
>extensive history. This is the first time that I thought of the Imperium as
>the evil empire. I guess it is really up to the SM to decide how to run the
>Imperium.

What I really wanted to do was to get people to realise *consciously* that the
Imperium *is* the "Evil Empire".

As for it being up to the Ref, yes, but the *background assumptions* are such
that he'd have to run the PCs as some sort of rebels *or* be pretty non-canon.

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:41:53 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (long)

Before I start I'd like to appologise for any offence my tone may cause,
and for any & all spelling mistakes - a couple of litres of homebrew beer
will do this to one.

At 22:08 11/10/98 +0100, Mark Watson wrote:
>Phillip McGregor wrote:
>
>> Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as
expressed in
>> Traveller is anti-democratic?

>As a result, the imperium runs as a loose confederacy for general
purposes. Worlds can
>maintain their own governmental systems and legal systems, can even manage
other worlds
>as (very) miniature empires, but must submit to the authority of the
imperial agencies
>- the army, the navy, the ministry of justice, even self-proclaimed
agencies like IRIS.
>They also effectively submit to the private agencies of the MegaCorps,
since the
>MegaCorps are each more powerful than any individual world.

There is no way the 3I can be called a confederacy. A loose federation,
perhaps, but not a confederacy - the 3I has the ultimate power, not its
member worlds (if they did the 3I wouldn't be nearly as large or as
powerful as it became).

>The nobility system, at the system level, can only mean anything within
the context of
>the local government type - many nobles will be like today's King of
Greece - he gets
>invited to the royal occasions of other royal families, but has zero
standing in Greece
>itself.

As far as I can see in the OTU the nobility are a hell of a lot more
powerful than that, in general. Sure some knighted war hero on the lecture
circuit wouldn't have much power os influence, but how about all those
hereditary nobles? They own and rule land and have jobs in the imperial
beaucracy. These people have serious power - far more than any local
government that doesn't ahve some imperial titles of its own.

>MTrav was an attempt to destabilise the Imperium using the old Raymond
Chandler plot
>technique of "man walks in with gun". All the stuff about decadence (and
there wasn't
>much) was just post-rationalisation. But I think MTrav (and the Digest
material
>published shortly before it) did a good job of fleshing out the Imperium
and showing
>how it had to work, although it still erred too far towards the noblesse
oblige of the
>nobility. I think in general the nobility are not so much motivated by
high principle,
>than by power, comfort and money.

IMO this latter is even more likely to result in the disintergration seen
in MT than misguided noblesse oblige would be. Besides isn't this what the
decadence in the late 3I was shown to be?

>TNE's main aim, from my perspective, was to make the Traveller setting one
which was
>appropriate to the construction of miniatures rules. But one of the other
things it
>tried to do was discredit the imperial setting and "fix" some things, like
the
>democracy issue. I think that had some interesting implications in the
regency (where
>the noble tier was extracted, but a hereditary monarchy was sustained),
but for the
>Coalition, you just ended up with Twilight 2000 in space. As predicted.

Funny, I always felt that the Coalition was best summed up as "Aftermath!
in space". After all TW:2000 was about things getting worse - the slide
into chaos was still in progress. Both Aftermath! and TNE were about the
reconstruction, not the death throes of civilization.

>This is a poor analogy. Fascism was distinguished (if that is the word) by
its
>irrationalism. Milieu 0 is just realpolitik - it's "great power" empire
building.

Only if you consider all-out free enterprise and profiteering as
realpolotik, rather than just another idealology for greed to dress up in.

>You need to read more history. Our current democratic tradition (yours and
mine) owes
>little to the "democratic tradition" of Greece and Rome and more to the
philosophical
>thread that runs back through Paine, Rousseau, Locke and Hobbes. And that
was mostly
>based on Christian ideas of original sin. Parliamentary traditions trace
back to the
>Viking and Saxon assemblies, to feudal diets and medieval republics like
Venice. Some
>of the names, I'll grant you, trace back to ancient times, but were taken
up by 18th
>century liberals who romanticised Greece and Rome, rather than being
directly descended
>as part of a grander tradition.

IMO this is a little too strong. Much of modern democractic ideals come
from Plato, though in a much more universal form.

>Most of classical Greece had nothing like democracy. Athens, the principal
and best
>known democracy, was not a representative democracy in the modern
representative sense
>- each citizen had a direct vote, and the general effect was of mob rule.
To qualify
>for a vote, you had to be a freeman. Athens' female population, and its
very large
>slave population (even Aristotle realised the Athenian economy was
dependent on slaves)
>did not qualify.

I don't recall anyone actually talking about representative democracy in
particular, just democracy in general. Sometimes I'm inclined towards the
view that representative democracy isn't actually democracy at all,
especially after watching a 'representative' voting against the public's
will for thier own selfish reasons.

>Roman political philosophers generally denigrated Athenian democracy.
Under the Roman
>Republic, the senate was made up of the members of patrician (ie noble)
families, and
>the senate elected the consuls. From 494 BC a veto was introduced which
could be used
>by the tribunes (elected by the plebeians) to constrain the executive
power of the
>consuls, but this hardly constitutes a representative democracy.
>
>Both Athens and Rome would establish authoritarian regimes in times of
crisis - these
>were the original meanings of the words "tyrant" and "dictator". Both
Athens and Rome
>attempted to construct empires. Athens foundered as a result, whereas Rome
succeeded.

Athens didn't fail as a result of its Tyrants, nor did Rome succeed as a
result of hers. In fact a good case could be made for the reverse. Athens'
Tyrants gave her a 'universal' justice system, Rome's gave her what we call
the 'Roman Empire'.

A Greek Tyrant was someone who ruled without any legitemate constitutional
authority - no matter how they got into power, unlike a Roman Dictator who
was elected by the Senate.

>And the idea of democracy did die out for very long periods of time, even
in Western
>Europe, and in parts of the world has never existed at all. For most of
European
>history since the fall of Rome I'd bet the average Western European's idea
of a perfect
>government was one which strictly imposed the tenets of Christianity,
rather than one
>which reintroduced ideas which were effectively lost until the Renaissance.

I beg to differ. From say 500AD to 800AD most inhabitants of Europe
wouldn't have been even a little bit interested in a Christian government,
except to kill its representatives. Even those who were nominally Christian
would have been happier if the governing authorities simply went away,
seeing as generally all they did (from the locals perspective) was to
gather taxes.

>> Of course, the idea of a powerful stellar empire is an old one, dating
back to
>> the golden age of SF ... an age when democratic ideals were under attack
>> throughout the world, and it looked like democracies were in retreat.
But the
>> idea of powerful stellar federations/leagues/confederacies etc. is at
least as
>> old.
>>
>> Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an
American
>> thing? Why?
>
>Traveller's just a setting. It's a good setting, which makes for interesting
>adventures. The political setting is just realistic enough to have genuine
political
>adventures. And the characters can question the politics if they like
(unless it's TNE,
>where that would get them vented).

Where do you get that? In the Coalition there were a number of major
political debates in which no side was clearly right, so how would
questioning politics get you vented? At a wild guess you don't like TNE, do
you?

>You forgot:
>2300AD: mostly democracies. Britain gets a romanticised monarchy.

But with the premier power an empire.

>Twilight 2000: anarchy. Groups of stranded American soldiers forcibly
impose their idea
>of order on the still smouldering remnants of Western civilisation. Most
reprehensible
>game setting ever.

Not just American soldiers, but anybody with an interest in order and some
guns.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:56:04 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #929

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:07:29 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 15:21:20 -0400
>From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
>Subject: Re:Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 
>
>>>That it _does_ not, not that it _can_ not. Besides, the Vargr are the
>>>ultimate democrats: you gain influence only through the support of your
>>>followers :-)
>>
>>I don't get the first sentence there ... are you saying that Traveller
>>says that
>>Democracy cannot die out? Or that it doesn't die out? I would, personally,
>>dispute both assumptions.
>
>Snipped a bit too much. Sorry.

What you say makes more sense. Can't say I *agree* wholeheartedly, but it *does*
make more sense!

>Traveller history is only _one_ future history. The fact that a democratic
>interstellar government doesn't last in the Traveller history is a
>statement of historical fact (from a fictional Traveller perspective). I
>don't see it as translating into Travller implying that a democratic
>interstelar government is impossible. Although I'll admit that, given the
>limits on communications, any democratic interstellar government would
>have to rely on trusted representatives or take a _long_ time to make
>decisions.

Yes, but it isn't impossible. And there is no suggestion that it was ever
considered. This is what I find unbelievable.

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:59:57 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Democratic Traditions

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:07:29 -0400, you wrote:

>> Our current democratic traditions
>> owe much to the ideals of Greece and Rome (especially the Republic), ideals that
>> never died even under centuries of authoritarian rule.
>
>You need to read more history. Our current democratic tradition (yours and mine) owes
>little to the "democratic tradition" of Greece and Rome and more to the philosophical
>thread that runs back through Paine, Rousseau, Locke and Hobbes. And that was mostly

And a lot of their ideas were based on the classical tradition. These people
were *educated* in the classics. And even christianity owes a lot to classical
traditions. I think you are underestimating them.

I do not say they are the only sources. As you correctly point out, there are
other evidently independent original sources ... which only goes to support my
contention. It is so widely spread through our culture that it pops up all over
the place!

And, as for not knowing about classical graeco-roman realities, well, yes, I do.
I teach it for a living. The *tradition* had to develop somewhere, and a lot of
the ideals that we accept are based on them.

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 11:02:45 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Star Wars Democracy

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:07:29 -0400, you wrote:

>> Star Wars: The struggle between the Rebels (who are democratic) vs the Evil
>> Empire
>
>I'll have to assume the episode where Leia is elected princess is going to be in the
>prequel.

Nope, but its made plain that the Empire was founded on the bones of the Old
Republic. There's no reason why you can't have an elective monarchy, anyway.
Look at the Holy Roman Empire and its system (no, its not even close to a
perfect example, with nobles electing another noble, but the principle is
there).

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 11:10:20 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #930

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 23:03:48 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 23:00:06 -0400
>From: "Walter G. Smith" <smithw@hartwick.edu>
>Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller...
>
>Was reading one of Weber's books, _A Short Victorious War_, when
>I saw Weber's take on the scariest thing that can happen to a
>democracy: what happens when the mob realizes they can get more
>bread and circuses just by voting for it.

Err, how is your historical knowledge?

*I* thought that Rob. S. Pierre and the planet of New Paris were dead giveaways!

I mean, am I the *only* person who was expecting the PRS "Witch of Endor" to be
captured by Honor in her escape from Hell?

I mean, it's obvious ... the PRH is *FRANCE* ... the Legislaturalists are the
Royalists and the CPS is, well, the CPS. 

Weber's re-writing the Hornblower novels (the ideas, not the exact events).

You've got Haven = France; Manticore - United Kingdom; Silesia = Prussia;
Solarian League = America (a very much out of time America).

Has anyone figured out what Grayson is the equivalent of, historically speaking?
I haven't ... maybe there *isn't* a parallel?

>The Republic of Haven is painted as a corrupt democracy. The leaders
>rule, but only as long as they propitiate the howling masses. At every
>level the leaders care only for their own advancement, at the expense
>of the people they despise yet claim to represent. The only thing keeping
>it from being an oligarchy is the facade that must be preserved, lest
>the mob rise and rip apart those at the top.

Yep. The Third Estate is always has a problem ... read about how they lost
control of the real revolution to the mob.

The parallels aren't perfect, but they are fairly obvious!

>The scary part to me was the way the corruptions, the bad decisions 
>accumulated into an unstoppable force. The leaders could see how

Just as it did for the French Monarchy. 

>their actions were not making things better, even making things
>worse. Their earlier actions, and the actions of leaders before them,
>had painted them into a corner that shrank almost daily. As long as
>they could keep up appearances, they could be in charge of a large
>interstellar state. When things started to slip, they could very well
>be dead. And it did not appear, even if they had the knowledge and
>the will, that there was anything to be done about it.

And Rob. S. Pierre cannot do much better, as he acknowledges on several
occasions.

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:22:35 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Jens \"Spacejens\" Rydholm" <spacejens@h72.ryd.student.liu.se>
Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Phillip McGregor wrote:

> Nope, but its made plain that the Empire was founded on the bones of the Old
> Republic. There's no reason why you can't have an elective monarchy, anyway.
> Look at the Holy Roman Empire and its system (no, its not even close to a
> perfect example, with nobles electing another noble, but the principle is
> there).

The Romans had elections for dictatorship, no matter how funny that might
sound today. They elected a ruler, an emperor, to rule until unable to do
so, or carely, until removed.

+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Jens "Spacejens" Rydholm    http://spacejens.ml.org     |
| jenry023@student.liu.se     Telephone: +46(0)13-4730961 |
| ICQ UIN: 3844745            Linköping, Sweden           |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU ?tc t4 ru ge+ 3i- jt+ a ?st ls kk++ hi+ as++ va++  |
|      ?dr so- zh ?da sy+                                 |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
|               In politics, left is right!               |
+---------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:25:07 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM co...

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Phillip McGregor wrote:

>What I really wanted to do was to get people to realise *consciously* that the
>Imperium *is* the "Evil Empire".

I wouldn't say the "Evil Empire", but more like an Imperium with real powerful
rulers with their own agenda. Play nice or they'll kick you hard until your
down :-)

>As for it being up to the Ref, yes, but the *background assumptions* are such
>that he'd have to run the PCs as some sort of rebels *or* be pretty non-canon.

Why not play characthers that wants the power. I don't really see why the
characthers always has to be the good guys. That's boring. I want my players
to play their characters as real persons, with ambitions, hopes, fears, moral
faults and so on, not ideal nice guys. 

>
>Phil

Tommy Grav
- -------------------------------------------------------------
tommy.grav@astro.uio.no     http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/  
Institute of Astrophysics, UiO, No  
IMTU tn++t4+tg+ ru+ge++ !3i jt+au+st+ls hi++dr-so++zh-sy-sw++ 
 

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:30:17 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Phillip McGregor wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:07:29 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>> Star Wars: The struggle between the Rebels (who are democratic) vs the Evil
>>> Empire
>>
>>I'll have to assume the episode where Leia is elected princess is going to be in the
>>prequel.
>
>Nope, but its made plain that the Empire was founded on the bones of the Old
>Republic. There's no reason why you can't have an elective monarchy, anyway.
>Look at the Holy Roman Empire and its system (no, its not even close to a
>perfect example, with nobles electing another noble, but the principle is
>there).
>
>Phil

But how do you hold elections in an Imperium which spans sectors. The canditates
put forth their program which then is shipped throughout the Imperium. This
takes years to reach the fringes. Now the people there has questions on what the 
candidate means with parts of his program, and how does this affect them? They
send questions back (more years pass), the candidate answers but under the years
there has been a recession so he has some new views that he has to send out.

When you get multisector covernments democarcies are not an option.

Tommy Grav
- -------------------------------------------------------------
tommy.grav@astro.uio.no     http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/  
Institute of Astrophysics, UiO, No  
IMTU tn++t4+tg+ ru+ge++ !3i jt+au+st+ls hi++dr-so++zh-sy-sw++ 
 

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 11:42:18 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #931

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 06:49:51 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:36:34 +0800
>From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
>Subject: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 
>
>How you actually run the Imperium in your TU (if the imperium stil exists,
>or exists at all) is up to you. On a theoretical level, no form of govt. is
>any better athan any other.  The practice of govt. is what counts.  Without

Well, maybe to *you* ... tell that to *all* the victims of the Fascist German
government during WW2. Or to the Stalinist Russian government from the 1930's to
the 1950's.

Ask them whether *they* agree that these goverments were theoretically equal to,
say, US Democracy of the same period. Or UK constitutional monarchy.

There are, inherently, some forms of government that are better than others.

The ones that allow and encourage arbitrariness are to be avoided (those that
are autocratic and absolutist) as there is no way of ameliorating the caprice of
the ruler. Those that allow and encourage democratic and/or republican ideals
are better, as they tend to ameliorate any arbitrariness (which is *not* to say
that they cannot be ruthless ... but they can recognise the fact that they have
been so or are being so because so many more opinions are involved).

>getting into empirical arguments about how things have worked out on earth,
>Life under the Sultan of Brunei is sweet, under the German Democrativc

Sure, and its even better if you're the Sultan.

Eventually his people will begin to wonder why, no matter how good their own
lifestyle is, *he* gets to live in a huge multi-hundred million dollar palace
and gets a jetset lifestyle and all they get is a middle class one.

That's when his days become numbered.

He will probably survive. Whether his son(s) do or not depends on their
adaptability ... they could do worse than look at the example of the House of
Windsor.

>Republic not so.  The UK is a constitutional monarchy without a
>constitution, and whilst the US may be a domocracy of sorts - and all

Well, yes and no. There are many laws that make it effectively a constitution.
One that is, perhaps, easier to change than the US (or Australian one).

The US ... indeed, *any* country where the government is elected by less than
50% of the people is not a democracy. In Oz we have compulsory voting - so, as
much as I dislike our PM and all he stands for, he can claim to have a mandate
from a hell of larger percentage of the people than Bill Clinton (or Newt
Gingrich) can.

>people have rights, not all humans were considered people until quite
>recently.  Contrarily I thought the TNE RC seemed gripped with some

The trend has been there for a long time, though.

>fixation about liberal American values, and the slaughtering of 'rag-head'
>- - equivalent - targets for our Good 'ole mrines to wup.   

Which is why I was severely doubtful of the democratic credentials of TNE,
Regency or RefCol.

>On another level the kind of govt. may well depend upon practical matters
>such as size, and distance.  In any case the Imperium consistes of many
>worlds with many govt. types.  

But the overall government is an arbitrary absolutist state.

>Finally What you ought to be concerned with are the values that the various
>governments actually hold dear, there is no necesary connection between
>govt type (not trav. gov. type) and society values.
>At the end of the day it is up to you.

Not in the Imperium. Its up to Strephon.

That's the problem.

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

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

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 00:46:48 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: The Terran Confederation (Was: Democracy etc.)

From:           	aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Date sent:      	Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:50:23 GMT

>Ah, but is it a *correct* premise? The Terran Government, prior to the current
>work of the TWG which is evidently making them out to be just as fascist as the
>Vilani and the 3I, was at least assumable to be based on an assumption that it
>was possible to have a democratically based interstellar state.

                      The Terran Confederation

The Terran Confederation grew out of the old Earth bound United Nations. Due 
to the revenues generated by UNSCA, by the time of the First Interstellar War 
the UN was largely free of its former reliance on contributions from the individual 
nations of Earth for its budget. With the growth of a truly global economy 
coupled with the massive improvement in worldwide communications at the end 
of the 20th century the individual nation state lost much of its importance. 
However the various nations of Earth clung grimly to their sovereignty and 
nationalism was a major factor in Earth politics during the later 20th and early 
21st centuries; to the extent that several previously stable nation states were 
torn apart by regional nationalism. Indeed the two strongest trends in this era 
were the rise in nationalism and the tendency towards globalisation through the 
various power blocs that were slowly evolving. By the end of the 21st century 
most nations on Terra had grouped themselves into larger trading blocs (the 
European Union, the Asian Confederation, the Pacific Rim Alliance etc).

Thus the first war was not fought by a single unified Terran command, but by 
the forces of Earth’s various nations under the tenuous coordination of the 
United Nations. By the end of the First War it was clear that this situation 
could not continue. To have any chance of survival against even the Vilani 
provincial fleet, the Terrans would have to utilise their resources to the full and 
place all of their forces under a strong central command. Thus in 2120 AD the 
United Worlds (with the admission of the Terran colony on Alpha Centauri in 
2118 AD, the United Nations had been renamed) became the Terran 
Confederation. Naturally this aroused some strong opposition amongst the 
various nation states who still jealously guarded their sovereignty (especially 
true of the smaller nations). However a clever media campaign portrayed the 
First Interstellar War as a great triumph and stressed the need for cooperation 
in the face of the “common enemy”. Meanwhile the new Confederation’s more 
vocal opponents were quietly arrested and deported to the new rimward 
colonies. Those colonies did not oppose the formation of the Confederation and 
the subsequent loss of their autonomy due to fear of losing their protection from 
the “Vilani Menace”.

Initially the new Confederation’s powers were strictly limited to military matters, 
but gradually the Confederation evolved into a proper interstellar government. In 
2125 AD the various national militaries were incorporated into a single 
Confederation Army and Navy, in 2131 AD the Secretariat was given the power 
to directly legislate taxation, in 2140 AD the Secretariat was given the power to 
legislate on matters that affected more than one nation. The final change came 
in 2150 AD when the Security Council was abolished and the Secretary 
General was acknowledged as the executive leader of all the nations of the 
Terran Confederation. The Terran government remained largely unchanged 
throughout the Interstellar Wars (in 2179 AD a measure of local autonomy was 
restored to the individual colony worlds); the General Assembly was retained 
as a generalised debating forum in which all nations and worlds were 
represented equally, but legislative power over all worlds was retained by the 
Secretariat. Thus while the Confederation was theoretically a multiworld 
democracy, it was to remain dominated by Terran interests until it was 
dissolved by Admiral Estigarrbia in 2314 AD and replaced by the military 
dictatorship that was to become the Rule of Man.

Despite its ultimate demise, the Confederation drew on elements of all of 
Earth’s many diverse cultures in its make up. The western ideals regarding 
progress, innovation and individualism allowed it to equal and surpass several 
thousand years of Vilani technological achievement in just 200 years; whilst the 
eastern ideals regarding duty, family and community allowed it to single 
mindedly apply itself and thus defeat and eventually conquer the vast Ziru 
Sirka. Indeed this very cultural diversity was to play a vital role in the 
Confederation’s survival during the early wars. When the Terrans first contacted 
the Ziru Sirka the bewildering array of nations and cultures convinced the Vilani 
that they were facing a loose alliance of several minor Human races. Thus the 
Ziru Sirka believed that Earth was simply a forward staging post for a pocket 
Empire located further to rimward. Thus Earth came to be characterised in the 
mind of Vilani strategists as a nest of pirates from some unknown civilised 
region far towards the rim.

                           Terran Culture

Terran culture was profoundly changed by the initial contact with the Vilani and 
the subsequent Interstellar Wars. At the beginning of the Wars the dominant 
Terran culture was the liberal western culture that had developed in Western 
Europe and the United States of America. This culture emphasised the needs 
of the individual and encouraged innovation (and thus was almost diametrically 
opposed to the Vilani). Unlike virtually all other interstellar cultures of the 
period, the Terran culture actively embraced change and progress as a goal in 
and of itself; this was to prove to be one of the Terrans greatest assets, 
enabling them to catapult from TL 9 to TL 12 in just 200 years.

However under the pressure of the Interstellar Wars, the Terran culture was to 
undergo some major changes. As the Wars progressed, the pressures of the 
struggle inevitably lead to the Terran culture gradually becoming more austere, 
conservative and militaristic, increasingly drawing on its eastern heritage with 
its strong emphasis on duty and community; but it was never to totally lose its 
liberal and individualistic character. However along with these changes, the 
Terrans came to emphasis their cultural traditions that set them apart from the 
Vilani. Thus even though the Interstellar Wars forced the peoples of the Earth to 
finally see themselves as single people, they also saw a great emphasis on 
local cultural traditions. An example of this is that although English evolved to 
become the “universal” language of the Terrans (known as Anglic), the period 
also witnessed a great revival of many older ethnic tongues (including many 
supposedly dead languages such as Mayan, Cornish, Chinook, Motu etc). The 
other great change that occurred was the eventual death of many of the old 
prejudices that had plagued the Terrans for so long. When the Terrans came to 
see themselves as one people the many of the old social scourges such as 
racism and sexism dropped by the wayside.

This tolerant and liberal culture was to prove to be a great asset for the Terrans 
throughout the Interstellar Wars. For over 2000 years the Vilani had ruled over 
their subject races by a policy of assimilation and force. The Vilani were utterly 
ruthless in the conduct of warfare, relying on simple theories of cost efficiency. 
Any resistance or rebellion would be met with overwhelming force and no mercy 
would be shown (the Vilani did not take prisoners except in exceptional 
circumstances and had no hesitations in using genocide or weapons of mass 
destruction). Thus the Terrans with their highly structured concepts of humane 
warfare and their policy of tolerance for other races were welcomed as 
liberators by virtually all the Vilani’s subject races. As the Terrans advanced 
they found many willing allies throughout the Ziru Sirka, many of whom would 
later be granted autonomy under the Rule of Man. Although this was not to be 
a major factor until the 8th and subsequent Wars, even in the early wars there 
were a few subject race units serving within the Terran military (the first such 
unit, the Vegan Legion, was formed in 2136 AD during the 2nd Interstellar War).

The period also saw a renaissance in Terran religion. Throughout the 20th and 
21st centuries the imminent demise of organised religion had been predicted by 
many Terran commentators. However these experts had not reckoned on the 
discovery of the Ziru Sirka; an event that forever changed the face of religion on 
Earth. The realisation that mankind was not alone in the universe strangely 
reinvigorated religious belief amongst the Terrans. By the end of the Wars the 
six great Terran religions (Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, 
Confucianism and New Age Mysticism) each had tens of billions of adherents 
including many non-Terrans and over 80% of the Confederation’s citizens were 
practising members of some organised religion.

                      Terran rimward Expansion

Whilst the Interstellar Wars apparently dominated the Terran Confederation’s 
policies, the period is also marked by a massive expansion into unexplored 
space by the Confederation. In reality, until the final Vilani collapse, this 
colonial expansion accounted for the majority of the Confederation’s growth. 
This expansion is usually referred to as the “Terran rimward expansion”, a 
name that is rather misleading as it also includes significant lateral colonisation 
to spinward and trailing. The key element of this colonisation was that it was 
directed towards areas not already controlled by the Ziru Sirka.

The rimward expansion resulted in much of the growth of the Confederation 
throughout this period. By 2160 AD, there were over 1,600 million Terrans living 
off Terra, by 2235 AD this had grown to more than 17,500 million (compared 
with the 17,200 million living on Terra itself and the 6,000 million absorbed 
Vilani in the former Ziru Sirka territories). By 2300 AD, these colonials made up 
over 75% of the Confederation’s Terran and absorbed Vilani population (roughly 
160 billion at that time). However, they remained chronically under represented 
in the Secretariat throughout the period; a situation that was to ultimately result 
in Estigarrbia’s coup and the downfall of the Confederation.

One of the more unusual facets of this expansion was the Terran 
Confederation’s policy of deliberately establishing settlements far beyond its 
conceivable sphere of influence. It is not know exactly how many of these 
colonies were established, since the entire project was shrouded in secrecy 
throughout the period, but hundreds of such colonies were established. Many of 
these settlements were established hundreds of parsecs away from the 
Confederation, well beyond its ability to administer or support and they 
consumed considerable resources for very little tangible return. These colonies 
were a form of long term insurance against the possibility of the Confederation’s 
defeat.

The agency responsible for these long range colonisation efforts was the 
Confederation Agency for the Preservation of Indigenous Cultures (CAPIC). Set 
up in 2124 AD in response to the fears of the smaller Terran nations regarding 
the loss of their cultural identities in the face of the expanding authority of the 
Confederation, CAPIC was charged with ensuring that the unique cultural 
heritage of Earth should be preserved regardless of the outcome of the Wars. 
Thus CAPIC embarked upon an ambitious program of long range colonisation. 
Many (though by no means all) of the colonists in the CAPIC program were 
drawn from Earth’s ethnic and linguistic minorities who already feared the loss 
of their identity in the rapidly evolving Confederation culture. It was a policy 
established by CAPIC’s first director (Dr Kenji Schwartz) that as many of 
Earth’s cultural and linguistic groups should be resettled; and that in an 
attempt to minimise any “cultural contamination”, each world was settled by 
only one cultural or linguistic group (Dr Schwartz lived in mortal terror of the 
loss or corruption of even one of “Terra’s priceless linguistic treasures”). In order 
to effect this policy, various methods were used to encourage groups to 
resettle. Most of these took the form of incentives (financial and otherwise), but 
CAPIC was not averse to using “strong arm tactics” if it proved necessary to 
encourage reluctant colonists to emigrate.

                    Terran Biomedical Technology

Throughout this period the one area of technology were the Terrans had a clear 
and unassailable advantage was in biological and medical technologies. Even 
at the time of the first contact the Terrans had a clear lead of several tech 
levels. The reasons for this advantage are not too hard to find. As the true 
homeworld of all Humaniti, Earth holds the greatest variety of life compatible 
with Humans. Thus the Terrans clearly fitted into the scheme of life on Earth; 
and there was a wealth of experimental subject matter that gave results 
relevant to Humans. However the most important factors was probably that, 
unlike the Vilani, the Terrans were exposed to vast numbers of hostile microbes 
every day and had to develop advanced biomedical technology simply to survive.

This advanced biomedical technology gave the Terrans a number of advantages 
over the Vilani. The Vilani never developed any technology equivalent to the 
Terrans cryogenic devices (low berths, food storage and the like). The Terrans 
had access to highly advanced drugs and medicines. The Terrans were able to 
genetically engineer Earth organisms to fulfil a great variety of roles, vastly 
increasing the viability and efficiency of their colonies. The Terrans were able to 
utilise terraforming to enable the colonisation of otherwise marginal worlds. 
Most Terran ships used a biologically based closed loop life support system, 
giving them far greater endurance than their Vilani counterparts. Terran 
computers used a synaptic architecture based on the human brain, greatly 
increasing their operational flexibility.

However the most well known product of this Terran biomedical technology was 
their biological warfare program. This is curious as the Terrans only employed 
these weapons once. During the 3rd War the Vilani employed nuclear weapons 
against Terran civilian targets on the colony world of Fenris. In retaliation the 
Terrans deployed a viral weapon against the Vilani world Shululsish. The virus 
proved to be more effective than the Terrans had envisioned; and within six 
weeks over 95% of Shululsish’s population of 500 million had died either from 
the virus or the social collapse that accompanied it. This one solitary attack 
was to have far reaching consequences. The Vilani were terrified by this new 
weapon; its effectiveness and their lack of any defence or counter measures 
were quite clear. However, the attack also had consequences within the 
Confederation. There was a huge public outcry against the use of these 
weapons, it was only the pressures of the war that prevented the entire 
biological warfare program from being abandoned all together. However it was 
evident to the Confederation government that public opinion was very solidly 
against the use of these weapons and that there would be severe domestic 
consequences from any future deployment of biological weapons. As a result 
the Vilani and Terrans came to an informal understanding and neither side 
again deployed weapons of mass destruction against civilian targets.

Unfortunately the reluctance of the Terrans to employ their biological arsenal 
did not prevent the exposure of the Vilani to Terran diseases. It was inevitable 
that as the Terrans occupied a Vilani world, many of Earth’s hostile microbes 
would accompany them. As a result, the local Vilani population would be 
exposed to a plague of monumental proportions. It is a testimony to the 
Terrans dedication to their humanitarian roots (and their medical technologies) 
that, before the final collapse of the Ziru Sirka, on average only 5% to 10% of 
the local population died as a result of these plagues when the Terrans 
occupied a world. However with the final collapse, the Terrans occupied far 
more worlds than they could ever hope to deal with and the death toll from the 
plagues that swept through the former Ziru Sirka after the Interstellar Wars was 
far higher.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #932
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

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

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

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

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 12 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 933



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Re: MT Task System
Re: Democracies in Space
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #931
FAQ has a new keeper
compulsory voting
The Terran Confederation (Was: Democracy etc.)
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)
Grayson
One Democratic Model
Re: Paperless Imperium
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #930
1998 (Ig)Nobel Prizes
please remove me
Weber & history
Re: Military History
Re: Archival materials
Re: Military History
re: Archbishop Snerd
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: A thought on Game Design
Re: TravGeekCode
Re: Titan Games Preview for (10/11/98)
Spoilers (was re: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #930)
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #923
Re: compulsory voting (OFF-TOPIC!!)

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

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 01:19:32 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

From:           	aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Date sent:      	Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:50:23 GMT

>Ah, but is it a *correct* premise? The Terran Government, prior to the current
>work of the TWG which is evidently making them out to be just as fascist as the
>Vilani and the 3I, was at least assumable to be based on an assumption that it
>was possible to have a democratically based interstellar state.

Unfortunatly there is very little in established 'canon' to support the premise that 
the TC was a democracy one way or the other. My reading of AM6 gives a very 
different "spin" to the TC. It states that Estigarribia's coup had fleet support 
because the fleet was largely composed of colonials who were cronically under 
represented in the confederation government. It also states that the TC was 
dominated by Terran interests through out its history. The only other "evidence" 
is that the TC was based on the UN general assembly (hardly a democratic 
body). At its foundation the TC would have had to have incorporated many 
(quite probably a majority) of autocratic states who would be _very_ reluctant to 
see the introduction of democratic reforms in their own patch. The only way it 
could have really worked is for each nation to retain its internal autonomy (and 
political system) and select its representatives to the Confederation by 
whatever means it chose. Perhaps the large democracies might have elected 
representatives, but its just as likely that many nations/regions did not. I think 
its stretching things to assume that the TC was a democracy in the western 
European/US sense. I think it certainly was founded on the principles of 
western liberalism, but I don't think it would have been a true western 
democracy.

After 200 years of fighting for their lives, facing rationing, conscription, the 
constant threat of conquest/spies/etc; the TC evolved to become an 
authoritarian state, I do not think this is an unreasonable (nor unethical) 
assumption. I actually have a hard time believing anything else would have 
happened.

Similarly I've never thought of the Vilani as "facist" either, they are Vilani. If I 
really had to put a label to them I'd say they were closer to communist than 
facist.


Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:17:32 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: MT Task System

SD Mooney wrote:

> (background) with a dash of TNE (for Survival Margin - the best MT
> supplement, ever).

IMHO Survival Margin was one of the best background products prdoced for any
flavour of Trav.
Does anyone know if there is a complete news service archive somewhere?

Paul Bendall

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:47:03
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Democracies in Space

>From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
>Subject: Re:Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 
>
>Traveller history is only _one_ future history. The fact that a democratic
>interstellar government doesn't last in the Traveller history is a
>statement of historical fact (from a fictional Traveller perspective). I
>don't see it as translating into Travller implying that a democratic
>interstelar government is impossible. Although I'll admit that, given the
>limits on communications, any democratic interstellar government would
>have to rely on trusted representatives or take a _long_ time to make
>decisions.
>

I'd say with electing planetary representitives on 7 year terms, and having
them elect sector representitives on seven year terms, you could cope with
2 years there and 2 years back fairly easily.

Then the only ugly questions are do you base the franchise on planetary
governments, or on individual citizens, or some half-assed mix of the two
(did anyone else see the system in the Regency Sourcebook and think 'with
half a gigacredit I could stack the shit out of that assembley' ?).

You also have the issue of whether you dismantle the bedrock of the
Imperium, which is that it rules not the worlds, but the space between the
worlds. Once you admit voting rights, then other civil rights tend to raise
their ugly heads ... and then you get the problems of local and individual
rights vs the view of the elected representitives.

Ian Whitchurch

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:14:57 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #931

Phillip McGregor wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The US ... indeed, *any* country where the government is elected by less than
50% of the people is not a democracy. In Oz we have compulsory voting - so, as
much as I dislike our PM and all he stands for, he can claim to have a mandate
from a hell of larger percentage of the people than Bill Clinton (or Newt
Gingrich) can.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The ones who didn't vote could have...well, OK, they kind of did, but
"none of the above" isn't very good at hosting state dinners. <g>

Still, the fact that they had the _option_ to vote is most significant.

It is a problem when more than half the electorate doesn't bother to
vote, but that doesn't mean we've gone and changed government
codes on you.

Walt Smith

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 98 23:23:55 
From: jamesd@spirit.com.au
Subject: FAQ has a new keeper

Hello,

  As of this message I am officially retiring as 'Keeper of the TML
FAQ'. Stuart Squibb <scs@vectis.demon.co.uk> has kindly taken over the
role. In addition he has also agreed to host the FAQ. It can now be
found at http://www.vectis.demon.co.uk/traveller/faq/tml-faq.html

  The old version of the TML will be taken down from my web site and
redirections put in place to Stuart's updated FAQ. The SSDS pages
including the Java ship designer applet 'Starship Assembly Line' can
still be found on my web site.

Bye,
James Dempsey
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 email: jamesd@spirit.com.au             | Neptune, Titan, stars can frighten!
 WWW:   http://www.spirit.com.au/~jamesd |   Astronomy Domine - Pink Floyd

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:56:34 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: compulsory voting

The US ... indeed, *any* country where the government is elected by less
than
50% of the people is not a democracy. In Oz we have compulsory voting - so,
as
much as I dislike our PM and all he stands for, he can claim to have a
mandate
from a hell of larger percentage of the people than Bill Clinton (or Newt
Gingrich) can.
**********************
he can claim it....doesn't mean he has it.....

for example in Brasil there is also compulsory voting....this means that
whoever is first on the ballot (drawn at random) generally wins....people
have to vote (if you don't vote you can't work) so they just mark down the
first one and go home.  do you get a 'none of the above' option?  or a 'it
doesn't matter' option...if so why compulsory voting?  you don't even have
the freedom to *not* vote...how is that more 'democratic'?

ever consider that your PM was elected due to random chance instead of
considered opinion?  was he first on the ballot?

sorry for the rant, but that is one of my hot buttons having seen
compulsory voting in action.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 08:56:33 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: The Terran Confederation (Was: Democracy etc.)

Had a little spare time there, Andrew? :-)

Awesome post! It just became part of my TU background.

Thanks!!

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:02:26 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

Phil McGregor wrote:
>
> What do the rest of you think?
>

Personally, I think part of it is the fact that with communication limited
to the speed of travel, there's no practical method of running a democracy.
By the time the parties involve learn that there is going to _be_ a vote,
the matter that is being voted on has past.

It is worth noting, however, that both Dulinor and Strephon felt that the
Imperium was ignoring the little guy too much...Dulinor just didn't think
Strephon was moving fast enough (or so I recall).


+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                         |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/ - AOL IM: Iowa Akins |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/ - AOL IM: CMS AndyA  |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+    |
|       vi+ da+                                                        |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+      |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                             |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 07:10:16 -0700
From: Sanders <timmon@primenet.com>
Subject: Grayson

At 11:10 AM 10/12/98 +0000, you wrote:
>You've got Haven = France; Manticore - United Kingdom; Silesia = Prussia;
>Solarian League = America (a very much out of time America).
>
>Has anyone figured out what Grayson is the equivalent of, historically
speaking?
>I haven't ... maybe there *isn't* a parallel?

As one currently living in the midst of it, I always assumed that Grayson
was the "Mormon Empire" writ large. Many of the cultural, social,
historical, and (to a lesser degree) religious aspects are certainly
similar, which is not a suprise, considering *where* the Graysons are
supposed to have migrated from in the first place - Idaho and the
surrounding western American states.

L8r,
Paul
 

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:20:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: One Democratic Model

While maintaining a democracy on the multi-sector level runs into major
problems of space and time, it should be possible to have a *more
democratic* structure. The Zhodani Consulate, to one degree, is an
example: if they broadened the franchise so that anyone, rather than
just nobles, could vote for community council or hold office, it at least
would have grass roots democracy.... throughout the consualte.

Travel times should allow you to maintain democracy on a represenative
basis up to the subsector level and I think allow the election of a long
term sector governor if the terms were, say, 10 years. One can reduce the
demogogue factor by requiring a sector governor to have served as a
subsector governor first. He can be re-elected for a second term.

For multi-sector government, I would say abandon the strict democratic
model and instead have an Upper House on capital or the equivelent.
Each sector has 2 representatives on it who serves for life or until
retired or censored by the Upper House (requires 3/4 vote). If an Upper
House member dies or retires, the sector governor at home  advances into
his position, his vice president takes over, and he may appoint another
pro-tem vice president from among someone who was a subsector governor
etc. All officials, because of the possibility of moving up, would keep a
general idea on the next level of government. If a sector governor didn't
want the upper house job, it goes to his VP; failing that, the subsector
presidents get together and vote one of their number into the job.

I think that would work. The subsector government is small enough to be
responsive to an electorate with, say, 4 year terms. The sector government
with 10 year terms has enough time to get some things done between
elections at the speed of travel. The upper house is not democratic, but
the requirements for membership ensure that leaders familiar with and
probably sympathetic to their sectors will be appointed...

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 11:02:20 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium

>>Microsoft eventually won. This also neatly explains Virus: it was
>actually
>>Windows 1120 :-)
>
><LOL> - except that, true to form, the Virus would not have been ready
>for beta-release until 1125.

Actually Virus was the Imperial millenium bug, 120 years late :-)

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 11:24:19 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #930

At 11:10 AM 10/12/98 +0000, you wrote:
>On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 23:03:48 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 23:00:06 -0400
>>From: "Walter G. Smith" <smithw@hartwick.edu>
>>Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller...
>>
>>Was reading one of Weber's books, _A Short Victorious War_, when
>>I saw Weber's take on the scariest thing that can happen to a
>>democracy: what happens when the mob realizes they can get more
>>bread and circuses just by voting for it.
>
>Err, how is your historical knowledge?
>
>*I* thought that Rob. S. Pierre and the planet of New Paris were dead 
>giveaways!
>
>I mean, am I the *only* person who was expecting the PRS "Witch of Endor" to be
>captured by Honor in her escape from Hell?

I was willing to sit on the sidelines on this one, but the comment above
kinda pissed me off.  I just bought the damn book and now I know what
happens.  Thanks.  :-(



Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:41:06 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: 1998 (Ig)Nobel Prizes

Just as there are Nobel prizes for scientific research, there
are also IgNobel prizes awarded to the silliest research programs.
The two most interesting of this year's winners (IMO) are:

     Troy Hurtubise of North Bay, Ontario... took home an Ig in
safety engineering for developing and testing a suit of armor
impervious to grizzly bears. 
     The entrepreneur was attacked by a grizzly when he was 18
and has been working toward understanding the beasts ever since.
Despite his intense claustrophobia, Hurtubise has spent a dozen
years testing these suits-even getting rammed by a pickup truck
traveling at 50 mph to simulate the force of a grizzly attack. 
     At a post-Ig lecture at Harvard on Friday, Hurtubise
unveiled the next generation of grizzly suit, a model he calls
the G Man Genesis. The new suit, made of a new alloy stronger
but lighter than titanium, can withstand temperatures reaching
3,000 degrees Fahrenheit and can't be stopped by an AK-47.

[ObTrav: I have no idea why he won. Can you say "combat armor"?]


    Finally, this year's biology prize went to Peter Fong of
Gettysburg College, a man who fed Prozac to clams. The treatment
seems to make the mollusks happy-at least happy enough to
reproduce. Prozac boosts the levels of the neurotransmitter
serotonin, a chemical event that induces spawning in clams. 
     "It's nice to be recognized," Fong said by phone from his
office in Pennsylvania. "But it's not something I think I'll put
on my CV." 
     In his acceptance note-read at the ceremony by Peter Kramer,
author of Listening to Prozac-Fong thanked the clams. "They gave
their lives for research," he said. "But at least they got to have 
sex first."

[ObTrav: The megacorp's strike force, despite terrible (and
expensive) losses finishes looting the secret Imperial bio research
station databank and returns to the ship. Upon downloading the
station's holocrystals to the ship's computer, the PCs find the
research to be...]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 11:46:37 EDT
From: Ubwon@aol.com
Subject: please remove me

please remove me from your mailing list, I dont have the time anymore to
follow the e-mails

thanks

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 11:53:45 -0700
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: Weber & history

>*I* thought that Rob. S. Pierre and the planet of New Paris were dead 
>giveaways!

   I remember reading at one of the HH sites that his editors thought the
name was a bit heavy handed.

   His editors did make him cut a scene he wrote in protest of the cover
art of "Field of Dishonor."

It went something like this...A historian of old Earth meets with
Steadholder Harrington.  He takes care to examine her hands, and is visibly
relieved not to find her wearing one sequined glove...




- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/  Opinions Mine!
"The whole world loves a lover"
is an interesting theory, but a very bad legal defense.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:57:09 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Military History

Walter G. Smith wrote:
> 

> Are you sure of the found date? I'd thought the 7th was around during
> the early "Indian Wars" (when a lot of Civil War cavalry commanders
> earned their combat experience). If not, no big deal - an occaisional
> running gag in my Traveller campaign was glaring errors in ancient
> Terran history. What, you didn't know that the Irish painted their
> bodies green and invaded New York City?
>

But they do...every St Paddys day...

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 11:04:26 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Re: Archival materials

>>>>
Anyway, once you get into the well sealed vault, you'd have the rock
carvings or inscribed metal plates. They'd contain enough info to
(hopefully) enable the finders to decode the more compact media,
which
would be the bulk of the archives. 
>>>>
A number of different cultures have used a gold alloy in foil or
plate form to create bound books.  The characters were incised in the
plates/foil.  This has got to be a bit tedious (as well as expensive),
but lasts well for thousands of years.
- - Joseph

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:16:20 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: Military History

> > Are you sure of the found date? I'd thought the 7th was around during
> > the early "Indian Wars" (when a lot of Civil War cavalry commanders
> > earned their combat experience). If not, no big deal - an occaisional
> > running gag in my Traveller campaign was glaring errors in ancient
> > Terran history. What, you didn't know that the Irish painted their
> > bodies green and invaded New York City?
> But they do...every St Paddys day...

That's just the reinactment <sp>...

> Bruce Johnson

Legate Legion, Militant Jewish Terrorist
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

We are Microsoft of Borg.  Your distinctive capabilities will be adapted to
service us.  Resistance is futile.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:01:20 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re: Archbishop Snerd

 Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk wrote:

>May I also publicly apologise to Steve Daniels who contributed 7 religions
>and mysteriously got missed from the credits.  The culprit will of course
>spend eternity in a particularly nasty religion's hell.  How about _101
>Hells_ anyone?  Don't the Chinese have 7?

I would like to second this apology on behalf of BITS - I've forwarded the
correction to Andy for changes in reprints. I don't know where this went
wrong, (probably in the transfering from Tim to me to Andy) but I feel bad
about this. Sorry Steve.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:03:15 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>I understand that but what is the relationship between TL and computational
>power?  In GURPS it's an order of magnatude (x10) but I have not seen this
>related in traveller or any other game in this way.

CSC and T4 discuss these relationships, albeit indirectly. There are tables
for computers at various ratings, at various TLs.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:11:29 -0400
From: "Chauncey Smith" <csmith@ICDC.com>
Subject: Re: A thought on Game Design

- ----------
> From: William F. Hostman <aramis@gci.net>
> To: traveller@MPGN.COM
> Subject: A thought on Game Design
> Date: Monday, October 05, 1998 11:23 PM
> 
> One of the things I realized while reading a copy of CORPS 1st ed is just
> how different game design is now from when the LBB's came out.
> 
> Back then, basic sets were rules mechanics, usually devoid of background.
> Settings were all supplements. Examples: D&D vs Greyhawk; Runequest vs
> Glorantha; Space Opera vs the various sector books; CT.
> 
> Now, most games are over  50% background material, and usually about 30%
> Cgen, and the other 20% being the rules mechanics. Perfect examples are
> WoD (Vampire, Mage, Werewolf, etc), Fading Suns, SLA industries.
> 
> 
> MT was mostly rules and CGen, with about 30% of the base three books
being
> background; about normal for that era (85-90).
> 
> TNE was about the same... but slightly more space on CGen IIRC.
> 
> 2300ad, like MT, was tied to its' setting in CGen, but easily
divorceable.
> 
> In 1st ed of CORPS, the author note that it was the first time he'd
written
> a game with more space on background than on rules....
> 
This is true. Due to the fact that now days ppl buy the setting and not the
system.
With the Now 3rd generation Systems like Gurps and heros and fudge. the
only reason. to buy a new game and not an add-on or supplement is that the
game adds something that is not caputured in the 3rd gen system. I play
WW's Vampire and WoD and not the Gurps version because of the flavor there.
I play Trav because I like the term based charater creation. I play Fang
Shui because it's my Idea of Hong Kong Action movies.

This change should continue with T5. Keep the gems that we all like and
make the system fast and free form. TNE damage and combat system with MT
task system and CT charater creation. shorter skill desciptions and tell
use about the Universe that is the Melieu T5.  Since this is a Traveller
release I sugguest all the Classic Major races be avilable for Cgen. and
the second product off the line being a Melieu book with all the stories of
the different melieus. I find that a kkewl way of selling Trav. And it
makes GT and assat as well. GT players will by a set and not feel ripped
off because they have more world information and may play in that system
due to look and feel reasons more then anything else.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:36:56 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: TravGeekCode

The IMTU codes can be found on Robert Eaglstone's website
(http://www.metronet.com/~washi/Tas/Lists/IMTU.html)

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:54:04 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Titan Games Preview for (10/11/98)

>    Web Site location: http://www.titan-games.com/
...
>Used Items:
>-----------

>    Judges Guild:
>        (Traveller)
>            (Adventure)
>                Dra`k'ne Station (105) [$14, N]
>                Marooned on Ghostring (640) [$13, N]
>                Amycus Probe (710) [$13, M]
>                Simba Safari (730) [$15, N]
>                Port O' Call: Tarlkin's Landing (740) (no maps)[$6, M]
>                Corsairs of the Turku Waste (880) [$15, N]
>            (Sector)
>                Ley Sector (blue symbol on cover) (340) [$12, N]
>                Ley Sector (red symbol on cover) (340) [$12, N]
...
>Sale Items:
>-----------
>    Judges Guild:
>        (Traveller)
>            (Adventure)
>                Waspwinter (940) [$6, M]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:43:54 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Spoilers (was re: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #930)

Kurt Feltenberger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>I mean, am I the *only* person who was expecting the PRS "Witch of Endor"
to be
>captured by Honor in her escape from Hell?

I was willing to sit on the sidelines on this one, but the comment above
kinda pissed me off.  I just bought the damn book and now I know what
happens.  Thanks.  :-(
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I was trying to keep my comments limited to the prologue of the book,
just for that reason. Apologies that the conversation took it's natural
course from there, 'twas imperceptive on my part.

Walt Smith

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 11:10:13 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #923

Rob Prior wrote the following:



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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 13:46:34 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: 101 Vehicles

Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU> writes:
>Emperor's Vehicles was a great idea that was poorly executed, hopefully
>in T5 we can get it right.

Too true.

I've written the text for 101 Vehicles, which I was hoping BITS would
publish. Is there a demand for this? (The vehicles are CSC designs.)



PS. Actually there's more than 101 vehicles. I've already up past 150...
***************************************************************************
**



      If these vehicles could be used in TNE or G:T I for one would be very
      interested.



Leo

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:38:42 -0300
From: Fabio Mascarenhas <fabio@darksiderpg.ml.org>
Subject: Re: compulsory voting (OFF-TOPIC!!)

Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com wrote:

NOTE: I'm not defending compulsory vote, it's just that this post had
some misconceptions about it.

> for example in Brasil there is also compulsory voting....this means that
> whoever is first on the ballot (drawn at random) generally wins....people
> have to vote (if you don't vote you can't work) so they just mark down the
> first one and go home.  do you get a 'none of the above' option?  or a 'it

I am a brazilian so I feel I am more qualified to speak about this: it
doesn't happen. There never was a direct correlation between being first
in the first row and being the elected, and as we're moving to a fully
electronic system this won't be an issue anymore by year 2002 or so.

> doesn't matter' option...if so why compulsory voting?  you don't even have
> the freedom to *not* vote...how is that more 'democratic'?

You can give a blank vote or void your vote by voting on a candidate
that doesn't exist.

> sorry for the rant, but that is one of my hot buttons having seen
> compulsory voting in action.

Certainly you have not seen it here in Brazil.

Fabio
fabio@darksiderpg.ml.org

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #933
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 12 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 934



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Spoilers (was re: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #930)
Re: Info on Galactic 2.x and other stuff
Re: Star Wars Democracy
Re: compulsory voting (OFF-TOPIC!!)
Re: MT Task System
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs(long)
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: compulsory voting (OFF-TOPIC!!)
Re: MT Task System
Re: Colonial units and the callous British
Re: Piracy
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller...
Another modification for the T4/5 task system
State Control & Documentation 
Re: Weber & history 
Re: Reactionless Thrusters
Re: Virus/Win1120
Re: Reactionless Thrusters

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:21:48 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Spoilers (was re: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #930)

At 01:43 PM 10/12/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Kurt Feltenberger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>I mean, am I the *only* person who was expecting the PRS "Witch of Endor"
>to be
>>captured by Honor in her escape from Hell?
>
>I was willing to sit on the sidelines on this one, but the comment above
>kinda pissed me off.  I just bought the damn book and now I know what
>happens.  Thanks.  :-(
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>I was trying to keep my comments limited to the prologue of the book,
>just for that reason. Apologies that the conversation took it's natural
>course from there, 'twas imperceptive on my part.

Not a problem.  I read the last couple pages, so I "knew" what was going to
happen, if only in gross dimensions.  After all, why would Weber off his
cash cow?  

ObTrav/GURPS:  I would _LOVE_ to see a sourcebook using the Traveller
system for Weber's universe.  

Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 11:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv@e2.empirenet.com>
Subject: Re: Info on Galactic 2.x and other stuff

Jeff Norton <jmnorton@earthlink.net> asked:
> What is Galactic? I mean, I know it maps the Trav galaxy, but, where do you
> get it?

It's available from my homepage:
http://members.aol.com/jimvassila  (just go to the programs section)

A more direct route is:
http://members.aol.com/jimvassila/progs.htm#galactic
(mentioned so that folks can establish a link to it from their own
homepages if they like the program enough)

Beware, it's about 6 megs. Be prepared to go get a snack and perhaps
mow the lawn after you begin downloading. Also, make sure you have
enough space on your harddrive before you start (you'd be surprised
how many people forgot about this).

The server in Georgia which has been carrying the program has been
going up and down recently due to hacker-problems, but I think they've
finally sorted all that out now. For those who have tried to use
Galactic from the TML cdrom distributed by Bryan, you need to copy
the program over to your harddisk and then unset the read-only flags.
The reason for this is that Galactic modifies some of its own files
in order to keep track of where you are in the program (what section
of space you're looking at). If those files are read-only, then it'll
have trouble doing this and likely bomb. I've talked to Bryan about
this, and so far the easiest fix seems to be to distribute the
program as a single zipfile on the cdrom so that users will no longer
try to run it directly from the cd.

Also, for those interested in sector development, there's a galactic
mailing list in operation, though activity on it has been sporadic at
best. Inquire for more details... -Jim

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:55:27 +0100
From: Mark Watson <markw@antares.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy

Phillip McGregor wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:07:29 -0400, you wrote:
>
> >> Star Wars: The struggle between the Rebels (who are democratic) vs the Evil
> >> Empire
> >
> >I'll have to assume the episode where Leia is elected princess is going to be in the
> >prequel.
>
> Nope, but its made plain that the Empire was founded on the bones of the Old
> Republic. There's no reason why you can't have an elective monarchy, anyway.
> Look at the Holy Roman Empire and its system (no, its not even close to a
> perfect example, with nobles electing another noble, but the principle is
> there).
>

A republic does not necessarily equal a democracy. Although I'm sure that if you pinned
George Lucas down on it, he'd establish the Republic (and the rebels) as a democracy,
since our willingness to identify with them is pretty key to the series. But I'd say
Traveller has a background which is richer than this goodies-baddies thing.
M

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:57:46 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: compulsory voting (OFF-TOPIC!!)

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:38:42 -0300
From: Fabio Mascarenhas <fabio@darksiderpg.ml.org>
Subject: Re: compulsory voting (OFF-TOPIC!!)
Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com wrote:
NOTE: I'm not defending compulsory vote, it's just that this post had
some misconceptions about it
**********
please let me know specificly what I got wrong...it has been a good 8-9
years  for me..when Collor was elected.
> for example in Brasil there is also compulsory voting....this means that
> whoever is first on the ballot (drawn at random) generally wins....people
> have to vote (if you don't vote you can't work) so they just mark down
the
> first one and go home.  do you get a 'none of the above' option?  or a
'it
I am a brazilian so I feel I am more qualified to speak about this: it
doesn't happen. There never was a direct correlation between being first
in the first row and being the elected, and as we're moving to a fully
electronic system this won't be an issue anymore by year 2002 or so.
************
Glad to here it. there was much made over who would be first one on the
election ballot during that election tho.


> doesn't matter' option...if so why compulsory voting?  you don't even
have
> the freedom to *not* vote...how is that more 'democratic'?
You can give a blank vote or void your vote by voting on a candidate
that doesn't exist.
****************
at the tiem of that election, a blank or voided vote did not count as a
vote....IIRC blank or void got about 20-30% and actulaly scored higher than
one of the front runners...more people would rather se noone in office,
that him but he still made it to the second round....has this changed?

> sorry for the rant, but that is one of my hot buttons having seen
> compulsory voting in action.
Certainly you have not seen it here in Brazil.
************
How could I miss the TV ads for Rede Povo?  now it has been a long time,
and things may have changed,  but did I get the facts straight (for that
election) if not please point out my errors.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:11:46 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: MT Task System

there is one up to the point of the rebellion (ie: covering the FFW) at
the Gurps Traveller site. Also there is a copy or two floating about on
the web <mumblesmurf> has a "Not the IG Website" that had it...sadly I
cannot for the life of me remember his name right now.

There was a compilation, floating about on the net, compiled by Clay
Bush. I have a copy, but long ago the file got corrupted and the first
couple of entries got eaten, that has served as the basis for several of
the copies floating about on the net.

And looking at it, those entries are in html form on Bryan's wondrous
HWIG/TML CD...

But...many of the entries in SM were written for that book, I think.

Paul Bendall wrote:
> 
> SD Mooney wrote:
> 
> > (background) with a dash of TNE (for Survival Margin - the best MT
> > supplement, ever).
> 
> IMHO Survival Margin was one of the best background products prdoced for any
> flavour of Trav.
> Does anyone know if there is a complete news service archive somewhere?
> 
> Paul Bendall

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:21:47 +0100
From: Mark Watson <markw@antares.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs(long)

Rupert Boleyn wrote:

> Before I start I'd like to appologise for any offence my tone may cause,
> and for any & all spelling mistakes - a couple of litres of homebrew beer
> will do this to one.

That's OK. Ditto. And I've corrected the spelling.

>
> At 22:08 11/10/98 +0100, Mark Watson wrote:
> >Phillip McGregor wrote:
> >> Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as
> >> expressed in Traveller is anti-democratic?
>
> >... the imperium runs as a loose confederacy for general
> >purposes.
>
> There is no way the 3I can be called a confederacy. A loose federation,
> perhaps, but not a confederacy - the 3I has the ultimate power, not its
> member worlds (if they did the 3I wouldn't be nearly as large or as
> powerful as it became).

What I said was it runs like a confederacy. Government is highly devolved. But as
a strict description, you're right ... the various worlds have no choice about
whether they're in the imperium.

> As far as I can see in the OTU the nobility are a hell of a lot more
> powerful than that, in general. Sure some knighted war hero on the lecture
> circuit wouldn't have much power os influence, but how about all those
> hereditary nobles? They own and rule land and have jobs in the imperial
> beaucracy. These people have serious power - far more than any local
> government that doesn't ahve some imperial titles of its own.

Some of them run their worlds, some (most) of them don't. At least IMTU. However
the fact that the noble "class" occupies most of the important jobs in the
bureaucracy, and probably a good few in the armed forces, is important.

>
> >> I think in general the nobility are not so much motivated by
> >> high principle,
> >> than by power, comfort and money.
>
> IMO this latter is even more likely to result in the disintergration seen
> in MT than misguided noblesse oblige would be. Besides isn't this what the
> decadence in the late 3I was shown to be?

It would if you thought the high moral standing of the nobility was key to the
stability of the 3rd Imperium in the first place. I don't think it was. I think
the key was the organisation and loyalty of the armed forces (granted, maybe due
to the position of the nobility), and the coincidence of interest between the
imperial government and the megacorporations. MT modifies this slightly and
starts giving greater weight to the archdukes. But the "playing pieces" in the
civil war are the fleets (and up to a point, the megacorps), not the nobility.

But ... at this point the nobility's position is based not upon a chivalric
ideal, but upon class (and presumably, money). So their "decadence" is
irrelevant. And the motivations I mention, while not particularly "nice", aren't
really decadent either.

> >>This is a poor analogy. Fascism was distinguished (if that is the word) by
> >> its irrationalism. Milieu 0 is just realpolitik - it's "great power" empire
> >> building.
>
> Only if you consider all-out free enterprise and profiteering as
> realpolotik, rather than just another idealology for greed to dress up in.

I'm not sure I can parse that sentence. My point is that M0 can't be described as
fascism. The aggression and greed of the Syleans (and of their rivals) may not be
particularly palatable, but that it how empires get built.

> IMO this is a little too strong. Much of modern democractic ideals come
> from Plato, though in a much more universal form.

Not Plato, I think. Even if you're trying to argue that it's all handed down from
the Greeks. Plato's somewhere at the other extreme.

> I don't recall anyone actually talking about representative democracy in
> particular, just democracy in general. Sometimes I'm inclined towards the
> view that representative democracy isn't actually democracy at all,
> especially after watching a 'representative' voting against the public's
> will for thier own selfish reasons.

We were talking about the democratic tradition. Representative democracy is the
only real democratic tradition, in the sense of something that has been passed
down and tried on a large scale in a number of different places. Since the
classical era, Athenian style participatory democracy has been tried in medieval
Novgorod, Hungary and Poland, and, er, that's it.

> >>Both Athens and Rome would establish authoritarian regimes in times of
> >> crisis - these
> >> were the original meanings of the words "tyrant" and "dictator". Both
> >> Athens and Rome
> >> attempted to construct empires. Athens foundered as a result, whereas Rome
> >> succeeded.
>
> Athens didn't fail as a result of its Tyrants, nor did Rome succeed as a
> result of hers. In fact a good case could be made for the reverse. Athens'
> Tyrants gave her a 'universal' justice system, Rome's gave her what we call
> the 'Roman Empire'.

My point was that Athens foundered as a result of her attempts to further develop
her empire, not as a result of her political organisation. And that, both
democratic Athens and republican Rome attempted with varying degrees of success
to impose their (undemocratic) rule on their neighbours.

> >>  For most of European history since the fall of Rome I'd bet the average
> Western European's idea of a perfect
> >> government was one which strictly imposed the tenets of Christianity,
> rather than one
> >> which reintroduced ideas which were effectively lost until the Renaissance.
>
> I beg to differ. From say 500AD to 800AD most inhabitants of Europe
> wouldn't have been even a little bit interested in a Christian government,
> except to kill its representatives. Even those who were nominally Christian
> would have been happier if the governing authorities simply went away,
> seeing as generally all they did (from the locals perspective) was to
> gather taxes.

Well I said it was a bet - in the absence of decent polling figures we can only
speculate. From about 800 to 1650 (say), though, Christianity and its internal
conflicts were the dominant forces underlying European political institutions.
But it's fair to say they weren't too worried about democracy.

>
> >> Traveller's just a setting. It's a good setting, which makes for interesting
>
> >> adventures. The political setting is just realistic enough to have genuine
> political
> >> adventures. And the characters can question the politics if they like
> (unless it's TNE,
> >> where that would get them vented).
>
> Where do you get that? In the Coalition there were a number of major
> political debates in which no side was clearly right, so how would
> questioning politics get you vented? At a wild guess you don't like TNE, do
> you?

Well you got me there, Rupert. Right on the button.

M

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:32:01 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

I tend toward the following on characters who have less skill levels than the
number of dice in the task (2.5D rounds down to 2D).

SKILLS
	A character may use the skills he or she has received or learned in the
course of prior careers and education. These skills are recorded by the player
on the Character Card (or elsewhere). 
	It’s Harder Than I Thought. If a task requires more dice than the character
has applicable skill levels, then increase the difficulty one level. For
example, a character with Skill-2 trying a Formidable task (3D) finds that
"It’s Harder Than I Thought!" Task difficulty increases one level to
Staggering (4D).
	Round half dice down (so Skill-2 is sufficient to handle a Difficult (2.5D)
without penalty.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:32:04 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

	Default Skill Tasks: A character may try a task with a Default Skill, even if
the character does not have that skill. Skill level used is 0 (zero) and the
associated characteristic is halved (round fractions up).

I propose to scrap this (/2 of char) and instead direct the user of a default
skill-0 to the "It's Harder Than I Thought" Rule. 

DEFAULT SKILL TASKS
An unskilled character may try a task if it uses a Default Skill. Skill level
is 0 (zero) and the It’s Harder Than I Thought Rule Applies.

	It’s Harder Than I Thought! If the skill level being used is less than the
number of dice required (treat 2.5D as 2D) then increase difficulty level by
+1.

But if its only +1 Difficulty, then itis easily negated by Cautious. So I may
make it +2 levels of Difficulty

Marc Miller

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:41:56 -0300
From: Fabio Mascarenhas <fabio@darksiderpg.ml.org>
Subject: Re: compulsory voting (OFF-TOPIC!!)

Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com wrote:

> please let me know specificly what I got wrong...it has been a good 8-9
> years  for me..when Collor was elected.

A sorry incident. :-) But certainly nothing to do with him being first
or not, more like a massive media campaign for him.

> I am a brazilian so I feel I am more qualified to speak about this: it
> doesn't happen. There never was a direct correlation between being first
> in the first row and being the elected, and as we're moving to a fully
> electronic system this won't be an issue anymore by year 2002 or so.
> ************
> Glad to here it. there was much made over who would be first one on the
> election ballot during that election tho.

There is (or was, not much now), but this doesn't mean it matters much.
Support from strong political figures and political marketing have much
more impact.
 
> You can give a blank vote or void your vote by voting on a candidate
> that doesn't exist.
> ****************
> at the tiem of that election, a blank or voided vote did not count as a
> vote....IIRC blank or void got about 20-30% and actulaly scored higher than
> one of the front runners...more people would rather se noone in office,
> that him but he still made it to the second round....has this changed?

If a candidate has less then 50% of valid votes there's a second round
between him and the second place. This is catch: *valid* votes, so
blanks and voids don't count, and by voting blank or void you are in
fact helping the first place. (of course if you didn't go vote you'd be
doing the same thing)
 
> Certainly you have not seen it here in Brazil.
> ************
> How could I miss the TV ads for Rede Povo?  now it has been a long time,
> and things may have changed,  but did I get the facts straight (for that
> election) if not please point out my errors.

Well, I didn't say there weren't big media campaigns, heavy political
marketing, all kinds of dirty stuff going on, just that compulsory
voting has nothing to do with it. :-)

Fabio
fabio@darksiderpg.ml.org

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:40:38 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: MT Task System

Bruce Johnson wrote:

> And looking at it, those entries are in html form on Bryan's wondrous
> HWIG/TML CD...

You're right. I've got a copy of the CD (but haven't had the time to explore it
properly yet) and found them. Brings back some memories....

Paul

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:59:52 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Colonial units and the callous British

>From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
>Subject: Colonial units and the callous British

... The colonial units suffered 
>heavier casualties because they got used more, and the main reason they got 
>used more was because they were stronger and better than the British units. 

  One further explanation that helps is that the colonial troops weren't as
close to suffering morale collapse (as the French largely did in `17 and the
Germans finally in late 1918); some British units were apparently reaching
the end of their useful lifespan as effective (and certainly as offensive)
formations.

  Given the nature of the 3I's manpower pool (and most other large Trav states,
I suspect) this wouldn't be an issue except in civil wars.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:59:56 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracyy
...
>>>What about subsidised pirates?  One with unofficial 'letters of mark'?  Back
>>>at the Varga example.  What if the 'Varga pirates' were Zoodanni or
>>>Solomanni backed?  Any booty they get is fee and clear.  Their saleries are
>>>payed and repair bases are available in the Extents.  Their primary job is
>>>to raise a little heck for a few years before an attack on the other border.
...
>However, Varga corsaers are canon and a constant problem.  As for the
>'piracy debate' house rule, I was asking for an opinion of the campain
>posibilities of the discribed senerio and ideas to fleash it out.  I was not
>proposing it as justification for some point in some debate.  I have not
>been on this list long enough to see this debate.  My question was/is, "Do
>you have any sugestions?"

  I can't see why the case you represented shouldn't be used, although there
might be some logical problems in using it repeatedly over a long period of
time.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:00:04 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller...

>From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
>Subject: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the
RoM coup)
...
>Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as expressed in
>Traveller is anti-democratic?

  Last time I checked that was factual history that was being represented in
the game books.

>The Imperium is a repressive dictatorial authoritarian regime based on a mix of
>might makes right, power based on social stratification, divine right of kings
  
  It is unclear to me in what way the Imperium is repressive - after all,
doesn't
it make few demands on its' citizens beyond taxes and enforcement of what amount
to internal security laws?

>etc. Sure, *in theory* the Imperium is all sweetness and light ... but it
allows
>(and encourages) the Megacorps to rip off the people for a Credit, as long as
>the Emperor gets his share. It suppresses technological development. It
>manipulates and destabilises member regimes (sure, the ones they do it to in
>published adventures are ones that you and I would probably say deserve it, but
>look at what the Ine Givar supposedly wanted ... per their manifesto/background
>on Pyramid). It rips off innocents for its own socio-political ends (as per
>Milieu 0, but not limited to that Milieu by any means). It promotes the worst
>sort of radical laissez faire capitalism coupled with organised monopolistic
>practices.

  With relatively few modifications most of the above would be applied by some
to the modern global economy.

>Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an
American
>thing? Why?

  Non-democratic is not necessarily anti-democratic. YMMV.

>Sure, you *could* argue that some of the planetary governments in Traveller are
>democratic. So what? The main game is with the big boys. The Imperium. The Evil
>Empire.

  If the planetary administration is a well-behaved clone of 1960's British
democracy, then how can and why would the Imperium interfere with them so
long as they paid their taxes and enforced Imperial law?

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:50:25 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

	Default Skill Tasks: A character may try a task with a Default Skill, even if
the character does not have that skill. Skill level used is 0 (zero) and the
associated characteristic is halved (round fractions up).

I propose to scrap this (/2 of char) and instead direct the user of a default
skill-0 to the "It's Harder Than I Thought" Rule. 

DEFAULT SKILL TASKS
An unskilled character may try a task if it uses a Default Skill. Skill level
is 0 (zero) and the It’s Harder Than I Thought Rule Applies.

	It’s Harder Than I Thought! If the skill level being used is less than the
number of dice required (treat 2.5D as 2D) then increase difficulty level by
+1.

But if its only +1 Difficulty, then itis easily negated by Cautious. So I may
make it +2 levels of Difficulty

Marc Miller

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:27:12 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: State Control & Documentation 

Hello,
>From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
>Subject: Re: Transponders
...
>>  There's been a misunderstanding: I didn't suggest detaining such
>>vessels, merely waiting for the paperwork to show up and then decide
>>whether they nedd to be hunted down and seized.
>
>Of course you then have to make sure the paperwork wasn't just
>lost before you commit the resources you need to finding a
>ship with communications that aren't much faster (if you are
>lucky) than the ship you are looking for.   Of course if
>the ship just changes ID (or changes back to a legit one....)

  If the system is automatic then lost documentation will be very rare, and
the delays in the system should be built to allow for any statistically
relevant delays from the X-Boat network.

  Commitment of resources for the search would largely amount to simply
flagging it as a stop and seize target on your hotlist, unless you're
certain it was a hostile and dangerous intelligence ship or the like.
This is unlikely to be very expensive.

  The switching of ID's back and forth presupposes that no highly reliable
ID system exists for ships or their major componenets, and probably not for
crew either. This is a difficult assumption given that this thread pretty
much assumes that some sort of difficult to tamper with  transponder exists
and that G:T has formalized the existence of a rather too effective (IMHO)
universal Imperial ID.

...
>>  Early modern France comes to mind.
>
>An example to the contrary doesn't speak to wether it was "uncommon",
>nor does the example have the decentralized society as presented
>in Traveller.  Finally, communications in that example are fast
>and easy compare to Traveller.

  More to the point, any state that has the organizational technology does
tend to implement such measures - both Imperial and Republican Rome, France,
China, ancient Egypt, certainly the Inca and probably the Aztec states (and
the Spanish imperial establishment when it took over) - some of whom had
worse commo and command times and capabilities than the 3I.

  Early modern France had many of the same command problems as the 3I, and
certainly had much authority hived off to lower echelons of officials (many
of whom were effectively unremovable by any practical method).

  FWIW, communications in 18th century France were abysmal, and the
speed of many administrative processes was worse - the central state
accounts were always _years_ behind.

  In effect, the historical reality is that the tracking of as much info
as possible by the state (let alone the private sector) was pretty much a
constant, and an unsupported statement to the contrary would appear to be
wishful thinking.

        Yours truly,
                Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:35:34 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Weber & history 

> 
> >*I* thought that Rob. S. Pierre and the planet of New Paris were dead 
> >giveaways!
> 
>    I remember reading at one of the HH sites that his editors thought the
> name was a bit heavy handed.
> 
>    His editors did make him cut a scene he wrote in protest of the cover
> art of "Field of Dishonor."
> 
> It went something like this...A historian of old Earth meets with
> Steadholder Harrington.  He takes care to examine her hands, and is visibly
> relieved not to find her wearing one sequined glove...

I don't get the reference.  Unless you're thinking she's Michael Jackson...

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:51:56 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

>>>>
It's a little more obvious than the above quote would suggest :-
momentum is not being conserved, hence the term
'reactionless thruster'. This is the physical law being mangled.
>>>>
I have long considered that the "reactionless" thrusters in CT/MT/T4
really do run by reaction, but they just don't have the reaction mass
coming out a nozzle.  The reaction is of the ship against the gravity
well, distorting the gravity well in a way that moves the ship in the
desired direction.  In essence, a ship moving out to 100 diameters is
moving the planet the other direction by a small amount (thus you get
to 100 diameters just a wee bit sooner than a strict accel/decel
equation would predict, but the difference is fairly small -- a few
minutes at most).
- - Joseph

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:54:17 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Re: Virus/Win1120

>>>>
> >Microsoft eventually won. This also neatly explains Virus: it was
actually
> >Windows 1120 :-)
> 
> <LOL> - except that, true to form, the Virus would not have been
ready
> for beta-release until 1125.
>>>>
That's why it was considered a computer virus, because the code
released was actually pre-alpha.
- - Joseph

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

Joseph Kimball writes:

> I have long considered that the "reactionless" thrusters in CT/MT/T4
> really do run by reaction, but they just don't have the reaction mass
> coming out a nozzle.  The reaction is of the ship against the gravity
> well, distorting the gravity well in a way that moves the ship in the
> desired direction.  In essence, a ship moving out to 100 diameters is
> moving the planet the other direction by a small amount (thus you get
> to 100 diameters just a wee bit sooner than a strict accel/decel
> equation would predict, but the difference is fairly small -- a few
> minutes at most).

Heh.  If you do this (a) performance should drop rapidly with distance (like 
contragravity), (b) any changes in acceleration should be subject to a delay
equal to no less than the time required for light to travel from you to your
anchor mass and back again, and (c) power requirements become complex (equal to
no less than the dot product of force and velocity relative to anchor mass) and
_much_ higher than are listed for reactionless thrusters.  Make all those
changes and you no longer violate any conservation laws, though it still
violates physics as we know it.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #934
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 12 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 935



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

US Electorate
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Re: Weber & history 
Re: Grayson
Re: Reactionless Thrusters
Re: Reactionless Thrusters
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: MT Task System
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #924
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #926
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #924
Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Grayson
[GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
re: US electorate
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Imperial Govt IMTU
Honor Harrington Cover Art
GG drilling rigs
Planetology 101 part 6 (last)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:57:56 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: US Electorate

Walt Smith:
>The ones who didn't vote could have...well, OK, they kind of did, but
>"none of the above" isn't very good at hosting state dinners. <g>
>
>Still, the fact that they had the _option_ to vote is most significant.
>
>It is a problem when more than half the electorate doesn't bother to
>vote, but that doesn't mean we've gone and changed government
>codes on you.

Don't know specifics for rest of the US, but in Alaska, 30% turnout of the
electorate is maximum that can be expected. And, of those elligible to
register, only about 1/3rd do so and thus become members of the electorate.
So, rougly 1/9th of alaskans determine alaska's political nature.

This would seem to be a self selecting oligarchy. For what it's worth, I
have heard that much of the country is in similar voting straights....

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:49:27 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

At 10:50 12/10/98 GMT, Phillip McGregor wrote:

>It was the "addition" to canon mentioned by TWG that the Terrans were a
corrupt
>dictatorial mob as bad as the Vilani that triggered off my musings.
>
>There is nothing in previously published material that I am aware of that
really
>makes this an inevitable conclusion.
>
>It is the *trend* that I find distressing.

This, upon reflection, I agree with. Back before T4 came along I used to
read MT's Imperial Encyclopedia and muse on what might have happened if
whatshisname hadn't successfully revolted against the Confederacy. I aways
felt that while the Confederacy was probably not very responsive to its
members wishes (it has always seemed to me that it's a fundamental part of
Traveller that once a state gets big enough that communications slow
centralised government becomes unwieldy, and IMO the Terrans didn't have
the time or experience to devise a workable decentralised system) it was at
least trying to be somewhat representative. Mind you IIRC MT does suggest
that the UN was less than interested in a truely democratic system, so
maybe the war was just a good excuse.

I found T4 irritating, because while the Syleans obviously played a bit
dirty at the begining, at least they had a vision. What's more the CT and
MT 3I (and to some extent the TNE one) wasn't evil in its early days, even
if by 1100 it had become moribund and rotten in the middle. In fact in can
be argued that the Rebellion wouldn't have gone on the way it did if the
lesser nobles and military weren't still reasonably uncorrupt and honest.
With no clear ruler these honourable nobles transfered their loyalty to
whichever contender seemed most worthy of the position. IMO if they had
more corrupt one faction or another would have been able to buy an
overwhelming advantage.

>Look, as bad as the US was prior to the 1960's and Civil Rights, it was a
>democracy. And, by and large, it managed to wage WW2 and then the cold war
>without too many abuses of democratic power and democratic processes. And it
>won. Ditto the UK and Commonwealth.

Sometimes when watching the US system in action (or reading about the 50's
and 60's) I'd be inclined to call it either government by Bureaucracy or an
Oligarchy.

>But democracy has *always* been there, somewhere, as either a reality or as a
>desired ideal.

When Athens recovered some of her former status after the failure of both
the Spartans or the Thebans to control post-Peloppenesian War Greece she
was an open Oligarchy, not a democracy, and her citizens seemed more than
happy with this. Also when Athens was constructing her empire on of the
gifts she brought those who 'joined' along with a permanent Athenian
presence was an Athenian style democracy. Curiously there were a number of
revolts, not all promoted by the former rulers, while after the war there
weren't many pro-democracy revolts in the newly non-democratic states.

>And that, i think, is the key. It is a gift of modern technology ... and, at
>least as much, of the level of education that modern technology has made
>universal. I do not see how this can be taken away *partly* ... if you have
>anything at all democratic in the Imperium, even individual worlds, you
>inevitably have an example of something better than the Imperium and its
>absolutist beliefs.

But is it better? To many, especially those with a Vilani background,
democracy is either going to be uneeded, because they're well enough off
already (this applies if the democracy stays conservative and nothing
changes) or is an actively bad thing (if it becomes radical and changes
things, encourages technological growth, etc). Throughout most of human
existence societies and and people have been intensely conservative, and
the Vilani fit this mould. 

I guess that I don't have a problem with Traveller's lack of democracy, but
I do have a problem with all its government being painted as evil. 

Just because the 3I was doomed to fall didn't mean that it had to be evil
and exploitative right from the start. IMO it would be better if it was
once an example of how an empire can be run well and fairly (though the
3I's attitude towards member worlds would always limited this), but in its
final years became old and senile and finally destroyed itself.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:35:12 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: Weber & history 

>I don't get the reference.  Unless you're thinking she's Michael Jackson...


The resemblence was striking...

(it also gets my vote for worst cover on a HH book)

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls 
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:30:06 EDT
From: Thendal@aol.com
Subject: Re: Grayson

What is Grayson?!!

Thendal

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 16:38:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

My choice for the best way to fix these things is to make them reaction
drives with neutrinos as exhaust.  There's nothing anyone can notice
coming out the back, so they aren't powerful plasma weapons like Heplar.
They are entirely harmless and look just like a reactionless drive,
although they will set off neutrino detectors (not a bad thing IMHO). 

This type of drive does require reaction mass, but the fuel efficiency is
~7.5x that of Heplar, so you only need 2/15s as much fuel.  As long as you
don't need more than a 100 hours or so the fuel requirements aren't that
bad.  They also make dandy STL interstellar drives.  The next time I run
I'll likely keep standard thrusters, but these things do intrigue me. 

Comments?


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 16:46:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

John R. Snead writes:
> My choice for the best way to fix these things is to make them reaction
> drives with neutrinos as exhaust.  There's nothing anyone can notice
> coming out the back, so they aren't powerful plasma weapons like Heplar.
> They are entirely harmless and look just like a reactionless drive,
> although they will set off neutrino detectors (not a bad thing IMHO).

Shrug.  Total conversion thrusters (specific impulse 3e+7 Seconds, or about 50
ton-weeks per ton fuel) do a tolerable job of emulating CT fuel consumption
(assuming 5 tons mass per ton displacement, 10% of ship's volume per G-week),
and at least pay something resembling homage to physics.  Exactly what the
output amounts to might vary, but is likely intense enough to be dangerous at
short ranges anyway.  

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:39:20 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@citnet.com>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

Marc,

I like this idea. I would recommend the +2 however. I have one player who's
nick name is "With All Due Caution" since that's the first words out of his
mouth whenever he tries to do ANYTHING.

Mike Peters, Letterworks@CITnet.com
"For my part, I travel not to go anywhere, but to go. I travel for travel's
sake. The great affair is to move."
Robert Louis Stevenson

- -----Original Message-----
From: CardSharks@aol.com <CardSharks@aol.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Monday, October 12, 1998 4:13 PM
Subject: Another modification for the T4/5 task system


> Default Skill Tasks: A character may try a task with a Default Skill, even
if
>the character does not have that skill. Skill level used is 0 (zero) and
the
>associated characteristic is halved (round fractions up).
>
>I propose to scrap this (/2 of char) and instead direct the user of a
default
>skill-0 to the "It's Harder Than I Thought" Rule.
>
>DEFAULT SKILL TASKS
>An unskilled character may try a task if it uses a Default Skill. Skill
level
>is 0 (zero) and the It’s Harder Than I Thought Rule Applies.
>
> It’s Harder Than I Thought! If the skill level being used is less than the
>number of dice required (treat 2.5D as 2D) then increase difficulty level
by
>+1.
>
>But if its only +1 Difficulty, then itis easily negated by Cautious. So I
may
>make it +2 levels of Difficulty
>
>Marc Miller
>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:59:52 EDT
From: Thendal@aol.com
Subject: Re: MT Task System

In a message dated 98-10-12 15:50:39 EDT, you write:

>And looking at it, those entries are in html form on Bryan's wondrous
>> HWIG/TML CD..

Where can I get the above wondrous item?


Thendal

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:06:43 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #924

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:47:17 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 1

 Of course if there was a computerised map available (especially
with click and zoom in/out functions; a good idea for a CD :-) ), things
would
be different....

- ------------------------------

     There was a program put out by a company called Planet III Software,
that was a computer generated map of sectors.  The program was called
"Traveller Navigator" and they had put out four sectors before the collapse
of GDW and the subsequent loss of rights.  For a time the program was still
available as share ware through the Imperium Games web site.  I do not know
if you can still get it, but I loved it.  Not only did it contain the
information for all the systems in each subsector, but allowed you to
attach game notes to them as well.  The program also had allot of the rules
for space travel and movement times Etc. included as well.  They were
working on a program similar to those created by many of you called
"Starbase" which would have used the FF&S rules to design ships, and had
said it would also do some deck designs.  If you look hard you might find
it still on the web out there some where.

Leo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:19:48 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

From:           	CardSharks@aol.com
Date sent:      	Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:50:25 EDT

>	Default Skill Tasks: A character may try a task with a Default Skill, even if
>the character does not have that skill. Skill level used is 0 (zero) and the
>associated characteristic is halved (round fractions up).

>I propose to scrap this (/2 of char) and instead direct the user of a default
>skill-0 to the "It's Harder Than I Thought" Rule. 

>DEFAULT SKILL TASKS
>An unskilled character may try a task if it uses a Default Skill. Skill level
>is 0 (zero) and the It’s Harder Than I Thought Rule Applies.

>	It’s Harder Than I Thought! If the skill level being used is less than the
>number of dice required (treat 2.5D as 2D) then increase difficulty level by
>+1.

>But if its only +1 Difficulty, then itis easily negated by Cautious. So I may
>make it +2 levels of Difficulty

Might I suggest make it +1 if the skill is 1 less than the number of dice, +2 is 
the skill is more than 1 less than the number of dice. That way a character is 
just a little below the required skill level can compensate by acting cautiously 
(effectively lower skilled characters will take greater time) while those seriously 
underskilled will not be able to compensate.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:19:25 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #926

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 17:26:49 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re:101 Vehicles

Sethkimmel@aol.com writes:
><< PS. Actually there's more than 101 vehicles. I've already up past
>150... >>
>
>Please do me a favor and title it 201 vehicles, since there was already a
>101
>vehicles published (DGP?). I am easily confused...:-)

Well, titling is actually Andy's call. And 201 Vehicles would require a
larger book (although I suppose it would save space if I left out such
minor details as prices and tech levels... :-)

What about 102 Vehicles? Hereby also neatly establishing a precident for
sequals to other 101 books.

More to the point, if you want to see it you could write to Andy Lilly
asking him for it.

Alternately, I suppose I could publish it as a PDF file (having finally
got Acrobat) with the printing turned off.

- ------------------------------

     I would love a copy if you could sent it to me.  If you attach it to
an e-mail and sent it to lhale@panlabs.com I should recieve it and be able
to access it.

Leo

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:36:26 -0400
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #924

Yea I bought it too.  Without thinking I never made a backup of it and it
got corrupted.  I have wanted to get a hold of those guys for a couple of
years to see if they would make it available again.  If you stumble onto
their web address I for one would appreciate the post.

Thom

- -----Original Message-----
From: Leo Hale <lhale@panlabs.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Monday, October 12, 1998 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #924


>>Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:47:17 EDT
>>From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
>>Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 1
>>
>> Of course if there was a computerised map available (especially
>>with click and zoom in/out functions; a good idea for a CD :-) ), things
>>would be different....
>>
>------------------------------
>
>     There was a program put out by a company called Planet III Software,
>that was a computer generated map of sectors.  The program was called
>"Traveller Navigator" and they had put out four sectors before the collapse
>of GDW and the subsequent loss of rights.  For a time the program was still
>available as share ware through the Imperium Games web site.  I do not know
>if you can still get it, but I loved it.  Not only did it contain the
>information for all the systems in each subsector, but allowed you to
>attach game notes to them as well.  The program also had allot of the rules
>for space travel and movement times Etc. included as well.  They were
>working on a program similar to those created by many of you called
>"Starbase" which would have used the FF&S rules to design ships, and had
>said it would also do some deck designs.  If you look hard you might find
>it still on the web out there some where.
>
>Leo
>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:26:33 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system

At 03:32 PM 10/12/98 EDT, you wrote:

>	It’s Harder Than I Thought. If a task requires more dice than the
>character has applicable skill levels, then increase the difficulty one
>level. For example, a character with Skill-2 trying a Formidable task (3D)
>finds that "It’s Harder Than I Thought!" Task difficulty increases one
level >to Staggering (4D).


This is a  nice little fix to the problem.

- --

+--------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net  |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/    |
+--------------------------------------+
| "Oh, My God.. they killed STREPHON!  | 
|  You Bastards!!!!                    |
|                -Grand Admiral Kyle   |
+--------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:29:43 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

At 03:32 PM 10/12/98 EDT, you wrote:

>But if its only +1 Difficulty, then itis easily negated by Cautious. So I
may make it +2 levels of Difficulty

How about making "It's Harder Than I Thought" scale out on a one for one
basis?

A Formidible Task requires skill-3.  If Skill-1 tries it, it's two levels
harder.  Makes the "EMT attempts heart surgery" scenario so beloeved around
here more realistic.  If open heart surgery requires skill-5, and Eleven
the EMT has skill-1...
- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:30:48 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

At 07:39 PM 10/12/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Marc,
>
>I like this idea. I would recommend the +2 however. I have one player who's
>nick name is "With All Due Caution" since that's the first words out of his
>mouth whenever he tries to do ANYTHING.

*anything*?  Bet he's a fun one on a date....
- --

+--------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net  |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/    |
+--------------------------------------+
| "Oh, My God.. they killed STREPHON!  | 
|  You Bastards!!!!                    |
|                -Grand Admiral Kyle   |
+--------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:34:50 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Grayson

At 07:30 PM 10/12/98 EDT, you wrote:
>What is Grayson?!!

Grayson is a world in David Wber's _Honor Harrington_ series.  A world
settled by a religious group that wanted to be left alone, they had the
misfortune to pick a world with extreme heavy-metal levels.

Grayson society is very conservative, and at the time of their first
appearence (_The Honor of the Queen_)women had no real rights.  This
changes radically after meeting Cmdr. Honor Harrington, RMN.
- --

+-------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/   |
+-------------------------------------+
| "Some days, you just can't get rid  |
|  of a bomb!"                        |
|     -Adam West, the REAL Batman     |
+-------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

hmm...despite my efforts, I was not able to duplicate the degree to which the
classic AHL sucks...oh well.

Hull: class 60,000, TL 12, unstreamlined.  600,000 sf
Turrets: 360 standardized
Bays: none (using _internal_ bays instead; partly to use up space)
Surface area: 888,000 sf.  Sealed, radical stealth.  Armor DR 8000 body/4000
turrets.
Bridge: command/12 hardened (12 command bridge modules).  This allows a
targeting-9 for every turret, or targeting-10 for every bay/spinal mount.  It
also increases Scan of all sensors by 6 (realistically should be 3).
Modules: 2 engineering, 3600 unpowered jump (36 GW, jump-5), 30,000 jump fuel
(jump-5), 300 fuel processor (2400/hr), 400 staterooms, 150 low berth (capacity
600), 10 sickbay, 120 utility, 40 * 10-space vehicle bay, 40 * 10-space
spacedock (more room, for repairs/etc), 3 * spacedock/200 (each holds 100
spaces of misc. small craft), 4 * 400-space vehicle bay (fuel shuttles), 720
units meson screen (1.2%, DR 16,864), 8 damper units (25 mile; reasonable
implementation of damper-5), 10,000 units unpowered manuever drive (1.25 MT,
125 GW), 4800 units power plant (192 GW), 500 units cargo space, 570 unpowered
TL 12 Xasers (190 triple turrets in 19 batteries, 10.3 GW), 80 unpowered TL 12
fusion guns (40 double turrets in 4 batteries, 2.7 GW), 390 sandcasters (130
triple turrets in 13 batteries), 24 missile bays (internal, take up 1200
spaces), spinal-67 PAW (54 GW; does 6d*20,000 with a range of 17/50 hexes).
Performance: unloaded 296 kT, loaded 310 kT (roughly), 4 Gs, jump-5.  No
airspeed.  Price GCr 31.974

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 21:12:20 -0400
From: "Walter G. Smith" <smithw@hartwick.edu>
Subject: re: US electorate

William F. Hostman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Don't know specifics for rest of the US, but in Alaska, 30% turnout of the
electorate is maximum that can be expected. And, of those elligible to
register, only about 1/3rd do so and thus become members of the electorate.
So, rougly 1/9th of alaskans determine alaska's political nature.

This would seem to be a self selecting oligarchy. For what it's worth, I
have heard that much of the country is in similar voting straights....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
An oligarchy that anyone can be part of, just by deciding to participate?
The usual Traveller oligarchy is supposed to be a more exclusive
club, IMO. They have the right to vote - the responsibility to. Their
fault (for the most part) if they decide not to.

I think you're multiplying the same fraction against itself. "Electorate",
in American usual usage, includes all citizens above the minimum
voting age (with the exception, IIRC, of prisoners). The technical term
might be limited to only those who register, but I'll wager that both your
approx. 30% figures refer to the same statistic - how many Alaskans
participate in their government by voting.

There is a wide variance between presidential and non-presidential
election year turnouts, of course.

In the end, people tend to get the government they deserve.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 21:38:45
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

What system was used to create this?  I'd like to see the data on how the
fusion guns were set up, I'd like to port it over to GURPS: Traveller
(official version)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:01:50 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Imperial Govt IMTU

>From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
>Subject: Re Imperial Govt IMTU
...
>>  I'm sure that the Imperiums representatives can think of various reasons
>>to make their locales more exciting, but the economic growth attributed to
>>warfare is a particularly naughty and inaccurate overgeneralization - you
...
>Warfare stimulate certain sections of the economy, and for the winner, they
>tend to slowly crawl down, based upon historical evidence currently known;
>losers either suddenly drop or build up post-war). Mostly, large
>military-industrial complexes. Also, warfare has the side benefits of
>population control, and keeping a well honed base to draw the Imperial Army
>from. Additionally, it keeps them busy enough distrusting each other that
>they don't bother to look at rebelling from tthe Imperium... for they know
>that if the other side cheats too often, the ImpMil response will eliminate
>them.

  _Investment_ stimulates certain sections of the economy (typically the ones
in which said investment occurs). I doubt that anyone will seriously argue
that the German invasion did more for Russian production than the Stalinist
Five-Year Plans of the `30's (although efficiency likely improved in some
cases :> ).

  If investment level is going to be centrally directed (whether through
forced savings or taxation) it does not follow that destruction of assets
will accomplish more than the production of non-productive ones (let alone
accomplish more than uncontrolled investment in the civilian economy - at
least to hear modern capitalist theorists tell it).

  I keep running into the virtue of population control for warfare, but I've
yet to hear a credible explanation (at least if it's your own population).

  I won't argue that the Imperium might not find warfare expedient :)

>I will honestly admit that it seldom does much for standards of living, but
>it does wonders for tech development. And tech development spins off. Were
...

  Nothing that peacetime allocation of similar (lesser, in all likelihood) R&D
investment wouldn't achieve.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:00:55 -0700
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: Honor Harrington Cover Art

Keven types out:
>>    His editors did make him cut a scene he wrote in protest of the cover
>> art of "Field of Dishonor."
>> 
>> It went something like this...A historian of old Earth meets with
>> Steadholder Harrington.  He takes care to examine her hands, and is visibly
>> relieved not to find her wearing one sequined glove...
>I don't get the reference.  Unless you're thinking she's Michael Jackson...

     That is what exactly who David Weber thought that cover art made her
look like.  He was not happy about this at all.


- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com -- These opinions are mine, no one else wants `em.
A well-educated electorate being necessary to the prosperity of a free 
state, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be 
infringed.  -- http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:09:58 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: GG drilling rigs

Bruce Johnson wrote:

>Oooohhh NAAAaaarrrrrrrffff!
>What a setting: "drilling" rigs floating in a GG atmosphere,
>sucking water and other valuable materials from the depths...

   Now that's a nightmare of an engineering problem, considering 
just how deep water is likely to be found and the temperatures and
pressures involved.  I'd sooner try drilling to the Earth's core for iron.
   Were I the engineer, I'd call it cheaper to set up on some
iceball with a low-tech fission reactor and start melting.  Even
set up an electric generator and start microwaving power to
someplace like your out-system sensor net.  You get better
thermodynamic efficiency at, say, 40 K than at 300, and no
environmentalists worrying about about heat pollution.
   Use the gas giant for its hydrogen content (shuttle tankers to
to the starport, especially if your mainworld is one of those
little desert rockballs where water's in short supply). Helium
and neon are valuable industrial gases, and a lot more common in
gas giants than on habitable worlds.
   

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:10:02 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: Planetology 101 part 6 (last)

  Considerable variation on chemical composition is possible,
but the following patterns are what we see in Sol system. With some
variation, we can expect similar patterns in others.
YMMV.

1) Hydrogen rich
        In order of decreasing volatility,
             Hydrogen, methane, ammonia, water.
   Typical of gas giants. The principal characteristic is a reducing
atmosphere, with plenty of free hydrogen. 

2) Middle hydrogen--Life bearers
        In order of decreasing volatility;
        Methane, ammonia, water, nitrogen, carbon dioxide.
   Heavier hydrocarbons and carbohydrates may also be present.   Neither
strongly reducing nor strongly oxidizing. Good support for many varieties
of biochemistry. Early earth was probably on the lower end of this scale.
Titan may qualify.

3) Hydrogen poor---common.
     nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide
        Water may be present, principally in frozen or liquid state.
Principal characteristic is an oxidizing atmosphere. In most cases, carbon
dioxide dominates, Nitrogen is next most likely. If water is present and
the planet is life bearing, free oxygen may be present.
If water is not present, sulfur dioxide or sulfuric acid may be minor
components.

   The basic composition and chemistry of this galaxy make it
biased in favor of carbon-based, water drinking, oxygen-breathing
organisms.  But for those who like the exotic, there is room
to add organisms which can tolerate or even depend on compounds
poisonous to humans: such as ammonia, nitrogen oxides, hydrogen
cyanide, hydrogen sulfide, and sulfur dioxides, and dozens of
fairly simple organic compounds, without losing too much
credibility.

  

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #935
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 13 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 936



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Honor Harrington Cover Art
Re: 1998 (Ig)Nobel Prizes
Re: Archbishop Snerd
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Does anybody like this idea?
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Re: Does anybody like this idea?
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #927
Re: Does anybody like this idea?
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re : Trade and Economics (sorry, Loren!!)-longish
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Does anybody like this idea?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:16:43 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

To equate freedom with deomocracy is to miss th epoint  Democracies are no
less authoritarian than any other system of gvt.

>You can grow orange trees in Alaska just fine, as long as they are in a
>greenhouse. [I have seen them.]  To continue the analogy freedom is a
>fragile plant which needs nurturing but can be made to grow in any type
>of political soil.  The notion that an authoritarian culture is destined
>to remain autoritarian is a bit of an overstatement it might bw more
>acurate (IMNSHO) to say that cultures without traditions of freedom
>_tend_ to remain authoritarian.  
>

>Peter Newman		pnewman@alaska.net
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>Member in Good Standing of The Society to Turn Wesley Crusher Into 
>a Small Styrofoam Dodecahedron
>
How do I join :)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:32:21 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

>>But if its only +1 Difficulty, then itis easily negated by Cautious. So I
>may make it +2 levels of Difficulty
>
>How about making "It's Harder Than I Thought" scale out on a one for one
>basis?
>
>A Formidible Task requires skill-3.  If Skill-1 tries it, it's two levels
>harder.

Good improvement of a good idea.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:34:17 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

traveller@mpgn.com writes:
>>I like this idea. I would recommend the +2 however. I have one player
>who's
>>nick name is "With All Due Caution" since that's the first words out of
>his
>>mouth whenever he tries to do ANYTHING.
>
>*anything*?  Bet he's a fun one on a date....


One of my colleagues gave the following parting advice to her son when he
left for university:

"When in doubt, double bag it."

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:33:58 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

In a message dated 10/12/98 8:07:45 PM Central Daylight Time,
a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz writes:

<< Might I suggest make it +1 if the skill is 1 less than the number of dice,
+2 is 
 the skill is more than 1 less than the number of dice.  >>

This sounds too involved.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:34:57 -0700
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: Honor Harrington Cover Art

Keven types out:
>>    His editors did make him cut a scene he wrote in protest of the cover
>> art of "Field of Dishonor."
>> 
>> It went something like this...A historian of old Earth meets with
>> Steadholder Harrington.  He takes care to examine her hands, and is visibly
>> relieved not to find her wearing one sequined glove...
>I don't get the reference.  Unless you're thinking she's Michael Jackson...

Ok...let me reparse this sentance in English this time. :-)

     That is exactly who David Weber thought that cover art made her
look like.  He was not happy about this at all.

- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/  Opinions Mine!
"Umfriend" - Sexual relationship; "this is Chris, my... um... friend."
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:45:05 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: 1998 (Ig)Nobel Prizes

Smart, David J (David) wrote:

>      Troy Hurtubise of North Bay, Ontario... took home an Ig in
> safety engineering for developing and testing a suit of armor
> impervious to grizzly bears.

> [ObTrav: I have no idea why he won. Can you say "combat armor"?]

I had a visit from a friend who covered the event for NetSurfer Digst.
It sounded great.  It should have been on television.  Apparently, some
one is making a documentary of the Ig Noble prize awards.

See the details, including animation of a Biker hammering the man in the

suit at:
http://www.trillium.net/grizzly/

The next generation is supposed to weigh 147 pounds.  Here are the
testing results from the web page.

- ---------------------

Struck With:
2 times with a tree trunk weighing 136 kilograms (300 lbs) from
a height of 9 meters (30 feet). 18 collisions with a 3 tonne truck
travelling at 50 kilometers per hour (30 mph).

Shot With:
Armour piercing arrows from a 45 kilogram (100 lb) bow.
12 gauge shot gun.

Assaulted By:
3 bikers (the tallest 6 feet tall, 385 lbs), armed with a splitting axe,

plank, and baseball bat.

Leaped Off:
A 15 meter (150 foot) fall off the Niagara Escarpment

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:47:00 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Archbishop Snerd

SD Mooney wrote:

>  Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk wrote:
>
> >May I also publicly apologise to Steve Daniels who contributed 7 religions
> >and mysteriously got missed from the credits.  The culprit will of course
> >spend eternity in a particularly nasty religion's hell.  How about _101
> >Hells_ anyone?  Don't the Chinese have 7?
>
> I would like to second this apology on behalf of BITS - I've forwarded the
> correction to Andy for changes in reprints. I don't know where this went
> wrong, (probably in the transfering from Tim to me to Andy) but I feel bad
> about this. Sorry Steve.

No worries.  It is enough that Monadin: The Cult of One was deemed fit
for publication.  :-)


Bloo
(Steve)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 00:02:37 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> DEFAULT SKILL TASKS
> An unskilled character may try a task if it uses a Default Skill. Skill level
> is 0 (zero) and the It’s Harder Than I Thought Rule Applies.
>
>         It’s Harder Than I Thought! If the skill level being used is less than the
> number of dice required (treat 2.5D as 2D) then increase difficulty level by
> +1.
>
> But if its only +1 Difficulty, then itis easily negated by Cautious. So I may
> make it +2 levels of Difficulty

That sounds potential a good way to go, but a question:

With skill-0, the "IHTIT" rule would apply to all tasks, wouldn't it?
So, even an 1D tasks become 2D, and a 2D tasks becomes 2.5D,etc.

[BTW: I think "Its Harder Than I Thought" as the name of a rule is
a bit unwieldy.  How about something like the "Skill Expertise",
"Expertise," or "Experience" Rule to reflect the idea that skill level
will be more valuable in more difficult tasks than high-stat+low
experience?  IHTIT is a good title for the description though.]

At first glance, it seems to me that above-average stats will be more
valuable than high skill levels.  So, I like the +2 levels of difficulty.
It looks like a little number crunching might be in order.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 00:06:34 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

Michael D. Peters wrote:

> Marc,
>
> I like this idea. I would recommend the +2 however. I have one player who's
> nick name is "With All Due Caution" since that's the first words out of his
> mouth whenever he tries to do ANYTHING.

Make him sweat.  Literally.  Slippery fingers and salty sweat in the eyes
makes doing much of anything much more difficult.

Also, shaking in the extremities after burning adrenalin or lactic acid build up

in the muscles is a nice way to shake such players up.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 00:08:04 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

dberry@hooked.net wrote:

> At 07:39 PM 10/12/98 -0400, you wrote:
> >Marc,
> >
> >I like this idea. I would recommend the +2 however. I have one player who's
> >nick name is "With All Due Caution" since that's the first words out of his
> >mouth whenever he tries to do ANYTHING.
>
> *anything*?  Bet he's a fun one on a date....

ROFLMAO!

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:10:14 -0700
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Does anybody like this idea?

Since we're talking about task systems again (that's my "thing" after
all), does anybody like this idea?

Just curious...we get rid of the half die, there's no multiplying or
dividing, skills and stats effect the success of the throw in different
ways...



1.  Difficulties are target numbers, like in the old MT system.  For
example  (and I'm just making up numbers here):

Easy  5+
Routine  15+
Difficult  25+
Staggering  35+
Impossible  45+



2.  Your stat modifies the target number by lowering it.  For example,
if you had a Dex 7, and you were throwing a Routine roll, you'd have to
throw 8+  (that's 15 - 7).

Easy  Automatic
Routine  8+
Difficult  18+
Staggering  28+
Impossible  48+

notice how the difficulty categories are the same space apart (10 points
each), making it easy to see any target number for any category once
you've done the subtraction once.



3.  The dice you throw are dependent on skill.  Everybody gets one die
by default--for task throws where they don't have a skill.  If you have
a skill, the chance of success improves greatly.  For example (taking
our example above one step further), our character has Dex 7 and
Pistol-2.

He would throw 3D6 (he gets his original default 1D plus 2D bonus for
his skill), and his target number would be those listed above.

Easy tasks are automatic
Routine task is 3D6 for 8+
Difficult task is 3D6 for 18+
Staggering task is 3D6 for 28+
Impossible task is 3D6 for 38+



Summary:  We would probably want to play with the numbers a bit.  I
think 18+ on 3D6 is a little harsh for a Difficult task for an average
joe with a level 2 skill.  But, I'm talking concept here, not finished
product.

Comments?  Suggestions?

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:29:54 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

From:           	CardSharks@aol.com
Date sent:      	Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:33:58 EDT

>In a message dated 10/12/98 8:07:45 PM Central Daylight Time,
>a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz writes:

><< Might I suggest make it +1 if the skill is 1 less than the number of dice,
>+2 is 
> the skill is more than 1 less than the number of dice.  >>

>This sounds too involved.

Then I think you want to go for +2 levels, but this might be a bit harsh on those 
only 1 level to low.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 98 23:46:24 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

On 10/12/98 at 10:50 AM,  aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor) said:

>>   Why are people so fascinated by the British, Dutch, Swedish, etc.
>>"royals"?  Answer the question and you'll know. 

>Personally *I* am not. Is this an American thing, too?

Yep, some Americans are royal-crazy.  I guess it's because we don't
have any of our own.  I can guarentee you we wouldn't like having a
feudal system. ;->

Ob Traveller:  In some places, nobles might be little more than
celebrity figureheads. 

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 01:02:39 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Does anybody like this idea?

In a message dated 10/12/98 11:19:08 PM Central Daylight Time,
dreamer@brokersys.com writes:

<< 
 Just curious...we get rid of the half die, there's no multiplying or
 dividing, skills and stats effect the success of the throw in different
 ways...
  >>

I am fine tuning a draft I put out several months ago. I am not revising/ or
rewriting the task system beyoond that draft.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 01:04:10 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

In a message dated 10/12/98 11:06:36 PM Central Daylight Time,
stevedaniels@portcaddo.com writes:

<< 
 At first glance, it seems to me that above-average stats will be more
 valuable than high skill levels.  So, I like the +2 levels of difficulty.
 It looks like a little number crunching might be in order.
  >>

By stats, you mean characteristics?

The purpose of the IHTIT rule is to counter the higher value of
characteristics when the level of skill is low.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 98 22:16:22 -0700
From: Tim Carroll <timc@paratwa.org>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #927

Here's my take on the whole Democracy vs Imperium discussion:


One of the big thematic elements in Traveller is responsibility.  Feudal 
systems are built around the oaths that bind each noble to both the 
nobles above them and also to all those who have sworn fealty to that 
particular noble (or those the noble is responsible for).

Similarly, Admirals of the Fleet, ship Captains, and so on, are all in 
positions of great responsibility.  Given the travel time, and 
communications lag, individuals need to have the authority to act 
quickly...and the responsibility to do so.

Now just because responsibility is a thematic element doesn't mean that 
everyone is immediately responsible.  In fact, the reverse often works 
better in game play.  Corrupt nobles, captain, admirals, are all very 
common ways to play something out.  And Survival Margin talked about the 
shift in the Imperium from Nobles who take responsibility and Nobles that 
just assume the privledges of their position.  (This of course is before 
the rewrite that made most M:0 nobles into amoral businessmen).

The "ideal" that I see in the Imperium is nobles and commonfolk each 
working to make the whole into a better place -- essentially, Dulinor was 
right.  The Imperium fails because it doesn't convince enough people to 
be responsible.  (And you could make a case for that in the real world as 
well -- we elect officials and assume that they will do all the work for 
us so that we don't have to volunteer our time and effort).

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:12:01 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Does anybody like this idea?

>Summary:  We would probably want to play with the numbers a bit.  I
>think 18+ on 3D6 is a little harsh for a Difficult task for an average
>joe with a level 2 skill.  But, I'm talking concept here, not finished
>product.
>
18+ on 3d6 is 216:1 against.  Maybe if we added 2 dice per level, (or 1.5 :) )
It looks a little unwieldy at the moment.
Colin

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 01:35:55 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 10/12/98 11:06:36 PM Central Daylight Time,
> stevedaniels@portcaddo.com writes:
>
> <<
>  At first glance, it seems to me that above-average stats will be more
>  valuable than high skill levels.  So, I like the +2 levels of difficulty.
>  It looks like a little number crunching might be in order.
>   >>
>
> By stats, you mean characteristics?

Yes.  Sorry I was unclear.

> The purpose of the IHTIT rule is to counter the higher value of
> characteristics when the level of skill is low.

I figured that.  So I suggest make it +2 levels of difficulty,
unless number crunching gets results you don't like.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:33:03 +1000
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Re : Trade and Economics (sorry, Loren!!)-longish

Ian Whitchurch had some good points re trade.

Some immodest proposals follow :-

1. Trade classifications, and non-mainworlds.
Detailed star systems may have other inhabited worlds
besides the main world, and these may fulfil the UPP
criteria for a trade type e.g. mainworld is an asteroid belt,
and there's an "agricultural world" present too.

An overall resources score needs to be determined for the system,
as per Pocket Empires.
Each 'significant other' world adds one to the resources score.

IMTU I determine resources as Jim Vassilakos suggested a while ago,
and use 2D-7 + mainworld size (+ gas giants, planetoid belts, and
interesting other worlds if commercial spaceflight exists).

Score   Comments
0-      Barren. Barely adequate to sustain population.
1-4     Poor. Surplus resources not worth trading.
5-B     Average. Economically exportable wealth.
C-E     Wealthy. System important at subsector trade level.
F+      Rich. System important in sector-wide trade.

I've also tweaked the trade classification system :-
Agricultural : resources 5+, life-bearing (IMTU 6+)
Barren : resources 0. Not necessarily unoccupied (but who would
want to live there if they could avoid it?)
Poor : resources 1-4. Atmosphere and hydro requirements dropped.
Rich : resouces F+ (PE maximum 22, IMTU 30)
Industrial : needs pop 9+, therefore Hi-Pop classification.
Non-Industrial : discarded.

2. Starship crews and their pay.
In MT Imperial Encyclopaedia, pay depends on position, skill,
and discharge rank from chargen.
In table below :-
Minimum rank = skill = 1 ; max rank = skill = 6
Average rank 2 ; average skill 2.5

                   Monthly Income, Cr
Area             Minimum    Average    Max
Bridge, Gunnery  550        1350       3300
or Engineering
Command          1000       2500       6000
Flight*          1100       1200       1600
Medical          500        1500       3000
Stewards, Troops 500        1000       3000
* - ship's boat, not starship pilots

One could give 'brevet' ranks to crew to increase their pay, or
change their pay scale. Good crew get paid like command crew, say.

6000Cr per month is a very good income when the average worker
makes 10-12KCr a year. Profit sharing arrangements are yet another
possibility. (individual contracts? product endorsements for the
real heroes??)

(PE : 100 million people earn one trillion credits on average ; plus
extrapolating from cost of living figures in LBB's).

3. Freight Costs and Passenger Fares
The speculative trade rules in the LBB's mentioned that the cost
of freight was a percentage of the cargo value. I can't remember
off the top of my head what it was (5-10%??) - but I think 1000Cr
per displacement ton ends up being a poor deal if you're
carrying anything more complicated than grain or ore.

So all freight is charged at a percentage of a cargo's value.
Cargoes need to be specified. Perhaps some tables would help <g>.

Hans Rancke-Madsen's shipping tables show that carrying passengers
isn't viable after a few parsecs :-
           Cost of Shipping, Cr
Parsecs    Low       Middle     High
1          799       3769       4335
2          1080      4774       5850
3          1524      6641       7922
4          2018      8338       10496
5          3119      15913      12409
6          4677      17833      23000
[Ticket :   1000      8000       10000]
- - and this ignores the 'life support' charge for the crew, as well!
Is the life support fee an amalgam of insurance premium, departure
tax, consumable fees and a 'right of way' fee levied by the 3I
(protection money, given recent talk about the 'evil empire')?.

Moral of the story :- leave passenger haulage to the corps, who enjoy
economies of scale the small fry do not.
Has anyone built a set of corporate rules? I recall a Universal
Corp Profile on the Traveller webring....

[What individual, or small group thereof, is going to have a high
jump capable ship and even care about shipping passengers for
profit, anyway? The ship is either stolen, loaned (for a specific
mission) or owned ("Daddy's yacht").]

4. 'Primitive' Worlds and Trade
Chronic debt is a problem unless imports of expensive gear are limited
(ideally, to capital goods - development is the only way out). Look at
most of the Third World.
Itinerant con-men (sorry, traders) flogging beads to the natives
should be discouraged, perhaps with armed force.
(Imperial contraband patrols - space based or portside customs
agents...)

5. Financial intermediaries
Yes, there should be brokers, bankers and the whole panoply of
financial services.

Watch out for those TL 15 derivatives though ; you need some
serious computing power just to figure out what you're buying,
exactly. Or is it leasing ? I'll let the expert system process the
contract....

Interest rates in the Imperium?
Low, because the place has been stable for 1000 years.
Middling high, to finance all those "4000Cr per year after 20 years
service" pensions.

Prime rates : not more than 3-5%
Upper ceiling on legitimate rates of return : 15% on shares with 100%
dividend reinvestment??

Individual worlds may vary significantly from this depending on
their financial health....

I'm sorry if I'm exhuming old corpses.

Robert O'Connor
Medico, Gearhead and Gaming Enthusiast

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 98 00:38:31 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

On 10/12/98 at 05:29 PM,  dberry@hooked.net said:

>>But if its only +1 Difficulty, then itis easily negated by Cautious. So I
>may make it +2 levels of Difficulty

>How about making "It's Harder Than I Thought" scale out on a one for
>one basis?

>A Formidible Task requires skill-3.  If Skill-1 tries it, it's two
>levels harder.  Makes the "EMT attempts heart surgery" scenario so
>beloeved around here more realistic.  If open heart surgery requires
>skill-5, and Eleven the EMT has skill-1...

One of the problems people (like me) have had is the Talented
Beginner (High Stat - Low Skill) being as good or better than the
Experienced Veteran (Average Stat - High Skill).  This might help...

Ted
  DEX         11
  Demolitions  1   (12)

Andy
  DEX          7
  Demolitions  3   (10)

Normally, Ted is going to have an advantage over Andy at any task
level, but now let's see what happens with Marc's idea, modified by
Doug's suggestion:

 Easy         +1
 Average      +2
 Difficult    +2
 Formidable   +3
 Staggering   +4
 Hopeless     +5

Ted and Andy attempt an Easy Task:
   Ted (12)  on 1d6  100%
   Andy (10) on 1d6  100%

Ted and Andy attempt an Average Task
   Ted (12)  on 2.5d6 91%  <--- Not much difference here
   Andy (10) on 2d6   92%

Ted and Andy attempt a Difficult Task
   Ted (12)  on 3d6   74%
   Andy (10) on 2.5d6 71%    <---- A little problem

Ted and Andy attempt a Formidable Task
   Ted (12)  on 4d6   34%
   Andy (10) on 3d6   50%  

Ted and Andy attempt a Staggering Task
   Ted (12)  on 5d6   10%
   Andy (10) on 4d6   16%
  
This looks good to me, except for the 1/2 die on Difficult Tasks.
I'm biased, I'll admit, but I think you might be able to drop the
1/2 die if you use this rule.

Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 98 00:49:21 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Does anybody like this idea?

On 10/12/98 at 11:10 PM,  Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com> said:

>Summary:  We would probably want to play with the numbers a bit.  I
>think 18+ on 3D6 is a little harsh for a Difficult task for an
>average joe with a level 2 skill.  But, I'm talking concept here, not
>finished product.

>Comments?  Suggestions?

This kind of thing is "my thing" too. ;->

I've seen better ideas from you on this idea, Ken. Your (Stat +
Skill*D6) idea is better. 

For non-d6 people, how about a modification of the TNE system where
you don't divide or multiply the asset, instead you have flat +/- 4
for each level around Difficult?  The uniform distribution of a d20
means each Task level is 20% harder/easier than the ones around it.

Easy        Asset + 8
Routine     Asset + 4
Difficult   Asset
Formidable  Asset - 4
Impossible  Asset - 8

For me that's easier to remember and use.

BTW, for the d6 crowd you can do the same thing with +/- 3 on a 3d6
rolls with good results. Try the numbers.

Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #936
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 13 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 937



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Re: Weber & history
The History of Medicine
Re: Grayson 
Re: Another Modification for the  T4/5 task system 
Re: The History of Medicine
Re: Star Wars Democracy
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #933
Re: Does anybody like this idea?
e: Colonial units and the callous British
Re: T4/5 skills
Re: The History of Medicine
Border Worlds question
Re: Star Wars Democracy
Re: Grayson
[GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
[GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Drop tanks
Re: (long ) Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 98 00:53:54 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

On 10/13/98 at 12:38 AM,  "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net> said:

>Ted and Andy attempt a Staggering Task
>   Ted (12)  on 5d6   10%
>   Andy (10) on 4d6   16%

Ooops! Andy would be using a 5d6 too, so he is only 3%, not 16%

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 02:06:53 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

In a message dated 10/12/98 3:59:57 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au writes:

<< Regardless, I think that there are actually governments, other than the
 ex-superpower and current superpower, who actually do *not* promote radical
 laissez faire capitalism, do not intentionally rip off innocents etc. Sweden.
 Switzerland. >>

I have to question this statement...are we talking about the same Switzerland,
who is currently sitting on millions of dollars in money looted from Europe by
the Nazis and seems, at best, EXTREMELY reluctant to return it?

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 02:15:33 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Weber & history

In a message dated 10/12/98 9:02:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
eclipse@ultranet.com writes:

<<   His editors did make him cut a scene he wrote in protest of the cover
 art of "Field of Dishonor."
 
 It went something like this...A historian of old Earth meets with
 Steadholder Harrington.  He takes care to examine her hands, and is visibly
 relieved not to find her wearing one sequined glove... >>

I wondered if I was the only one who thought that cover was modeled by either
The Gloved One (or his sister...more likely IMO)

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:11:24 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: The History of Medicine

I thought this was interesting

The History of Medicine
=========================
2000 B.C. - Here, eat this root
1000 A.D. - That root is heathen. Here, say this prayer.
1850 A.D. - That prayer is superstition. Here, drink this potion.
1940 A.D. - That potion is snake oil. Here, swallow this pill.
1975 A.D. - That pill is ineffective. Here, take this antibiotic.
2000 A.D. - That antibiotic doesn't work anymore. Here, eat this root.

ObTrav: To what extent do you think that pharmaseutical research in the
Third Imperium depends on finding & duplicating the healing effect of
natural plants and to what extent do you think that medical  problems
are solved with scratch built synthetic designed for a specific effect?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 03:22:26 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Grayson 

> At 11:10 AM 10/12/98 +0000, you wrote:
> >You've got Haven = France; Manticore - United Kingdom; Silesia = Prussia;
> >Solarian League = America (a very much out of time America).
> >
> >Has anyone figured out what Grayson is the equivalent of, historically
> speaking?
> >I haven't ... maybe there *isn't* a parallel?
> 
> As one currently living in the midst of it, I always assumed that Grayson
> was the "Mormon Empire" writ large. Many of the cultural, social,
> historical, and (to a lesser degree) religious aspects are certainly
> similar, which is not a suprise, considering *where* the Graysons are
> supposed to have migrated from in the first place - Idaho and the
> surrounding western American states.

The impression I got from the books is, the state religion, the Church of Man Unchained, was more of a 'holy roller'-style Pentacostal movement.  Mormons aren't Pentacostals.  I can almost see Austin himself chitchatting with Oral Roberts and Billy Graham and holding his own.

FWIW, I see a bit of a parallel with Grayson as Japan before Perry.  You have various and sundry 'warlords' (Steadholders) keeping on top of an almost figurehead Emperor (Protector).  In their steadings, the Steadholder gets an almost *fanatical* devotion from his subjects and of course his own personal army.

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:25:19 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Another Modification for the  T4/5 task system 

dberry@hooked.net wrote

> > I have one player who's
> >nick name is "With All Due Caution" since that's the first words out 
> >of his mouth whenever he tries to do ANYTHING.

> *anything*?  Bet he's a fun one on a date....

Well since a cautious task takes twice as long according to the rules
and some nice things you might do on a date are better if they take
longer it sure seems as if he might indeed be a fun one on a date....

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 03:40:25 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: The History of Medicine

Peter Newman wrote:

> I thought this was interesting

[snip]

I'm passing that along to my Med School friends.

At law school, the good joke we learned for doctors who hate lawyers is
just to say:

Over two hundred years ago your professional ancestors were bleeding people

with leeches, while my professional ancestors were writing the United
States
Constitution.

I usally add that the Constitution, great as it is, might have been better
if
those 'doctors' hadn't been bleeding some of the founding fathers to death.

George Washington had 4 doctors all doing independent bleedings of him
before he finally gave up the ghost.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:22:53 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 07:46:48 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:30:17 +0200 (MET DST)
>From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
>Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy
>
>On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Phillip McGregor wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:07:29 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>>>> Star Wars: The struggle between the Rebels (who are democratic) vs the Evil
>>>> Empire
>>>
>>>I'll have to assume the episode where Leia is elected princess is going to be in the
>>>prequel.
>>
>>Nope, but its made plain that the Empire was founded on the bones of the Old
>>Republic. There's no reason why you can't have an elective monarchy, anyway.
>>Look at the Holy Roman Empire and its system (no, its not even close to a
>>perfect example, with nobles electing another noble, but the principle is
>>there).
>>
>>Phil
>
>But how do you hold elections in an Imperium which spans sectors. The canditates
>put forth their program which then is shipped throughout the Imperium. This
>takes years to reach the fringes. Now the people there has questions on what the 
>candidate means with parts of his program, and how does this affect them? They
>send questions back (more years pass), the candidate answers but under the years
>there has been a recession so he has some new views that he has to send out.

Well, like I said (in another post), all an Interstellar Government *really* has
to do is to protect trade and enable the safe carriage of the mail. It can leave
pretty much everything else to the individual worlds.

It would actually be pretty easy to run a government on that basis. It would,
effectively, be a real Confederacy. The central government would not have a
reason to intervene in the affairs of individual worlds unless ...

a) Said world tries to prevent or limit (beyond specifically allowed
limitations) access to offworld travellers and traders (and vice versa,
perhaps).

b) Said world tries to interfere militarily in the affairs of another world.

These would have to be pretty loose ... and, yes, you would end up with
Kossovo-like situations where the Confederacy sits on its backsides forever
before actually doing anything ... but, when they act, they would be like a
sledgehammer squashing a wet, soggy, pea.

Since there is not a great deal for the government to do that needs doing
*quickly* that could not have been set up by the original, much smaller,
forerunner organisation, there is really no problem with slowness of
communications. No more than the Imperium has to deal with.

Would it work? Probably about as well as the Imperium does, and with much
greater freedom of choice.

>When you get multisector covernments democarcies are not an option.

No. That is an anti-democratic *assumption*. They will require different ways of
looking at things.

Of course, a lot of people accepted "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer", too ...
and rejected the Weimar Republic (though they didn't understand that that was
what they were doing at the time).

There is no reason why a reasonably intelligent bunch of sentients could not
come up with a democratic *style* government for an Interstellar Nation.

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:31:10 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #933

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:18:18 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:56:34 -0400
>From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
>Subject: compulsory voting
>
>The US ... indeed, *any* country where the government is elected by less
>than
>50% of the people is not a democracy. In Oz we have compulsory voting - so,
>as
>much as I dislike our PM and all he stands for, he can claim to have a
>mandate
>from a hell of larger percentage of the people than Bill Clinton (or Newt
>Gingrich) can.
>**********************
>he can claim it....doesn't mean he has it.....
>
>for example in Brasil there is also compulsory voting....this means that
>whoever is first on the ballot (drawn at random) generally wins....people
>have to vote (if you don't vote you can't work) so they just mark down the
>first one and go home.  do you get a 'none of the above' option?  or a 'it
>doesn't matter' option...if so why compulsory voting?  you don't even have
>the freedom to *not* vote...how is that more 'democratic'?

Maybe in Brazil they are stupid?

In Australia, first choice on the Ballot Paper is drawn randomly by the AEC, so
there is no way of taking advantage of it.

Innumerable (well, a large number, anyway) of studies have shown that "Donkey
Votes" rarely make the difference between victory and defeat and are a tiny
percentage of the overall ballots cast.

Remember, in Oz we actually fill in paper ballots by hand rather than using
voting machines as much of SoAm does and, as I understand it, the US does.

Anyway, the perfect solution, I've always said, is to print circular ballot
papers with the candidates name around the edges. Try getting an advantage from
that!

>ever consider that your PM was elected due to random chance instead of
>considered opinion?  was he first on the ballot?

Nope. PMs are elected by Parliament ... the majority Party therein. They are not
directly elected by the people (hey! wait a minute, neither is *your* President
... he's elected by the Electoral College which can, and has at least once,
voted against the expressed will of the people ... that travesty of democracy
*cannot* happen in Oz!!!). We have a Westminster system, thank you very much,
and find it works very nicely most of the time. At least as often as yours does,
if not more so!

>sorry for the rant, but that is one of my hot buttons having seen
>compulsory voting in action.

Like I said, maybe in Brazil they're all stupid. I can assure that they aren't
in Oz!

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:31:09 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Does anybody like this idea?

At 00:49 13/10/98 -0500, Eris Reddoch wrote:

>For non-d6 people, how about a modification of the TNE system where
>you don't divide or multiply the asset, instead you have flat +/- 4
>for each level around Difficult?  The uniform distribution of a d20
>means each Task level is 20% harder/easier than the ones around it.
>
>Easy        Asset + 8
>Routine     Asset + 4
>Difficult   Asset
>Formidable  Asset - 4
>Impossible  Asset - 8
>
>For me that's easier to remember and use.

Personally I think that multiplying/dividing by two, as in TNE, is a
wonderful idea. I don't like systems where a task can become impossible for
a low skill character while remaining pretty easy for the highly skilled
(MT's task system does this sometimes).

>BTW, for the d6 crowd you can do the same thing with +/- 3 on a 3d6
>rolls with good results. Try the numbers.

Or if you want to replicate the effect of TNE use +-2 for each TNE
difficulty level.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:40:18 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: e: Colonial units and the callous British

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:07:43 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 12:59:52 -0700
>From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
>Subject: Re: Colonial units and the callous British
>
>>From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
>>Subject: Colonial units and the callous British
>
>... The colonial units suffered 
>>heavier casualties because they got used more, and the main reason they got 
>>used more was because they were stronger and better than the British units. 
>
>  One further explanation that helps is that the colonial troops weren't as
>close to suffering morale collapse (as the French largely did in `17 and the
>Germans finally in late 1918); some British units were apparently reaching
>the end of their useful lifespan as effective (and certainly as offensive)
>formations.

It was well hidden at the time, and is still hidden to a considerable extent,
but the British Army was (or significant portions of it) were either actually
mutinying or were close to it by October 1918.

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:23:14
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: T4/5 skills

> Marc Miller wrote :
>Subject: Re: A modification for the T4/5 task system
>
>I tend toward the following on characters who have less skill levels than the
>number of dice in the task (2.5D rounds down to 2D).
>
>SKILLS
>	A character may use the skills he or she has received or learned in the
>course of prior careers and education. These skills are recorded by the
player
>on the Character Card (or elsewhere). 
>	It’s Harder Than I Thought. If a task requires more dice than the character
>has applicable skill levels, then increase the difficulty one level. For
>example, a character with Skill-2 trying a Formidable task (3D) finds that
>"It’s Harder Than I Thought!" Task difficulty increases one level to
>Staggering (4D).
>	Round half dice down (so Skill-2 is sufficient to handle a Difficult (2.5D)
>without penalty.
>

May I suggest making the user roll as many extra dice as you are missing
skill levels ?

Example : Joe Brainburner has Explosives-1 and INT-13, and is trying a
Formidiable (3d) task. Because he's 2 skill levels down, he would be
rolling against 5 dice against 14. Lotsa luck, Joe ... experience counts -
his friend, Edith Expert, has Explosives 4 and INT 8. She is rolling 3 dice
against 12.

>------------------------------
>
>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:32:04 EDT
>From: CardSharks@aol.com
>Subject: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
>
>	Default Skill Tasks: A character may try a task with a Default Skill,
even if
>the character does not have that skill. Skill level used is 0 (zero) and the
>associated characteristic is halved (round fractions up).
>
>I propose to scrap this (/2 of char) and instead direct the user of a default
>skill-0 to the "It's Harder Than I Thought" Rule. 
>

This works for me.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 06:19:44
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: The History of Medicine

>ObTrav: To what extent do you think that pharmaseutical research in the
>Third Imperium depends on finding & duplicating the healing effect of
>natural plants and to what extent do you think that medical  problems
>are solved with scratch built synthetic designed for a specific effect?

It is likely that the development of new treatments will eventually
outstrip the natural evolution of new pathogens.

This is only within the context of our world, however, and it may be that
with a thousand worlds for bugs to evolve on, new plagues may appear at
times that prove resistant or adaptable to the accepted methods of
treatment.  Among the 'spacer' community (that is, starship crews, regular
interstellar passengers, and starport staff) such things may be alarmingly
prevalent.

Disease usually makes a poor environment for roleplaying, however.  I, as a
GM, would use it more as a prod for moving people than to actually have
them catch a disease...

"The Traveller's Aid Society is reporting a breakout of Yarbu plague in
many Lunion subsector starports, so we're going to take a shortcut through
the Sword Worlds."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:33:35 +0100
From: "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Border Worlds question

Does anyone know the capitol of  the  Border Worlds  (the  puppet
state formed from half the Sword Worlds at the end of  the  Fifth
Frontier War)?

According to  The Spinward Marches Campaign  (GDW 1985)  p17  the
capitol is Beater.  But on p19 of  the  same  book  it  says  the
capitol is Sting.  I have found no other references.



Regards PLST

"Make sure hands, etc. are inside before closing windows."
- - helpful hint from 1992 Nissan owner's manual.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 06:29:42
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy

>Well, like I said (in another post), all an Interstellar Government
*really* has
>to do is to protect trade and enable the safe carriage of the mail. It can
leave
>pretty much everything else to the individual worlds.

Isn't that what the Traveller Imperium is supposed to do?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:01:49 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: Grayson

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:30:06 EDT
From: Thendal@aol.com
Subject: Re: Grayson
What is Grayson?!!
*************
The closest parallel is the Republic of Deseret.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:11:34 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

 80 unpowered TL 12
fusion guns (40 double turrets in 4 batteries, 2.7 GW),
**********
stats for these would be nice.


, spinal-67 PAW (54 GW; does 6d*20,000 with a range of 17/50 hexes).
***********
even just like this would be fine

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:37:25 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Anthony Jackson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
hmm...despite my efforts, I was not able to duplicate the degree to which the
classic AHL sucks...oh well.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hmmm...if IYO it sucks so much, why did you bother?

The original CT ship design system made it difficult to create a multi-role
ship capable of truly independent operations - you had to make some
sacrifices. Am I getting the idea the GURPS:Traveller lets you get away
with more in a ship?

You want max performance, get yourself a battle rider. <g>


Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:52:10 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Drop tanks

Ian Whitchurch writes:

>Drop tanks without interior tankage seriously unbalance interstellar trade
>in favour of jump 4-6 ships with zero internal tankage. Hans Ranke did the
>analysis of this last time they came up.

In the case of long distance trade, yes. But transport costs for high jumps
are going to be higher than for low jumps even with drop tanks. 
 
>I strongly recommend increasing the misjump chance when using drop tanks to
>about 1 in 36. This will make them commercially unviable, but militarily
>still worthwhile.
 
That would make nonsens of the TNS newsbriefs which speaks of established
commercial services which use drop tanks. My suggestion is that the period
is one of transition to drop tank transport. It takes time to replace the
existing body of merchant ships; furthermore, drop tank traffic lacks
flexibility and requires a certain minimum of trade. Thus drop tank services
are still few and only between systems with a lot of traffic. 


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:02:14 +1100
From: scout <scout@microtech.com.au>
Subject: Re: (long ) Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

At 14:50 10/10/98 GMT, you wrote:

>This is a sort of a philosophical post. Just some things that are (sort of,
>allowing for the fact that, in theory, its all a game) disturbing about
>Traveller's background and the way it has developed.

Phil, I am always happy to respond to a philosophical post, and will delurk
momentarily to address some of the ideeas that you have bought forward.

>Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as
expressed in
>Traveller is anti-democratic?

I do.... There is no denying that the basic structure of the Imperium is
anti-democratic. Therefore, it would seem to us, being people who
acknowledge, and greatly appreciate, the currency of democracy, that this
particular structure is wrong and abhorrent. I would hope that there is
no-one on this list who would like to even like attempt to implement this
sort of structure in real life. Were this so I would certainly be one of
the Ine Givar. 
However, I feel that the Imperium, like any government, has it's good
points and it's bad points. I like to think of the Imperium in a more
chivalric manner, where the nobles have a duty to those not only above but
below. LIke any government, this allows the Imperium to both shine brightly
like a beacon in the dark (as a Duke leads naval personell, who bravely
sacrifice their lives attempting to run badly needed food and medical
supplies to a neutral world blockaded by a hostile power), and to be
responsible for the most heinous acts (as a Count trades the live of
several thousand colonists on a newly settled world for a chance at
stepping one more rung up the social ladder).
The environment provides for many adventuring possiblities (like the
attempt by a party to bring the count to trial).
It is an unfortunate, but true fact, that the type of government structure
possessed by the Imperium is likely to be abused by those in power than
more often than not.
>
>Worst of all, the underlying assumption of everything that has been
published in
>recent years is that all of this is inevitable.

Unfortunately, this is true, the fact that the imperium lasted 1000 years
before it was torn apart by civil war is quite remarkable. The government
was an empire, the only method of advancement was over the corpse of
another (be It a loved relative dying of old age, or a political rival with
a knife in the back). 
This method of advancment was even acknowledged as law (the right to become
the emperor by assassination). That alone should have pointed to the
inherent illnes of the Imperial structure. (the right of assination was
established in Ctrav).

>MTrav and the TNE sequel to it was about how decadent all the power groups
>within the imperium were, at their base. All of them. Even Norris.

Mtrav, yes (oh.... but what an interesting environment to adventure in),
TNE was not so. The Reformation Coalition was a democratic government which
abhored the the structure of the Imperium and rightly blamed it for the
destruction it wrought. 
The regency was also in the process of replacing the nobility with elected
officials.  


>Now we are being told that the Late Terran Federation was a repressive
regime at
>least as bad as that of the Vilani Ziru Sirka.
>
>And we all sit back and accept it.

The path from open democracy to repressive regime is not as long as people
believe. Even today, people in my country are re-electing officials who
place camera's in the streets. We are beginning to accept the routine
invasion of our privacy, becuase of the security that it brings. "The
government is looking after me, and doing it's best to protect me from bad
people". In countries around the world towns are beginning to hire private
police forces to protect them, by making sure no undesirables live where
they do....


>I mean, doesn't anyone out there realise that the way things are going is
that
>*you* are playing the Imperial Stormtroopers and supporting the "Dark
Side"? The
>Emperor is *not* a nice guy. The Imperium is even actively (if
unintentionally)
>malevolent in its release of Virus.

You don't become emperor by being a nice guy...  you don't stay one if you do!



>What is wrong with the people out there? Do they think that democracy is so
>useless and fragile that it cannot last ... well, its been around almost
as long
>as authoritarianism, and keeps on keeping on. Our current democratic
traditions
>owe much to the ideals of Greece and Rome (especially the Republic),
ideals that
>never died even under centuries of authoritarian rule.

Democracy is as fragile as the people who make it up..... but it is
interesting that you use Greece and Rome as an example. Both limited which
citizens could partake of their democracy, and both allowed the enslavement
of other people. 
Is it really so different today. In Australia, if you refuse to give
evidence to a Royal Commission you can be detained.... without trial... it
has already happened once. 


>In countries all around the world, countries where there has never been a
>democratic tradition, people are struggling even as we speak to build
democratic
>institutions ... some paying with their liberty and some even with their
lives.

And may they achieve their objective.... for democracy is much better than
any of the alternatives.


>>And look at India. A democracy since 1947 ... with mass illiteracy and mass
>poverty on a scale that is really staggering. Yet, despite Pakistan's
example of
>what can happen in such a developing situation, India has remained a
democracy.

And in Australia, the people of the Northern territory voted to give other
people the right to kill them, by voting for euthenasia. A democracy is as
strong as the will of it's people. 

>
>There is an assumption, evidently deeply rooted, that democracy dies out
at some
>time in the near future (or during the early Interstellar Wars) and that it
>never re-emerges. That it cannot, it seems.

In times of military emergency, democracies have been known to put some
aspects of their democracies on hold.... the UK formed a governemtn from
both sides for the duration of the war. It is not too hard to fosee
democratic institutions being placed on hold, for the desperate emergency
that must have been the Interstellar wars. These wars went for a long
time.... it is conceivable that the democratic tradition may have been lost.

>Admiral Estigaribbia stages his coup to supposedly protect the Vilani from
>Terran exploitation, but declares himself emperor rather than, say,
President.


The Vilani had an emporer, it is something they would understand. It would
also provide him with great personal power. For him to do this must have
meant he was seeking this power. We have to ask... what kind of man was
he... how did he deal with his opposition. 

IMO The anti democratic theme adds flavour to the game, I will not lament
the passing of the demcratic ideal.... it hasn't. Those who play in my
games experince first hand the problems of living in a non-democratic
society. 
Plus they also have a lot of fun! (Or so they tell me, I think that's what
htey mean when they call me a ba____d at the end of the night, at least
thier smiling when they do it... and they always come back for more)


As a last point... true democracy is as impossible to acheive as true
communism, anarchy or any other idealic structure. There will always be
groups that will have thier rights removed by the will of the people. The
Rich who will dominate government to thier own ends... That does not meen
that democracy is bad... just not perfect.. but then what is?
How about adventures in an evil democracy (look at the Federation in Blakes
Seven).



scout

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #937
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 13 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 938



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

re: The History of Medicine
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 
[none]
Re: The History of Medicine
State Control & Documentation
Re: Piracy
compulsory voting
OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Re : Trade and Economics (sorry, Loren!!)-longish
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #935
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Transponder's true nature
101 Religions authorship
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Shipping Containers (was Re: Re : Trade and Economics...)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:57:05 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: The History of Medicine

steve daniels wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
At law school, the good joke we learned for doctors who hate lawyers is
just to say:

Over two hundred years ago your professional ancestors were bleeding people

with leeches, while my professional ancestors were writing the United
States Constitution.

I usally add that the Constitution, great as it is, might have been better
if those 'doctors' hadn't been bleeding some of the founding fathers to
death.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Most of the founding fathers were businessmen, inventors, philosophers,
farmers, military leaders - as well as, if they were at all, lawyers.

How many lawyers today are anything but lawyers?

And I seem to recall leeches, for certain medical applications, coming
back into fashion...<g>

Cryptoquote of the day: "The problem with the United States is not
that we have so many lawyers, but that we have so many good ones.
Think of all the dedicated, competent men and women who could be
curing diseases, inventing new products, creating new wealth, who
are instead greasing wheels on deals and cutting people down to make
business for each other."

ObTrav: How many of your PC's thought it prudent to have a crewman
along with Legal-3 or so?  :)

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:15:31 +1100
From: scout <scout@microtech.com.au>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 

At 18:43 10/10/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Off gaming: I'm seriously worried about the resurgence of corporatism
>around the world.  The MAI (as it stands) scares the shit out of me. 
>Being told "work harder for less money, because our company must be more
>competitive" by a man earning millions in "productivity bonuses" while our
>stock plunges makes me look for convenient lampposts and some spare rope.

The upside is that because we have been working so hard to build lamposts
and rope there will be plenty to spare.... 

Is the idea of national governemtn declining..... is it being rplaced by
the international corporation. 
I work for a large company. It is run by the manager. If the manager does a
good job... he will run (rule)  the company for a long time. He appoints
sub-managers becuse he can't be everywhere at once. This company routinely
monitors my workplace and reads my emails in the interst of making sure
that the company is secure, that I am not abusing my priviledges and am
working hard. 
If you don;t like the sytem you can resign (emigrate). If you don't tow the
line you are sacked, or fired (executed).

Replace manager with duke, sub manager with barons... and you see that many
of us still live (for 7-8 hours a day) within a feudal system. These larger
companies can and do influence governments. Some governments wish to
emulate the success of large companies (economic rationalism). 

Is this how the terran government was slowly replaced with a feudal system?




scout

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:31:48 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: [none]

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 01:09:50 EDT
From: theherald@juno.com (Michael Layne)
Subject: GT: SIM-12 Missiles

     In the midst of designing a starship, I was just looking over the
SIM-12 missile on p. 159 of GURPS Traveller.
     The warhead is a 62.5 lb 250mm directed-energy (HEAT) type.
While good for punching through armor, there might be an alternative
warhead available of the HE annular blast fragmentation type, proximity
fuzed.
************
Yeah, that works...
     For example, this missile  can carry a nuclear warhead ranging
from a mini-nuke of only a few tons yield, to a strategic nuke of up to
2.48 MT yield (
*****************
Dont let the Navy find out you have it.


     An even more interesting possibility for Navy SIM-2s would be the
bomb-pumped X-ray laser!  (I got to like these things back during the SDI
debates, and became a real fan of them after reading the Honor Harrington
series...) :)  MA Lloyd covers them on p. 110a of his VE2 additions.
**************
if you do use then, use the ones from Pyramis...not a all powerful...also
might want to playtest them to make sure they don't invalidate Imperial
naval designs.


     I was surprised to see the SIM-12 employed straight command
guidance via a one-way laser link, with no sensors aboard the missile
itself!  While this would definitely keep the cost down, I would suggest
that Naval versions (if possible) be given Brilliant PEH, Brilliant NH,
Active LADAR Homing, or some combination,
*************
yes there is 0.8 cf of empty space in them.


     Another possibility is to use a two-way datalink, and mount some
sensors on the missile itself.
*********
also a good idea.


     The "stock" SIM-12 is set up to boost at a constant 10G for one
hour.
*********
rather you have 30 hexes of velocity change....the missile still works
until it is out of power.  You fly it using pilot (Missile).


     Finally, are the SIM-12s also the missiles that would be used in
the bay missile racks?
*********
Yes.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:33:08 -0400
From: Joe Pettit <jpettit@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: The History of Medicine

>
> ObTrav: How many of your PC's thought it prudent to have a crewman
> along with Legal-3 or so?  :)

I'm playing a captain with Service-6, Liason-3, Persuasion-3 and Legal-4.
Virtually no starship operating skills or combat skills.  So when I see all
this discussion about ship's paperwork, I just have to smile and wonder what's
the problem?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:33:36 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: State Control & Documentation

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:27:12 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: State Control & Documentation
Hello,
>From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
>Subject: Re: Transponders
...
>>  There's been a misunderstanding: I didn't suggest detaining such

  The switching of ID's back and forth presupposes that no highly reliable
ID system exists for ships or their major componenets, and probably not for
crew either. This is a difficult assumption given that this thread pretty
much assumes that some sort of difficult to tamper with  transponder exists
and that G:T has formalized the existence of a rather too effective (IMHO)
universal Imperial ID.
**********88
no problem there...the lower TL  IDs are much like IDs today....presumably
just as easy to forge as well.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:36:15 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Charles Prevatte writes:

>I was thinking Vargr pirates.  You are right about unsupported pirates being
>good target pratic for the local navy.  They can only run so far so fast but
>with a border to cross...

The pirates-are-not-economically-viable crowd, of which I am a member,
believe that pure piracy is not, well, you guessed it, economically
viable. Now, you can come up with lots of examples from the Real World of
activities that are not economically viable and are still attempted by a
lot of people (prospecting for gold in the Old West is a good example).
But I can't come up with a single such activity that requires a multi-
million dollar investment.

If we are wrong and pirates can expect a reasonable average profit, then
IMO pirates would certain exist. Even if most pirates crap out, if the
odds of a big return is sufficiently high, I think you could propably find
investors to support pirate activity.

But if we are right, then someone must be footing the bill and they must
be after something other than money as a return. That's where we get to
the subsidized raiders. But whoever is subsidizing them must be getting
something in return that is worth millions of credits. It's not enough to
say: "Well, pirates are possible if someone subsidized them. You must also
come up with a plausible reason for them to plunk down the money. 
 
>Well they could grab a big merchant or two and have all that much more to
>sell.  One or two week of piracy before the sell off would work.

If you go to a system with no defenses you can catch anything that turns
up with empty tanks, yes. How many ships will arrive in a couple of weeks
such a world? How much is a random cargo worth? Can you take the ship with
you and how much is the ship worth to a 'ship fence'? The two lines above
contains a huge number of assumptions, very few of which are agreed upon by
everybody in the discussion.

>How many loads of say a 4000 ton freighter filled with computer chips would
>it take?  ONE!

How many 4000 T ships visit worlds with no system defense boats at all? Very
few, IMO. How many of them would be carrying a high-value load? Even fewer.

>Part of being a sucessfull pirate is intel on the goods. Spies in ships
>departments etc.  Vargr are known for this.

OK. Let's say you have a spy in Akerut's shipping department on Aramanx and
are waiting for a good tip. Where are your ship in the meantime? What does it
do? You then get the tip that Akerut is gount to send a particularily valuable
shipment to Towers in six days. How do you capture that particular ship?

 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:42:54 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: compulsory voting

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:31:10 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #933
On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:18:18 -0400, you wrote:
>Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 09:56:34 -0400
>From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
>Subject: compulsory voting
>
>The US ... indeed, *any* country where the government is elected by less
>than
>50% of the people is not a democracy. In Oz we have compulsory voting -
so,
>as
>much as I dislike our PM and all he stands for, he can claim to have a
>mandate
>from a hell of larger percentage of the people than Bill Clinton (or Newt
>Gingrich) can.
>**********************
>he can claim it....doesn't mean he has it.....
**************
as you state below, he hasn't *any* mandate from the people.


>
>for example in Brasil there is also compulsory voting....this means that
>whoever is first on the ballot (drawn at random) generally wins....

In Australia, first choice on the Ballot Paper is drawn randomly by the
AEC, so
there is no way of taking advantage of it.
*******************
exactly like I stated above :) thank you for making my point for me.


Innumerable (well, a large number, anyway) of studies have shown that
"Donkey
Votes" rarely make the difference between victory and defeat and are a tiny
percentage of the overall ballots cast.
***************
but iof 'none of the above wins...does it bar all the canidates from that
election?  if not they dont count anyway.


Anyway, the perfect solution, I've always said, is to print circular ballot
papers with the candidates name around the edges. Try getting an advantage
from
that!
************
that woulsd work great !  :)


>ever consider that your PM was elected due to random chance instead of
>considered opinion?  was he first on the ballot?
Nope. PMs are elected by Parliament ... the majority Party therein.
*********
so you cant deliberatly handicap your governement?  that is what we
do...vote one party for presedent and another for congress...that way they
spend all their time fighting and leave you alone.

:)

'The government is best which governs least'



anyway they both work (mostly)  and we wont find perfection in a government
was long as the leaders have human failings....

want to agree to disagree?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:36:24 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: OT: Lord of the Rings

I know there's a New Zealander or two on the list, and wanted to direct
a question thataway:

I hear a New Line Cinema affiliate will start filming a live-action
Lord of the Rings movie this coming May. Is this for real?

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:53:52 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: Re : Trade and Economics (sorry, Loren!!)-longish

Robert O'Connor wrote:

> 3. Freight Costs and Passenger Fares
> The speculative trade rules in the LBB's mentioned that the cost
> of freight was a percentage of the cargo value. I can't remember
> off the top of my head what it was (5-10%??) - but I think 1000Cr
> per displacement ton ends up being a poor deal if you're
> carrying anything more complicated than grain or ore.

IMTU I've always assumed that any cargoes that needed special storage had such
included in the cargo volume. 3 tons of frozen pizza is in fact only 2.5 tons of
pizza and 0.5 tons of refrigerated storage.

Assuming special storage is not included in the cargo volume then cargo holds
would have to be pretty expensive items in order to cater for all the potential
cargoes.

On the subject of cargo, I'm sure that the subject of containers has been done
before on the list. What was the outcome?

Paul Bendall

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:21:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #935

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest wrote:

> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
> Subject: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
> 
> hmm...despite my efforts, I was not able to duplicate the degree to which the
> classic AHL sucks...oh well.
> 
> Hull: class 60,000, TL 12, unstreamlined.  600,000 sf
> Turrets: 360 standardized
> Bays: none (using _internal_ bays instead; partly to use up space)

Odd decision. The Azhanti class were the ship that convinced me that bays
(despite their name) were NOT internal, but were simply "big turrets" --
take a look at the art shown for the ship!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:13:50 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

Walter Smith wrote:

> I hear a New Line Cinema affiliate will start filming a live-action
> Lord of the Rings movie this coming May. Is this for real?

It seems to be. There's some info at   http://www.xsite.net/~mweeks/meccg/
which is a ME:TW card site. Very good if you're into that sort of thing.

Paul Bendall

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:15:42 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

Rupert Boleyn posted:
> 
<snip>
> I found T4 irritating, because while the Syleans obviously 
> played a bit
> dirty at the begining, at least they had a vision. What's 
> more the CT and
> MT 3I (and to some extent the TNE one) wasn't evil in its 
> early days, even
> if by 1100 it had become moribund and rotten in the middle. 
> In fact in can
> be argued that the Rebellion wouldn't have gone on the way it 
> did if the
> lesser nobles and military weren't still reasonably uncorrupt 
> and honest.
> With no clear ruler these honourable nobles transfered their 
> loyalty to
> whichever contender seemed most worthy of the position. IMO 
> if they had
> more corrupt one faction or another would have been able to buy an
> overwhelming advantage.

Not necessarily. IMO, 3I citizens are pretty much like the
average citizen now. They basically want to be left alone
to live out their lives and don't have much real interest in
what happens outside of their personal environment, unless
they recognize an event as a threat to their personal
environment. If something is a threat, most will take the
easiest way which seems to neutralize that threat. If that
means aligning with one faction over another, that's what
they'll do. I don't see it so much as "honourable". I believe
it to be more a matter of personal survival.

> I guess that I don't have a problem with Traveller's lack of 
> democracy, but
> I do have a problem with all its government being painted as evil. 
> 
> Just because the 3I was doomed to fall didn't mean that it 
> had to be evil
> and exploitative right from the start. IMO it would be better 
> if it was
> once an example of how an empire can be run well and fairly 
> (though the
> 3I's attitude towards member worlds would always limited 
> this), but in its
> final years became old and senile and finally destroyed itself.

Yep, that's pretty much how I see (and run) it. With the
exception that the 3I is pretty much a hands-off organization
in regards to individual world governments. Most govt. corruption
which affects PCs in my campaigns are world govts. An appearance
by the Imperium in a situation usually signifies the PCs are
*really* in it deep, especially if a corrupt Imperial official
is involved. The flip side of this is that if the official is
caught, he/she/it pretty much winds up as healthy as road kill,
not so much out of honor (though it has happened in the past)
but because the naughty noble let other nobles discover he/she/it
had an advantage over them; i.e., a perceived threat to their
personal environment.

Hmmm..The Naughty Noble..sounds like an Imperial bachelor party
holo. :P

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:26:23 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

In a message dated 10/13/98 12:39:21 AM Central Daylight Time,
stevedaniels@portcaddo.com writes:

<< 
 I figured that.  So I suggest make it +2 levels of difficulty,
 unless number crunching gets results you don't like.
  >>

I tried +1 and number crunchinggave me numbers I didn't like. I'm inclined
toward +2.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:36:39 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

Gary (TravelrTNE@aol.com) writes:

>The vast majority of the alien polities (including the Solomani
>Confederation) could well not be installed w/ Deyo transponders.
>It doesn't change the story.  I don't care to argue about minutia
>that won't change the net effect.

It may not matter to you, since your campaign takes place in TNE, but it
makes a huge difference to those of us who set our adventures in an era
where these supposedly unforgable transponders are in use.
  
>>1) You steal a blank transponder. One of those millions of
>>transponders that are made at the Central Repository of All Deyo Chips and
>>shipped all over the Imperium. 2) You bribe someone with the required
>>knowledge and equipment to install genuine transponders to install it.
>> 
>> Hey presto! You now have a false transponder indistinguishable from a
>>genuine one.
> 
>It will tell the false info but that will never change.

Yes of course. The owner of that false transponder had better have a
genuine one to show to anyone that inspects the ship. I never disputed
that.

>Eventually the paper trail should catch up to that ship and its transponder
>will never be able to cover up its earlier lie.

So don't let the authorities examine it.
 
>>_76 Patrons_, p. 7: "The registration transponder of the vessel will then
>>be changed, new papers forged, and the ship will be turned over to the
>>adventurers as payment."
> 
>"The registration transponder *changed?*  Can that be explained as putting a
>new transponder in?

Obviously. That's not the issue. But it can hardly be through legitimate
channels. Thus illegitimate means of changing the transponder of a ship
do demonstrably exist.
 
>>_76 Patrons_, p. 12: "...the ship's papers are forged..."
> 
>Papers. Not transponder.

And just how do you propose that someone with an unaltered transponder will
get any sort of use out of forged papers?

"Pay no attention to my transponder. Although it is unforgable it is not
telling the truth. Here, look at my papers. They tell the true story!"
 
>>_76P_, p. 13: An adventure involving a scout using his ship to attack a
>>yacht. Another adventure where the PCs are hired to use their ship in an
>>attack on a SuSAG facility.
> 
> huh?  The point?  

Would you use your ship to perform an illegal attack against a megacorporation
if you are unable to disguise which ship it was?

>>_76 P, p. 37: "The patron does not own the free trader, but has stolen it."
> 
>huh?  The point?

Would you travel in a stolen starship if you couldn't disguise it?
 
>>>I think that the storyline (of the life, death, and aftermath of the Third
>>>Imperium) should be justified and reconciled where there are incongruities.
>> 
>>Funny, that's the position I've argued all along. But you claim that there
>>are no incongruities in the first place.
> 
>Hmm... I distinctly remember you wanting to excise certain things...  wasn't
>this one of em?  Or was that just the *other* discusson?

Well, sometimes there are no way to reconcile an incongruity and in those
cases I do indeed advocate excising the offending bits (as little as will
work, of course), but the present one isn't one of those.

>>My attitude to new stuff is that it is the obligation of the author of such
>>to make sure that it is "backward compatible" (Unless the old stuff was
>>flawed to begin with, of course).
> 
>Maybe the old stuff was flawed to beging w/? ; )  Nevermind. 

What, transponders that are not tamperproof is so inconcivable that Dave
Nielsen was justified in correcting such an obvious mistake? ;-) 
  
>>>It is *official* (Survival Margin) whether you like it or not. I'd prefer
>>>to justify everything that makes up the OTU instead of discarding things.
>> 
>>No you don't. You're perfectly willing to discard forgable transponders.
>>You just want to keep the bits that you like and get rid of the bits you
> 
>Don't put words or intent on me, please.  You're obviously a poor judge of
>such.  I absolutely accept a "configurable" transponder as the one that was
>previous to the Deyo transponders.  You toss the Deyos out completely.  Just
>be honest about it.

There you go jumping to conclusions again. I haven't mentioned my proposed
solution to the problem at all. I've been too busy getting you to admit that
there is a problem in the first place. Now that you have, perhaps we can move
on to a more constructive discussion.

Now, moving the date of introduction of the Deyo transponders a decade
may work (although it will leave several issues that _some_ of us consider
highly unlikely). But here another factor enters. If we have to change
something anyway, I'd like to leave as much freedom for the individual Refs
as possible, within an established framework. With this solution Refs will
have to use the unforgable transponder in MT and G:T settings. If we make
transponders difficult, but possible, to forge, then Refs who want to
can tell their players: "But you can't do it and you don't know how to
find anyone who can", effectively allowing him to use unforgable
transponders and still stay within canon. The reverse is not true. If the
canonical transponder is unforgable, any Referee who wants to give his
Bad Guys a false transponder is forced outside canon.

So here is my proposal. FWIW it addresses all the problems I had with the
original version and still allows the Virus to run rampant through Deyo-
type chips from the Rim to the Core.

- ------------------
The Deyo chip project was concieved and sold to the Emperor as a way to create
an unforgable transponder. In 1086 the researchers thought they had reached
their goal with the developement of the SDG-313F chip. It was made mandatory
for Imperial ships in 1088 and over the course of 12 years retrofitted into
all existing vessels. But long before that human ingenuity had managed to
circumvent the supposedly unforgable transponder. For the most part genuine
transponders were stolen and programmed with false information (the military
version of the transponder, specifically designed to be able to put out false
IDs, was especially popular, but also, of course, much harder to come by) but
other methods were also used. The most resourceful rival interstellar states
even managed to duplicate the chips and create their own versions. The
rarest, but also most efficient, method was for a psi adept with computer
empathy to "seduce" the chip into broadcasting false information even though
the chip "knew" it was false. Fortunately computer empathy is an extremely
rare talent.

Despite all this, the Imperium stuck to the Deyo transponder. The reason was
simple: Even though the transponder was not completely safe, it was vastly
safer than the one it replaced (For this reason the technology was also
adapted and used by other interstellar states). The fact that admitting the
truth would cause an enormous loss of face to some very powerful Navy people
may also have played a part; certainly the Imperial authorities never
admitted officially that their transponders were not 100% safe.

Unofficially the number of transgressions mounted as powerful corporations
decided that they did not want their commercial rivals to know everything
they did and began using "alternate" transponders in steadily increasing
numbers. By 1107 the practice was so widespread that while private
individuals would still get into very serious trouble if caught using them,
interstellar companies could use them with relative impunity as long as they
were discrete about it and didn't break too many other laws in the process.
- ------------------



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:42:42 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: 101 Religions authorship

Just to confirm to all and sundry that Steve Daniels should be added to the
credits of any copy of 101 Religions that's out there.

BITS has apologised to Steve and gone on to add the following information:

[T]he next print run of 101 Religions will be updated to include Steve's
name.
We only did a short run for launch at Gen Con, so the major print run will
have the corrected version.


Obviously anyone who'd like to obtain a copy of this should either contact
Andy Lilly directly or try Leisure Games of London
(www.btinternet.com/~leisuregames/).


tc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:48:27 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

Bruce Johnson writes:

>Fundamentally, it's harder to propagate TL changes the larger your Area
>of Operations are. The Terra (pre-IW period) are able to move tech very
>rapidly because they are considerably smaller. With something the size
>of the 3I (or 1I or 2I) maintaining a stable technological base over the
>size of the Imperium is going to slow things down considerably since the
>infrastructure to support a higher TL has to propogate out from the area
>of innovation.

But individual planets are not bound by that restriction. If that was the
only reason why the 3rd Imperium was only TL 15, then there would be scores
of TL 25 planets around. 


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:46:07 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Shipping Containers (was Re: Re : Trade and Economics...)

Paul Bendall wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
IMTU I've always assumed that any cargoes that needed special storage had such included in the cargo volume. 3 tons of frozen pizza is in fact only 2.5 tons of pizza and 0.5 tons of refrigerated storage.

Assuming special storage is not included in the cargo volume then cargo holds would have to be pretty expensive items in order to cater for all the potential cargoes.

On the subject of cargo, I'm sure that the subject of containers has been done before on the list. What was the outcome?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I've only seen bits of such discussion, but IMTU I'd assumed that
people hiring cargo space at Cr1000/tn would expect the kind of
conditions one would find in a warehouse, and pack their cargoes
accordingly. If it cost them less money to put their cargoes in
containers that can handle exposure to space - say, to allow
cheaper cargo transfer to an orbital ship - the person who owned
the cargo would make that decision. The person owning the cargo
would have to, of course, meet some Imperial shipping safety
requirement, especially with regard to hazardous cargos.

In the case of speculative cargo, it depended where we were. On high
tech, high traffic worlds the players were often assumed to be bidding
on leftovers from what came in on, or was supposed to go out on the
big corporate ships - most of these cargos would already be well
packaged for long hauling. On lower-tech worlds, the PC's might
be responsible for packing the cargo themselves, including safety
procedures. This could make for interesting hazards - "What, you didn't
know that ripening Zhorgo fruit made that smell? I wouldn't worry
about it - but you probably shouldn't smoke that in here..."

Interesting idea for a confusing cargo. Players get hired to ship
a bunch of shipping containers to a frontier world...say a research
project needs something safe to pack up all the doodads from an
archaeological site in. Smart player realizes they can get paid
twice for the same trip - put a cargo in the shipping containers
before they go. Then get bitched at by the scientists for getting their
nice, new shipping containers all dirty, contaminating the samples...

Walt Smith

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #938
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 13 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 939



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Archbishop Snerd
T5 Task Resolution and Skill List Available
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Azhanti High Lightning (was re: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #935)
Re: Piracy
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #935 (fwd)
Re: US electorate
Re: Star Wars Democracy
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Hardcovers
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #935
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
DADTT and SFRPGs (was Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs)
The History of Medicine
IHTIT
Re: Transponder's true nature
re: Marc Miller and the Half Die
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:55:58 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Archbishop Snerd

"David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net> wrote in reply to me:

>>For those who've *not* rushed out and bought this yet, I finally
>>laid eyes

>    You mean those of us who live in the US where it's not yet
>available? (And haven't had the time to make an overseas phone call
>during English working hours ...)


Fair enough, it's not the easiest the thing in the world and I'd be
delighted if BITS books were already available over there.  After all, if
I'm going to help contribute to the things I'd love them to go to the
widest audience possible and I assume that the US market is the largest RPG
market (perhaps the most vociferous at least!).

I should add though that for much of the rest of the world, working out out
to buy things from the States has become par for the course to obtain much
sought after Traveller material.  All that time/energy/expense makes you
love the books that much more....

tc
"Me?  I'm a bibliophiles bibliophile."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:13:27 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: T5 Task Resolution and Skill List Available

The current version of the T5 Task Resolutions System system is now available
as a Zip file. It contains the T5 Task text, a list of skills, and the text of
the skill chapter. Skills are extensively illustrated with task examples.

The files themselves are in Word for Windows 95 format (sorry, no other
formats available) and have been Zipped.

Please request the file from 

FarFuture@AOL.com

and you'll get it by return email.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:20:00 -0500
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

"Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> wrote:

> Unfortunatly there is very little in established 'canon' to support the 
> premise that the TC was a democracy one way or the other. My reading of
> AM6 gives a very different "spin" to the TC. It states that Estigarribia's
> coup had fleet support because the fleet was largely composed of colonials
> who were cronically under represented in the confederation government. It
> also states that the TC was dominated by Terran interests through out its
> history. The only other "evidence" is that the TC was based on the UN
> general assembly (hardly a democratic body). 

Actually, as I recall the Terran Confederation either disbanded the General
Assembly or kept it as a Moot-like powerless deliberative body, disbanded
the Security Council, and gave the *Secretariat* legislative powers.  This
is the UN executive branch, headed by the Secretary-General.  The library
data is a little muddled up on these details, though. 

I get the impression that this wasn't an out-and-out dictatorship headed by
the Secretary-General and picked appointees, however.  Reading between the
lines, it looks almost as if the Confederation operated as a civil service
bureaucracy (gov code 8).  Many jobs would be filled by competitive civil
service examinations, possibly with hiring quotas from different nations
or regions of Terra and the "colonies".  I don't remember if there's any
information on how the Secretary-General was chosen in the Confederation,
either, or other details.  Nonetheless, it looks like both executive and
legislative powers were delegated to various bureaucrats and agencies of
the Confederation.

Still, this doesn't look much like a representative democracy either.  It
looks more like a proto-Imperium, minus the nobility added by the Rule of
Man and with most power concentrated on one world.

  -- Steve Bonneville

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:22:41 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Azhanti High Lightning (was re: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #935)

David L. Pulver wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Odd decision. The Azhanti class were the ship that convinced me that bays
(despite their name) were NOT internal, but were simply "big turrets" --
take a look at the art shown for the ship!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The deck plans make this a little more clear. Yes, there are big turrets
outside, but the machinery, power, targetting and whatnot take up
a lot of interior space. Each group of four turrets you see (two dorsal, two
ventral) pretty much take up an entire deck - the Gunnery Decks from
the deck plans.

I usually map out bays as mostly internal for missiles and "mini-spinal
mounts" - that is, beam, PA or Meson bays that act as the primary
armament for smaller ships. Fusion, Plasma, and PA or Meson
bays on really big ships I usually map with inspiration from AHL.

Not that I've finished a really, really big ship's deck plans yet.. :)

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:32:16 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 03:36 PM 10/13/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte writes:
>
>>I was thinking Vargr pirates.  You are right about unsupported pirates being
>>good target pratic for the local navy.  They can only run so far so fast but
>>with a border to cross...
>
>The pirates-are-not-economically-viable crowd, of which I am a member,
>believe that pure piracy is not, well, you guessed it, economically
>viable. Now, you can come up with lots of examples from the Real World of
>activities that are not economically viable and are still attempted by a
>lot of people (prospecting for gold in the Old West is a good example).
>But I can't come up with a single such activity that requires a multi-
>million dollar investment.
>
>If we are wrong and pirates can expect a reasonable average profit, then
>IMO pirates would certain exist. Even if most pirates crap out, if the
>odds of a big return is sufficiently high, I think you could propably find
>investors to support pirate activity.
>
>But if we are right, then someone must be footing the bill and they must
>be after something other than money as a return. That's where we get to
>the subsidized raiders. But whoever is subsidizing them must be getting
>something in return that is worth millions of credits. It's not enough to
>say: "Well, pirates are possible if someone subsidized them. You must also
>come up with a plausible reason for them to plunk down the money. 
>

Not so much pirates as comerse raiders.  A diversion on a distant border
(Varga) to pull ships away from say... the zoodoni border?
 
>>Well they could grab a big merchant or two and have all that much more to
>>sell.  One or two week of piracy before the sell off would work.
>
>If you go to a system with no defenses you can catch anything that turns
>up with empty tanks, yes. How many ships will arrive in a couple of weeks
>such a world? How much is a random cargo worth? Can you take the ship with
>you and how much is the ship worth to a 'ship fence'? The two lines above
>contains a huge number of assumptions, very few of which are agreed upon by
>everybody in the discussion.
>

Why would you need a fence?  Take it back across the border and sell it
openly.  It is a different 'nation' without extradition.

>>How many loads of say a 4000 ton freighter filled with computer chips would
>>it take?  ONE!
>
>How many 4000 T ships visit worlds with no system defense boats at all? Very
>few, IMO. How many of them would be carrying a high-value load? Even fewer.
>

In a years time a High pop. planet WILL get a few high $ cargos.  How many
truck loads of Pentium II are shiped in the US today?

>>Part of being a sucessfull pirate is intel on the goods. Spies in ships
>>departments etc.  Vargr are known for this.
>
>OK. Let's say you have a spy in Akerut's shipping department on Aramanx and
>are waiting for a good tip. Where are your ship in the meantime? What does it
>do? You then get the tip that Akerut is gount to send a particularily valuable
>shipment to Towers in six days. How do you capture that particular ship?
>

Not 6 days, 6 months.  If a company has an order for say 2 mason guns to be
delivered on x day to y planet then they will have a ship scheduled way in
advance that could carry that load.  Most routine cargo would travel through
scheduled shipping routes or chartered ships.  A company with production
contracts will have a contracted shipping firm to make thier deliveries on
time.  Most companies that build on contract have penalites they have to pay
if they do not deliver on time.  These are called complition bonds.  One
accoutant or billing clerk in the companies main factory or bussiness
location could funnel information to an entire pirate clan for 'processing.'
Three or four such operatives (with some outside subsidies) and you have a
successfull enterprise that distract the empire enough to devert ships and
patrols.

Charles.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:58:45 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

In a message dated 10/12/98 6:21:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ajackson@iii.com
writes:

<< hmm...despite my efforts, I was not able to duplicate the degree to which
the
 classic AHL sucks...oh well.
  >>

She looks better than the HG design.... BTW; does anyone know what the effect
of "Heavy or Total compartmentalization" does for a ship? GT gives the cost
and weight penalties, but the Starship Combat rules don't seem to show any
modifiers, etc. for them.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:06:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #935 (fwd)

> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
> Subject: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
> 
> hmm...despite my efforts, I was not able to duplicate the degree to which the
> classic AHL sucks...oh well.

Forgot to say: nice design. Have you considered applying for the Starships
book for GT? 
 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:59:43 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: US electorate

In a message dated 10/12/98 6:23:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
smithw@hartwick.edu writes:

<< In the end, people tend to get the government they deserve.
  >>

and we have....:-(

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:58:45 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy

At 06:29 AM 10/13/98, you wrote:

>>Well, like I said (in another post), all an Interstellar Government
>>*really* has to do is to protect trade and enable the safe carriage of the 
>>mail. It can leave pretty much everything else to the individual worlds.

>Isn't that what the Traveller Imperium is supposed to do?

Exactly.

The Imperium, as I see it, is nowhere nearly as omnipotent as most people
seem to assume.  Most citizens don't think of themselves as Imperials,
prefering to see themselves as Reginians, Denebians, or whatever.

IMTU, the Imperial Navy is a very small organization.  Why?  Because after
the Civil War Arbellatra wanted to make sure that what Olav (and she
herself) did was never agin possible.  The Nobles of the Moot, having been
forced to confirm Admirals who just happened to have a massive fleet in
orbit, were more than willing to go along.

The individual worlds of the Imperium were thriled that the tax rate
dropped, because it allowed them to invest in their own infrastructure,
rather than supporting massive ship-building projects dozens of parsecs
away.  Under Arbellatra worlds asserted their independence and right to
self determination.  Busy trying to rebuild the Core, Arbellatra had little
choice but to allow unheard of levels of local control.

In the modern Imperium, Naval commanders are constantly underfunded for the
missions they are given.  Fleet strength is deliberately kept low, since
experience has shown that given time, the Imperium can muster reserves to
win any war.
- --

+-------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry    | 
+-------------------------------------+
| "I created the universe; give ME    |
|  the gift certificate!!"            |
|        - Lisa Simpson, Overachiever |
+-------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:42:02 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

Sudden thought...

With the IHTIT rule, we now have a perfect use for Jack-of-all-Trades
skill.  Using J-o-T to raise the effective skill to avoid the IHTIT.

Skill required 3, Skill possessed 1, If the PC has JoT-2 he avoids the
penalty.
- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:12:05 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

In a message dated 10/12/98 11:14:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
DustyLV769@aol.com writes:

<< I have to question this statement...are we talking about the same
Switzerland,
 who is currently sitting on millions of dollars in money looted from Europe
by
 the Nazis and seems, at best, EXTREMELY reluctant to return it?
  >>

Absolutely, though they aren't the only ones....

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:25:54 -0600
From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com>
Subject: Hardcovers

From the SJ Games Daily Illuminator 13 October 1998:

          "We ordered only 2,000 each of the GURPS Basic Set and GURPS
Traveller hardcovers.
           Apparently the printers gave us some extra. A good thing, too,
because we came
           very close to selling out of the GURPS Basic Set just on
pre-orders . . . I expect
          to run out this week, except for the ones we have reserved for
direct mail sales . . .
           and GURPS Traveller won't be far behind.

          So if you want one of these, go bug your local retailer right
now, and beat out
           those people who don't read the Illuminator . . .

           -- Steve Jackson"

What this means is that the distributors snapped up 90% of the GURPS Basic
Set hardback and almost 75% of the GURPS Traveller hardback. If you want a
Traveller HARDBACK, go to your FLGS and put your order in NOW, 'cause they
won't be around much longer. Those of you who don't have a FLGS, give us a
call, and we can arrange to sell you one direct.

NOTE: The rush applies only to the HARDBACK version. We have ample supplies
of the GURPS Traveller SOFTBACK in stock and shipping. The only difference
between the two is on the cover and the binding -- the interiors are the
same.

BTW, the hardback looks pretty cool. We put a very thin line of foil
stamping on the red "laser" line on the front of the book, which allows the
"glow" effect to show through and makes the line look almost
three-dimensional. The overall effect is stunning.




Loren Wiseman
     Traveller Line Editor
     Traveller Guru-in-Residence
     SJ Games
     LKW@IO.COM
     (512) 447-7866 VOX
     (512) 447-1144 FAX

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:29:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brannon Boren <brannonb@animal.blarg.net>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Walter Smith wrote:

> I hear a New Line Cinema affiliate will start filming a live-action
> Lord of the Rings movie this coming May. Is this for real?

I saw a mention of it in the latest Entertainment Weekly, so I'd say it is
real.

Ben

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:35:20 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #935

In a message dated 10/13/98 7:25:42 AM Pacific Daylight Time, dlpulver@kos.net
writes:

<< Odd decision. The Azhanti class were the ship that convinced me that bays
 (despite their name) were NOT internal, but were simply "big turrets" --
 take a look at the art shown for the ship!
  >>

Yeah, but the deck plans showed that most of the "guts" of the system were
internal, with the bay "mega-turrets" popping in and out of the hull...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Fred and Evelyn Wolke writes:
> 
> What system was used to create this?  I'd like to see the data on how the
> fusion guns were set up, I'd like to port it over to GURPS: Traveller
> (official version)

This was done with my alternate modules, which were posted on this ML a bit
ago.  You can find them in the gurpsnet archives, at:
http://www.io.com/GURPSnet/Archive/Vehicles/Construction/traveller_modules

Fusion guns are created as N-PAWs with a *1.5 cost multiplier (*15 if below 10
megajoules).  These particular ones are 1 gigajoule extreme range compact
weapons with full stabilization and a universal mount; damage is 6d*500, draws
33 megawatts to fire once/second, 1/2D 4200 mi (i.e. same space combat hex),
Max 12,600 mi (immediate adjacent hexes), Acc 30.  16.8 tons, takes up 1.5
spaces(2/turret), $2.32 million.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:34:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Walter Smith writes:
> Hmmm...if IYO it sucks so much, why did you bother?
Because regardless of whether it's a good design, it's a classic design which
is mentioned in a variety of places in the source material.
> 
> The original CT ship design system made it difficult to create a multi-role
> ship capable of truly independent operations - you had to make some
> sacrifices. Am I getting the idea the GURPS:Traveller lets you get away
> with more in a ship?

It has _different_ constraints -- GT bases performance on mass, not volume.  As
a result, you tend to get higher acceleration in designs which have a lot of
fuel space and relatively light armor.  You also get _lower_ acceleration in
designs which have heavy armor, my attempts to design a Tigress aren't doing
too well.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:00:26 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: DADTT and SFRPGs (was Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs)

>As a last point... true democracy is as impossible to acheive as true
>communism, anarchy or any other idealic structure. There will always be
>groups that will have thier rights removed by the will of the people. The
>Rich who will dominate government to thier own ends... That does not meen
>that democracy is bad... just not perfect.. but then what is?
>How about adventures in an evil democracy (look at the Federation in Blakes
>Seven).


Or to paraphrase some author who's name I cannot remember:

"Dictatorships are based on the belief that one person knows what's best
for everyone.

"Uhm, yeah, right.

"Democracies are based on the belief that a consensus or the general public
knows what's best for everyone.

"Uhm, Yeah, right."

;-)

People seem to be too smart for semi-static institutional systems like
governments and "infallible" transponders. Technology advances, people
figure loopholes in laws, and governments are overthrown. Dangit, is there
no Utopia???

ObTrav: Assuming that Virus never happens (or happened), as does the GT
setting, what would be the Imperium's response to the discovery of a
"mechanical" civilization of AI machines? Say a deep-space probe from a
non-hostile, even pacifistic AI civilization jumps into Imperial space and
initiates contact (most likely, Rimward, since all the other borders seem
padded with non-3I states). Would immediate war result?

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:06:06 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: The History of Medicine

steve daniels wrote:

>At law school, the good joke we learned for doctors who hate lawyers is
>just to say:
>
>Over two hundred years ago your professional ancestors were bleeding people
>
>with leeches, while my professional ancestors were writing the United
>States
>Constitution.

A man is walking down the street when he sees a shop advertising human
barin for sale. Intruguied, he enters.

Man:        How much for the brain?
Shopkeeper: Which type? We've got scientist, engineer & lawyer.
Man:        How much is each type?
Shopkeeper: Well, the scientist brain is 20$/oz; the engineer brain is 
            30$/oz; and the lawyer brain is 3000$/oz.
Man:        3000$/oz? Why is layer brain so dear?
Shopkeeper: Have you got any idea how many lawyers you have to kill to                   
            get 1 oz of brain? 

ObTraveller: Hopefully, the far future has far less lawyers than the USA
does at present.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:59:37 +0100
From: "Paul James" <paul@turing.tcp.co.uk>
Subject: IHTIT

I would tend to argue for either +1 if one level below else +2 or else an
increasing penalty depending on how many levels before. Given that the a +1
modifier can be cancelled by taking time I would think this would give a
reasonably realistic chance of success. This means someone with _almost_
enough knowledge to do it of the top of their head actually can do the task
with the same chance of success but have to take longer as they rack their
brains for the next step/consult a reference manual etc. Of course some
tasks (emergency surgery for example) the time is _not_ available and thus
the task is harder for that person.

Paul

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:35:45 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

"Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net> wrote:

>> It's also been stated that DGP went beyond what was intended.  How do you
>> interpret G:T Aliens I being explicity instructed by "Miller and
>> Wiseman" not
>> to use anything DGP?
>
>I had not heard that. If true, then I retract my previous statement.

It is quite easily explainable. There is an issue over copyright ownership
of the DGP material (else IG could have recycled the old Alien books with
M0 added).

I know that the CORE writers who completed the Aliens Vol 1 manuscript for
IG were told not to use the DGP material directly. In other words, quoting
was banned, but paraphrasing and expanding wasn't.

Unless everything has changed again.

Dom

Who feels sorry for those that wrote the material for IG who haven't been
paid, and are now seeing a GT alien manual covering the same topic.


- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:41:14 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re: Marc Miller and the Half Die

Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com> wrote: (heavily snipped)

>......revised T4/T5 system ........half die ......haphazard
.>......I don't get a good feeling about it ........can be fixed, and it
should be.
>.....my suggestion:  use a system, like T4, where dice increase in whole dice.

I get this terrible feeling of...... ;-)

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:17:37 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

In a message dated 10/13/98 11:08:14 AM Central Daylight Time,
dberry@hooked.net writes:

<< 
 With the IHTIT rule, we now have a perfect use for Jack-of-all-Trades
 skill.  Using J-o-T to raise the effective skill to avoid the IHTIT.
 
 Skill required 3, Skill possessed 1, If the PC has JoT-2 he avoids the
 penalty.
  >>

Much what I was thinking of... JOT is used to avoid the penalty.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 06:36:11 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

From:           	dberry@hooked.net
Date sent:      	Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:42:02 -0700

>Sudden thought...

>With the IHTIT rule, we now have a perfect use for Jack-of-all-Trades
>skill.  Using J-o-T to raise the effective skill to avoid the IHTIT.

>Skill required 3, Skill possessed 1, If the PC has JoT-2 he avoids the
>penalty.

Do I get to go Arghhhhhhhhhh now? :*>

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:44:25 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

At 11:58 AM 10/13/98 EDT, you wrote:
>In a message dated 10/12/98 6:21:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ajackson@iii.com
>writes:
>
><< hmm...despite my efforts, I was not able to duplicate the degree to which
>the
> classic AHL sucks...oh well.
>  >>
>

I read the discription but some things seem to be missing.

Twin launch tubes.

The large fighter complement.

The larger cabins for the VIPs and other special appointments.

If my memory is correct I thought the AHL class carried more fuel shuttles
or was it that they carried modular cutters to help out?  The ships boats
look a little light.  Years ago I did a 'lost is enemy space' campain with
the characters as crew on a 'battle scout' running point for a stranded AHL
class group deep the rebelious teritory (Sword worlds confederation and the
frontier beyond).  Seems I remember that the AHL took quite a bit to refuel.
Many of the adventures were getting spare parts for the ship and finding
safe places to refuel and repair.  That and a few comando raids on
industrial planets to shake up the rebels a bit.

Also I never considered the AHL as a sucky ship.  It was a 'frontier
cruiser'.  Made to be a jack of all trades.  Not a battle queen.  It had the
room to add almost anything it needed for special missions or carry the
supplies for a long cruise.

PS:  Does anybody have an idea about the support\escort ships a AHL class
would have in a patrol or 'show the flag' mission?

Charles.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #939
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 13 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 940



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Hardcovers
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Piracy
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Physics - Help!
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Piracy
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: :arry ELmore
Re : Trade and Economics (sorry, Loren!!)-longish
Re: Piracy
Re: The History of Medicine
Re: Marc Miller and the Half Die
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
re: Azhanti High Lightning
Second Survey Gov and Law aggregate data.
Analysis of 2nd survey Data was Re:Disturbing anti-democratic trends...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:42:11 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Hardcovers

At 11:25 AM 10/13/98 -0600, you wrote:

>NOTE: The rush applies only to the HARDBACK version. We have ample supplies
>of the GURPS Traveller SOFTBACK in stock and shipping. The only difference
>between the two is on the cover and the binding -- the interiors are the
>same.

Out of curiosity, how is G:T doing sales-wise?  I know my local stores sold
out of it in a few days...

- --

+------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry dberry@hooked.net |
|   http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/   |
+------------------------------------+
|  111     Embrace Fascism.     111  |
|  |||  The uniforms look cool  |||  |
+------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:07:25 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:58:45 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
In a message dated 10/12/98 6:21:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
ajackson@iii.com
writes:
<< hmm...despite my efforts, I was not able to duplicate the degree to
which
the
 classic AHL sucks...oh well.
  >>
She looks better than the HG design.... BTW; does anyone know what the
effect
of "Heavy or Total compartmentalization" does for a ship? GT gives the cost
and weight penalties, but the Starship Combat rules don't seem to show any
modifiers, etc. for them.
*****************
+1 and +2 to the HT of the ship....useful in the mass combat system from
space/compendium2 and adding to survival rolls for the crew as well.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:04:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Charles Prevatte writes:
> I read the discription but some things seem to be missing.
> 
> Twin launch tubes.
No real GT equivalent.
> 
> The large fighter complement.
80 10-ton Rampart fighters -- weren't listed beyond the fact it had 40 10-space
bays and 40 10-space spacedocks.
> 
> The larger cabins for the VIPs and other special appointments.
Didn't bother listing it specifically.  Split up the 400 staterooms however one
wants.
> 
> If my memory is correct I thought the AHL class carried more fuel shuttles
> or was it that they carried modular cutters to help out?
It might be that it had a large number of 40-ton shuttles, not a small number
of 400-ton shuttles.
> The ships boats
> look a little light.  Years ago I did a 'lost is enemy space' campain with
> the characters as crew on a 'battle scout' running point for a stranded AHL
> class group deep the rebelious teritory (Sword worlds confederation and the
> frontier beyond).  Seems I remember that the AHL took quite a bit to
> refuel. Many of the adventures were getting spare parts for the ship and
> finding safe places to refuel and repair.  That and a few comando raids on
> industrial planets to shake up the rebels a bit.
> 
> Also I never considered the AHL as a sucky ship.  It was a 'frontier
> cruiser'.  Made to be a jack of all trades.  Not a battle queen.  It had
> the room to add almost anything it needed for special missions or carry
> the supplies for a long cruise.

Um...Mod/6 computer sucks outright, particularly on a 60 kT ship.  2 Gs and
agility 0 kinda sucks too.
> 
> PS:  Does anybody have an idea about the support\escort ships a AHL class
> would have in a patrol or 'show the flag' mission?

Hm...kind of a shortage of jump-5 supply or escort ships.  I think the AHL is
supposed to be mainly self-sufficient.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:06:47 +0200
From: "Jonas Karlsson" <Jonas.Karlsson@baldakinen.umea.se>
Subject: Re: Piracy

> From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
> Now, you can come up with lots of examples from the Real World of
> activities that are not economically viable and are still attempted by a
> lot of people (prospecting for gold in the Old West is a good example).
> But I can't come up with a single such activity that requires a multi-
> million dollar investment.

Well, drilling for oil in the middle of Sweden comes to mind. Of course,
that may have been a scam from the beginning. (At least it was a
phenomenally bad idea that quite a few people lost quite a bit of money on.)
Hmm. Perhaps pirates would arrange shares scams to get the money to buy
their ships? (Or, more likely, just take the money and run. ;-)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:18:59 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:44:25 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
At 11:58 AM 10/13/98 EDT, you wrote:
>In a message dated 10/12/98 6:21:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
ajackson@iii.com
>writes:

PS:  Does anybody have an idea about the support\escort ships a AHL class
would have in a patrol or 'show the flag' mission?
***************
some scouts/fleet couriers....A Fer-de-lance or six for taking out
missiles.  a Fleet Tanker,  a Fleet Escort or two.  a troopship/assault
shuttle carrier.  some Patrol Cruisers.....just about anything you want to
add, but as a cruiser it should be able to operate by itself.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:24:15 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: Physics - Help!

This is one for the science gurus on the list.

Can anyone tell me what phonons and ronons are (*not*
photons and ronin..I know what those are)? I heard
they're examples of quantum particles related to a quantum
fluid (whatever that it) but I'm a layman when it comes to
quantum physics and I've never heard of these things before.

BTW, what's a quantum fluid?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:35:36 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

>I know there's a New Zealander or two on the list, and wanted to direct
>a question thataway:
>
>I hear a New Line Cinema affiliate will start filming a live-action
>Lord of the Rings movie this coming May. Is this for real?

I'm not a New Zealander, but yes, it is. It going to be directed by Peter
Jackson, the same guy that directed the _Frighteners_, _Bad Taste_, and
_Brain Dead_. (IMHO, ick!)

I hope it will be good, but I cannot help but think of those other NZ
exports: _Hercules_ and _Xena: Warrior Princess_. Woo hoo, Kevin Sorbo as
Aragorn! :-(

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:35:45 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

>She looks better than the HG design.... BTW; does anyone know what the effect
>of "Heavy or Total compartmentalization" does for a ship? GT gives the cost
>and weight penalties, but the Starship Combat rules don't seem to show any
>modifiers, etc. for them.

It increases the DR of internal walls and bulkheads, as well as some other
stuff. It's in GURPS Space, IIRC.

Boy, that was almost completely unhelpful.

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:35:43 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Piracy

[snippage of discussion between Charles and Hans -- I love piracy discussions]

>>Can you take the ship with
>>you and how much is the ship worth to a 'ship fence'?
>
>Why would you need a fence?  Take it back across the border and sell it
>openly.  It is a different 'nation' without extradition.


That, me lad, would lead to war with the big 3I.


>>>How many loads of say a 4000 ton freighter filled with computer chips would
>>>it take?  ONE!
>>
>>How many 4000 T ships visit worlds with no system defense boats at all? Very
>>few, IMO. How many of them would be carrying a high-value load? Even fewer.
>
>In a years time a High pop. planet WILL get a few high $ cargos.  How many
>truck loads of Pentium II are shiped in the US today?


The point, however, is that hi pop worlds will be able to buy a good SDB
defense, since hi pop worlds tend to have lots of credits to throw around.
And a good SDB defense kills piracy dead, dead, dead -- dead as freakin'
stone. ;-)

Disclaimer: Given the nature of the information we have (i.e., incomplete),
there is no real conclusion one can make about piracy in the 3I except that
it exists in the setting's "canon." Many (including myself) seem to think
piracy makes little sense as presented in published material, but "say
lah-vee!" (as we stupid, non-French-speaking Americans sometimes say).

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:44:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

>She looks better than the HG design.... BTW; does anyone know what the
>effect of "Heavy or Total compartmentalization" does for a ship? GT gives
>the cost and weight penalties, but the Starship Combat rules don't seem to
>show any modifiers, etc. for them.

In G: Vehicles the effect is to divide by 5 or 10 all leakage results, and to
reduce the odds of developing a leak in vacuum or various unpleasant
atmospheres.  No effect is listed in GT; I'd say that for a vehicle without
compartmentalization taking 10% of hit points means the vehicle is considered
depressurized; this would wait until 50% or 100% for partial or total
compartmentalization.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:00:19 -0500 (CDT)
From: buzz@funkadelic.com
Subject: Re: :arry ELmore

DustyLV769@aol.com wrote:

>>And definately Larry Elmore!  He did a lot of the B&W art in T4

>Hear! Hear! We spend too much time slagging of the poor Foss art in T4 
>and not noticing the good material. I liked the Elmore stuff - it had a
>real flavour to it.

Larry Elmore? Ol' SnarfQuest Larry Elmore? Please... no. I'll feel like
I'm playing Star Frontiers. Liz Danforth and that Dietrich fellow, no
there you go.

buzz(at)funkadelic(dot)com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:08:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re : Trade and Economics (sorry, Loren!!)-longish

 
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au>
> 
> Ian Whitchurch had some good points re trade.

	He usually does.
 
> Some immodest proposals follow :-
> 
> 1. Trade classifications, and non-mainworlds.
> Detailed star systems may have other inhabited worlds
> besides the main world, and these may fulfil the UPP
> criteria for a trade type e.g. mainworld is an asteroid belt,
> and there's an "agricultural world" present too.

	True, but if most of the population is on the mainworld, these 
smaller world-lets may not be terribly economically significant by 
comparison.
 
> 3. Freight Costs and Passenger Fares
> The speculative trade rules in the LBB's mentioned that the cost
> of freight was a percentage of the cargo value. I can't remember
> off the top of my head what it was (5-10%??) - but I think 1000Cr
> per displacement ton ends up being a poor deal if you're
> carrying anything more complicated than grain or ore.
> 
> So all freight is charged at a percentage of a cargo's value.
> Cargoes need to be specified. Perhaps some tables would help <g>.

	This doesn't make any economic sense at all.  Freight is freight 
and should be carried at a Cr/ton rate.  It doesn't cost the shipper any 
more to carry 1 ton of computer chips than 1 ton of grain.  If you and I 
were the only ship captains available and you wanted to charge 5% of the 
value of the cargo of computer chips, I could underbid you at 4% and still 
make a fortune.  You in turn could under bid me, etc. until we had 
competed our price down close to our costs.  Our costs will be 
determined by volume, not value/volume, so that is all our final 
price will depend on.  BTW, this is called a Bertrand game in economics.

> Hans Rancke-Madsen's shipping tables show that carrying passengers
> isn't viable after a few parsecs :-
>            Cost of Shipping, Cr
> Parsecs    Low       Middle     High
> 1          799       3769       4335
> 2          1080      4774       5850
> 3          1524      6641       7922
> 4          2018      8338       10496
> 5          3119      15913      12409
> 6          4677      17833      23000
> [Ticket :   1000      8000       10000]

	It's not viable if you stick to the fixed ticket prices.  If 
someone wants to travel 6 pcs and they're willing to pay the cost, why 
not take them?
 
> 4. 'Primitive' Worlds and Trade
> Chronic debt is a problem unless imports of expensive gear are limited
> (ideally, to capital goods - development is the only way out). Look at
> most of the Third World.

	Debt is a problem in the Third World for many complicated reasons,
at least some that are no fault at all of the 3W leaders or people.  That
said, the plan you describe of only importing capital goods is known in
economic development circles as Import-Substitution Industrialization.  It
was tried extensively in Latin America in the post-WWII period and for the
most part failed miserably.  Efforts to reduce import dependence through
ISI wound up increasing it instead because of the need to import more
intermediate and capital goods which were then employed at lower
efficiency than they were in their home markets.  ISI countries also had
fewer export earnings to pay for their imports because investment focused
on those industries where the country was _least_ competitive and
therefore imported the most.  All of this resulted in severe balance of
payments problems and debt. There is no economic reason that 3W countries
should chronically be in debt.  The answer usually lies in the poor
decisions of 3W politicians, and the bad advice of 1W gov'ts and bankers. 

ObTrav:  The frequency of low-TLs can be partly explained by the 
misguided policies of gov'ts or the short-sighted avarice of 
off-worlders.  Balance of Payments and debt crises like we're seeing in 
the Real World could also be novel settings for adventures.
  
> Interest rates in the Imperium?
> Low, because the place has been stable for 1000 years.

	Agreed.  Given the slow pace of TL change, we have to assume that 
the opportunities for profitable investment are low, hence the low demand 
for capital, i.e. low interest rates.

> Prime rates : not more than 3-5%

	Given that starships, a low to moderate risk investment, are 6%, 
this seems reasonable.
 
 -JM

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:17:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Piracy

From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>
> Why would you need a fence?  Take it back across the border and sell it
> openly.  It is a different 'nation' without extradition.

	The vast majority of the Imperium is months travel from an 
international border.  Furthermore, even once across the pirate could 
face arrest and extradition unless relations between the two polities are 
so poor that no such agreements exist. 
 
> >>How many loads of say a 4000 ton freighter filled with computer chips would
> >>it take?  ONE!
> >
> >How many 4000 T ships visit worlds with no system defense boats at all? Very
> >few, IMO. How many of them would be carrying a high-value load? Even fewer.
> >
> 
> In a years time a High pop. planet WILL get a few high $ cargos.  How many
> truck loads of Pentium II are shiped in the US today?

	But a High pop world will have more than enough SDBs to make 
piracy an extremely hazardous if not impossible proposition.  Worlds with 
enough trade to be worth pirating are worth defending.  Worlds not worth 
defending have little trade worth pirating.
  
- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:21:20 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: The History of Medicine

Walter Smith wrote:

> Most of the founding fathers were businessmen, inventors, philosophers,
> farmers, military leaders - as well as, if they were at all, lawyers.
>
> How many lawyers today are anything but lawyers?

Depends.  Most are only that, but the same goes for politicians, inventors,
farmers, military leaders, etc.  Although at my school, about 10% were
engineers about 5% accountants and about 1% were doctors.  But
I expect that is atypical.  I was the only redneck, but one of two
booksellers (real bookseller, not mall bookstore cashier).

> And I seem to recall leeches, for certain medical applications, coming
> back into fashion...<g>
>
> Cryptoquote of the day: "The problem with the United States is not
> that we have so many lawyers, but that we have so many good ones.
> Think of all the dedicated, competent men and women who could be
> curing diseases, inventing new products, creating new wealth, who
> are instead greasing wheels on deals and cutting people down to make
> business for each other."

Thats great!  I would only modify is to say that its the technically good
ones that create all the technicalities and complexity, that are often
unnecessary, while the much rarer morally good ones usually practice
in obscurity.

The quote reminds me of a discussion I had with an engineer friend
at law school.  I said something along the lines of that quote about
medical school and he responded:  The reason that most of these
law students are in law school, is that they are totally incapable
of understanding science enough to be doctors or engineers.

He was right.  Most of these fresh lawyers now working on Wall
Street and State Street and all the other places where people lives are
can be affected by small mistakes, have never balanced a checkbook
or paid their own rent.

> ObTrav: How many of your PC's thought it prudent to have a crewman
> along with Legal-3 or so?  :)

Well, since a GURPS playtest waaaaay back when, the value of a
guy who can keep everyone out of jail was imprinted on me.  So,
I tend to keep their wallets down by forcing them to hire expensive
lawyers.  They'll get the point eventually.  ;-)

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:19:22 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Marc Miller and the Half Die

In a message dated 10/13/98 12:17:24 PM Central Daylight Time,
dom@cybergoths.u-net.com writes:

<< ;-) >>

The risk I take in discussing the Task Resolution system on the net is that
some people will want to revise it, rather than comment on it and how it
works. If the discussion is "I won't use it because it uses the half die,"
then perhaps they should continue to use MT or CT or even GT. There is clearly
little (if any) possibility that the half-die will be eliminated. In fact, the
argument that the half die is only used in tasks has prompted me to consider
other places where it can logically be used as well.

The current task and skill system is available as a zipped file from
FarFuture@AOL.com. My hope is that people will use it and play it and point
out failings and inconsistencies in it so that it can be well-edited and
tested when it comes out in T5.

Marc Miller

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:26:58 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

Walter Smith wrote:

> I know there's a New Zealander or two on the list, and wanted to direct
> a question thataway:
>
> I hear a New Line Cinema affiliate will start filming a live-action
> Lord of the Rings movie this coming May. Is this for real?
>
> Walt Smith

http://www.aint-it-cool-news.com/

Has been reporting on this story and surrounding rumors for almost a year.
There has been contradictory information about whether its the Hobbit live
action,.
the LOTR live action, or LOTR animated.  Very confusing and doesn't make
sense.

A few months ago, it was confirmed that something live action was being
done
but not which.  Then, IIRC, the funding got pulled by one studio, but
another
may have picked it up.

There was a level of secrecy about the same as the Star Wars prequels.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:31:45 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

dberry@hooked.net wrote:

> Sudden thought...
>
> With the IHTIT rule, we now have a perfect use for Jack-of-all-Trades
> skill.  Using J-o-T to raise the effective skill to avoid the IHTIT.
>
> Skill required 3, Skill possessed 1, If the PC has JoT-2 he avoids the
> penalty.

Very nice!

The Its-Harder-Than-I-Thought-But-I-Think-I-Know-A-Trick Rule.
;-)

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:29:26 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Azhanti High Lightning

Aerron Winsor wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
PS:  Does anybody have an idea about the support\escort ships a AHL class
would have in a patrol or 'show the flag' mission?
***************
some scouts/fleet couriers....A Fer-de-lance or six for taking out
missiles.  a Fleet Tanker,  a Fleet Escort or two.  a troopship/assault
shuttle carrier.  some Patrol Cruisers.....just about anything you want to
add, but as a cruiser it should be able to operate by itself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Most of these craft wouldn't be able to keep up. It's been a tenet
since the 1940's that you group your combat units by mobility.

The only reason to use an AHL is it's Jump-5 capability. With the
exception of a couple cruiser models (_Gionnetti_?), there's little in the 
Imperial fleet built to that standard. 

I'd say some fleet couriers would come along, Jump-6.

You can't really use a tanker effectively in Jump-5 operations - 
fuel requirements for the tanker to jump twice are over 100%,
keep the tankers to give longer legs to the short-jump units.

Except for the IISS's own Azhanti High Lightnings (some were
transferred for use as really cool exploration cruisers), we haven't
seen anything for the IISS in the J-5 range - no scout ships, but that's
probably a role the 80 fighters on the AHL are best for anyway.

Unless the Navy has a fleet of j-5 support vessels (doubtful due
to Imperial standard for fleet being j-4), I'll bet you'll see AHL's
pretty much alone or in poorly supported CruRons. I'd hope such
ships were allowed to use the optional rules allowing fighters
to act in an anti-missile role.

IIRC, there are several examples of AHL's acting alone. One that comes
to mind is the loss of the _Vermillion Stance_ to the "perfidious
Zhodani" in 1042 in the Garonne system (0102 Haldensleben\Vanguard
Reaches). _Vermillion Stance_ was on her own when the Zhodani
spec force unit took her, no one knew her fate until years later
when some of her crew were returned (by accident?) in a prisoner
exchange.

btw, the data presented in Jim Vassilakos' excellent Galactic program
disagrees here with canon. The supplement describing the loss of
_Vermillion Stance_ (the scenario backgrounds from the AHL rulebook)
indicates a situation where it would be impossible for Aslan, Imperial
or even most interstellar foriegn representatives to be present in-system.
The data for Garonne indicates a rescue operation by an ad-hoc
alliance of Imperial Marines and Aslani warriors that succeeded in
freeing an Aslani ambassador, but was too late to recapture 
_Vermillion Stance_. Any of these combatants could have revealed
the fate of the ship, which is supposed to have been unknown to
the Imperium until after the Fourth Frontier War, some 42 years later.

Unless something else happened to these brave souls on their way back
home, that is.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:37:30 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Second Survey Gov and Law aggregate data.

Full Imperium
Govt	# Worlds	Population	% Worlds	% Pop
0	1080	3.91E+12	8.02%	7.06%
1	696	3.83E+12	5.17%	6.91%
2	941	3.92E+12	6.99%	7.06%
3	1106	4.43E+12	8.21%	7.98%
4	1259	5.22E+12	9.35%	9.42%
5	1253	5.06E+12	9.30%	9.12%
6	1278	5.09E+12	9.49%	9.18%
7	1108	5.07E+12	8.23%	9.14%
8	934	4.27E+12	6.93%	7.70%
9	747	2.96E+12	5.55%	5.33%
A	496	2.29E+12	3.68%	4.13%
B	316	5.38E+11	2.35%	0.97%
C	193	6.19E+11	1.43%	1.12%
D	79	5.97E+11	0.59%	1.08%
E	28	1.12E+10	0.21%	0.02%
F	8	7.01E+10	0.06%	0.13%
G	318	1.23E+12	2.36%	2.22%
H	237	4.12E+11	1.76%	0.74%
J	189	8.37E+11	1.40%	1.51%
K	212	3.28E+11	1.57%	0.59%
L	486	2.28E+12	3.61%	4.10%
M	208	9.99E+11	1.54%	1.80%
N	219	9.38E+11	1.63%	1.69%
S	54	3.77E+11	0.40%	0.68%
T	19	1.83E+11	0.14%	0.33%
U	3	5.00E+08	0.02%	0.00%
V	1	7.00E+04	0.01%	0.00%
Totals	13468	5.55E+13		


Spinward Marches Only
Govt Type	# Worlds	Population	% Worlds	% Pop
0	54	2.52E+10	12.30%	2.52%
1	30	2.87E+11	6.83%	28.65%
2	30	1.27E+11	6.83%	12.71%
3	38	1.23E+10	8.66%	1.23%
4	56	1.21E+11	12.76%	12.13%
5	42	4.32E+10	9.57%	4.32%
6	40	2.73E+10	9.11%	2.73%
7	38	1.13E+11	8.66%	11.32%
8	34	8.30E+10	7.74%	8.30%
9	36	1.25E+11	8.20%	12.46%
A	18	3.51E+10	4.10%	3.51%
B	9	8.44E+05	2.05%	0.00%
C	10	1.00E+09	2.28%	0.10%
D	4	7.21E+07	0.91%	0.01%
Totals	439	1.00E+12		

Law Levels

Full Imperium					Running totals	
Law Level 	# Worlds	Population	% Worlds	% Pop 	worlds	Pop
0	1447	5.84E+12	10.74%	10.53%	10.74%	10.53%
1	707	3.00E+12	5.25%	5.41%	15.99%	15.94%
2	938	4.39E+12	6.96%	7.91%	22.96%	23.84%
3	1152	5.19E+12	8.55%	9.35%	31.51%	33.20%
4	1244	4.68E+12	9.24%	8.43%	40.75%	41.62%
5	1264	5.28E+12	9.39%	9.51%	50.13%	51.14%
6	1393	5.75E+12	10.34%	10.36%	60.48%	61.49%
7	1277	4.79E+12	9.48%	8.63%	69.96%	70.12%
8	1125	5.00E+12	8.35%	9.01%	78.31%	79.13%
9	1004	4.33E+12	7.45%	7.80%	85.77%	86.93%
A	678	2.08E+12	5.03%	3.75%	90.80%	90.68%
B	541	2.60E+12	4.02%	4.69%	94.82%	95.37%
C	322	1.31E+12	2.39%	2.37%	97.21%	97.74%
D	172	5.49E+11	1.28%	0.99%	98.49%	98.73%
E	97	4.94E+11	0.72%	0.89%	99.21%	99.62%
F	62	1.32E+11	0.46%	0.24%	99.67%	99.86%
G	29	7.24E+10	0.22%	0.13%	99.88%	99.99%
H	8	4.01E+09	0.06%	0.01%	99.94%	99.99%
J	6	3.93E+09	0.04%	0.01%	99.99%	100.00%
K	2	1.00E+06	0.01%	0.00%	100.00%	100.00%
Totals	13468	5.55E+13				

Spinward Marches only					Running totals	
Law Level 	# Worlds	Population	% Worlds	% Pop 	worlds	Pop
0	70	1.21E+11	15.95%	12.14%	15.95%	12.14%
1	22	9.51E+09	5.01%	0.95%	20.96%	13.09%
2	38	1.36E+11	8.66%	13.57%	29.61%	26.66%
3	41	2.18E+11	9.34%	21.77%	38.95%	48.43%
4	34	6.64E+10	7.74%	6.64%	46.70%	55.07%
5	36	7.25E+10	8.20%	7.25%	54.90%	62.32%
6	44	6.07E+09	10.02%	0.61%	64.92%	62.92%
7	38	1.86E+09	8.66%	0.19%	73.58%	63.11%
8	37	1.95E+11	8.43%	19.49%	82.00%	82.60%
9	28	1.53E+11	6.38%	15.31%	88.38%	97.91%
A	21	2.07E+10	4.78%	2.07%	93.17%	99.98%
B	14	1.13E+08	3.19%	0.01%	96.36%	99.99%
C	8	4.70E+07	1.82%	0.00%	98.18%	100.00%
D	6	2.01E+07	1.37%	0.00%	99.54%	100.00%
F	2	8.00E+03	0.46%	0.00%	100.00%	100.00%
Totals	439	1.00E+12				

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:37:26 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Analysis of 2nd survey Data was Re:Disturbing anti-democratic trends...

Rather than relying on anectodal evidence so beloved by demagogues and
politicians everywhere, I thought I'd actually look at how repressive
the 3I is to the average citizen.

There are two UWP codes associated with the 'repressiveness': Gov and
Law.

Government types are pretty much scattered as ytypes, not a spectrum as
is law, so what we can do is look at the pertinent data.

There are two explicit Democracies in the UWP codes, 2 (Participatory
Democracy) and 4 (Representative Democracy). There are also two
non-democratic, but popularly supported government codes Charismatic
Dictator (A) and Charismatic Oligarchy (C)

Law can be ranked as a scalar from 0 (no law) to L (Total Repression)

Law levels in Traveller are heavily 2nd amendment weighted: _all_ that
counts is weapons possesion. 

Still it will give us the only estimate we can make of the general
repressiveness of the legal system.

I'm using the 2nd survey data from the archives, and look at two cases,
the total Imperium and the Spnward Marches only. The reason for this is
that (per the article in the last Challenge magazine) There are
significant problems with the Non-Spinward Marchesdata...it was clearly
generated by a computer with a poor random number generator. The
Marches, as the most used, most worked over sector, we'll make the
assumption that it is more accurate.

Summary data (tables to follow in another post)

Looking at government types, the democratic governments represent 16.48%
of the total population of the 3I, popular governments represent 21.7%. 
Ok, not the majority, but a solid minority nonetheless.

In the Spinward Marches the numbers are 24.84% for democracies, and
popular governments are 28.45%. nearly a third of the poulation lives
under either a representative government or one that has their
confidence.

Law levels are, IMO, far more representative of the repressive character
of a governent. All levels 7 and below are moderate to low law, and
pretty well represent the majority of the 'Western Democracies' of the
present day.

On this basis, 70% of the total Imperium, and 63% of the Spinward
Marches populations live in moderate to low law level worlds.

Extreme Law worlds, which I would consider definitely repressive, (A and
above) account for just 13% of the population of the full Imperium, and
17.4% of the population of the Spinward Marches.

The REASON there isn't a widespread revolt against the Evil Monster
Third Imperium, is that the large majority of the population feels that,
however the mechanism of rule, they're being ruled in a just fashion.

Of course it is a stretch from Law Level to satisfaction of the
populace, but it's the only measuring stick we've got.

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #940
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 13 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 941



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Super-short Intellectual Property Law (was - Re: Transponder's true  nature)
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: The History of Medicine
Re Demos
JOT and IHTIT
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Piracy
re: The History of Medicine
Re: Transponder's true nature
re: GURPS Traveller starship questions
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: 101 Vehicles
Re: SDB
re: Democracy in Traveller
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM co...
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)
101 Religions & Bloo - Re: Archbishop Snerd
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
[OFF TOPIC] Dune RPG?
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:45:23 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Super-short Intellectual Property Law (was - Re: Transponder's true  nature)

SD Mooney wrote:

> "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net> wrote:
>
> >> It's also been stated that DGP went beyond what was intended.  How do you
> >> interpret G:T Aliens I being explicity instructed by "Miller and
> >> Wiseman" not
> >> to use anything DGP?
> >
> >I had not heard that. If true, then I retract my previous statement.
>
> It is quite easily explainable. There is an issue over copyright ownership
> of the DGP material (else IG could have recycled the old Alien books with
> M0 added).
>
> I know that the CORE writers who completed the Aliens Vol 1 manuscript for
> IG were told not to use the DGP material directly. In other words, quoting
> was banned, but paraphrasing and expanding wasn't.

Ideas can only be patented, which is hard to do.
Expressions _are_ copyrighted as soon as they are recorded.
Names, characters, and the like can be trademarked if used in commerce.

Hope this helps.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:53:44 -0400
From: "Scott Spieker" <scspieker@ncweb.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:29:42 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Brannon Boren <brannonb@animal.blarg.net>
> Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
> 
> On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Walter Smith wrote:
> 
> > I hear a New Line Cinema affiliate will start filming a live-action
> > Lord of the Rings movie this coming May. Is this for real?
> 
> I saw a mention of it in the latest Entertainment Weekly, so I'd say it
is
> real.
> 
> Ben


Sure enough, the LotR is at:
http://www.newlinecinema.com/lordoftherings.html

Hope that helps,
Scott

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:05:35 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: The History of Medicine

Matt Clonfero wrote:

<snip jokes>
>ObTraveller: Hopefully, the far future has far less lawyers than the
USA
>does at present.

IMTU, I solve the anti-democracy debate (and other debates) by having
megacorp lawyers and the IGLF (Ine Givar Legal Front) constantly trying
to limit the powers of the Imperium.  This is compounded by a heavy
layer of bureaucrats.

Charles

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:01:18 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Demos

>William F. Hostman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Don't know specifics for rest of the US, but in Alaska, 30% turnout of the
>electorate is maximum that can be expected. And, of those elligible to
>register, only about 1/3rd do so and thus become members of the electorate.
>So, rougly 1/9th of alaskans determine alaska's political nature.
>
>This would seem to be a self selecting oligarchy. For what it's worth, I
>have heard that much of the country is in similar voting straights....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>An oligarchy that anyone can be part of, just by deciding to participate?
>The usual Traveller oligarchy is supposed to be a more exclusive
>club, IMO. They have the right to vote - the responsibility to. Their
>fault (for the most part) if they decide not to.

Not quite anyone: they have to be US citizens, State Residents (ooohh... 30
days for voter registration... so they can't vote the first 60 days),
cannot be felons, and must be mentally fit. (Although that last is quite
lax, as many of the Down's Sysndrome adults are registered voters!)

>I think you're multiplying the same fraction against itself. "Electorate",
>in American usual usage, includes all citizens above the minimum
>voting age (with the exception, IIRC, of prisoners). The technical term
>might be limited to only those who register, but I'll wager that both your
>approx. 30% figures refer to the same statistic - how many Alaskans
>participate in their government by voting.

sorry Walt, you lose that wager. 1/3 of elligibles to register do so, if
that.  Since I work elections, I get to see turnout directly as a % of
REGISTERED voters - usually 23-28 %.

in a typical anchorage voting precinct, there will be 1000 - 1500
residences minimum, with an average occupancy somewhere around 1.5-3. Rule
out non-citizens, Felons, and the mentally incompetent, and you wind up
with around 1500-2000 persons elligible. And then compare to the precinct
registers (which average 400-600). Some precincts are worse, since
precincts are apportioned by registered voters in precinct, limited to
existing district boundaries.

>There is a wide variance between presidential and non-presidential
>election year turnouts, of course.

Yeah, RIght... At least, during a presidential, more people register.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:03:22 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: JOT and IHTIT

> dberry@hooked.net writes:
> 
> << 
>  With the IHTIT rule, we now have a perfect use for Jack-of-all-Trades
>  skill.  Using J-o-T to raise the effective skill to avoid the IHTIT.
>  
>  Skill required 3, Skill possessed 1, If the PC has JoT-2 he avoids the
>  penalty.
>   >>
> 
> Much what I was thinking of... JOT is used to avoid the penalty.
> 
> Marc

This sounds like it would work well, and keep JOT from becoming too
powerful. I would like to see a cap on how many levels of JOT a character
is allowed to have, but aside from that, this sounds very workable.

Allen

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:10:45 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

At 11:04 AM 10/13/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte writes:
>> I read the discription but some things seem to be missing.
>> 
>> Twin launch tubes.
>No real GT equivalent.
>> 
>> The large fighter complement.
>80 10-ton Rampart fighters -- weren't listed beyond the fact it had 40 10-space
>bays and 40 10-space spacedocks.
>> 
>> The larger cabins for the VIPs and other special appointments.
>Didn't bother listing it specifically.  Split up the 400 staterooms however one
>wants.
>> 
>> If my memory is correct I thought the AHL class carried more fuel shuttles
>> or was it that they carried modular cutters to help out?
>It might be that it had a large number of 40-ton shuttles, not a small number
>of 400-ton shuttles.
>> The ships boats
>> look a little light.  Years ago I did a 'lost is enemy space' campain with
>> the characters as crew on a 'battle scout' running point for a stranded AHL
>> class group deep the rebelious teritory (Sword worlds confederation and the
>> frontier beyond).  Seems I remember that the AHL took quite a bit to
>> refuel. Many of the adventures were getting spare parts for the ship and
>> finding safe places to refuel and repair.  That and a few comando raids on
>> industrial planets to shake up the rebels a bit.
>> 
>> Also I never considered the AHL as a sucky ship.  It was a 'frontier
>> cruiser'.  Made to be a jack of all trades.  Not a battle queen.  It had
>> the room to add almost anything it needed for special missions or carry
>> the supplies for a long cruise.
>
>Um...Mod/6 computer sucks outright, particularly on a 60 kT ship.  2 Gs and
>agility 0 kinda sucks too.

I thought there was more than one?  No back up?  That does suck it that is
how it is.  As for 2G and 0 agility, it's a medium carrier not a fighter.

>> 
>> PS:  Does anybody have an idea about the support\escort ships a AHL class
>> would have in a patrol or 'show the flag' mission?
>
>Hm...kind of a shortage of jump-5 supply or escort ships.  I think the AHL is
>supposed to be mainly self-sufficient.
>

Wasn't there some escorts listed for it in the AHL class book?  I though
they were lower jump but the AHL just short jumped and had fuel to run if it
needed to.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:10:48 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 01:35 PM 10/13/98 -0500, you wrote:
>[snippage of discussion between Charles and Hans -- I love piracy discussions]
>
>>>Can you take the ship with
>>>you and how much is the ship worth to a 'ship fence'?
>>
>>Why would you need a fence?  Take it back across the border and sell it
>>openly.  It is a different 'nation' without extradition.
>
>
>That, me lad, would lead to war with the big 3I.
>
>

Only if they can provit abd it is worth it to them.  With another war on
another border...what a few freighters between frields? (Grin)

>>>>How many loads of say a 4000 ton freighter filled with computer chips would
>>>>it take?  ONE!
>>>
>>>How many 4000 T ships visit worlds with no system defense boats at all? Very
>>>few, IMO. How many of them would be carrying a high-value load? Even fewer.
>>
>>In a years time a High pop. planet WILL get a few high $ cargos.  How many
>>truck loads of Pentium II are shiped in the US today?
>
>
>The point, however, is that hi pop worlds will be able to buy a good SDB
>defense, since hi pop worlds tend to have lots of credits to throw around.
>And a good SDB defense kills piracy dead, dead, dead -- dead as freakin'
>stone. ;-)
>

You jump them BEFORE they get to the high pop. world.  The jump route is
what you get from your industrial spy.  And just how many SDBs does it take
to take on two Varga pirate cruisers (plus support ships) each armed with
meson gun spinal mounts?  AKA the traveller adventure?

>Disclaimer: Given the nature of the information we have (i.e., incomplete),
>there is no real conclusion one can make about piracy in the 3I except that
>it exists in the setting's "canon." Many (including myself) seem to think
>piracy makes little sense as presented in published material, but "say
>lah-vee!" (as we stupid, non-French-speaking Americans sometimes say).
>

Piracy probably can pay with good information and good fences.  Perhaps not
as a full time job, except maybe for comerce raiders, but as a once in a
while bonus it could be done.  It could improve your bottom line by quite a bit.


Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:04:36 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: The History of Medicine

Steve Daniels wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> Most of the founding fathers were businessmen, inventors, philosophers,
> farmers, military leaders - as well as, if they were at all, lawyers.
>
> How many lawyers today are anything but lawyers?

Depends.  Most are only that, but the same goes for politicians, inventors,
farmers, military leaders, etc.  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Back then, quite a few people were more than one of the above.
George Washington was a farmer, writer, military leader, professional
surveyor, inventor (his innovative design for a round-walled barn made
threshing quite a bit easier, and was well-recieved), and statesman.
He wasn't atypical in this respect, at least for a landowner.

I haven't seen the career breakdown, but I don't recall that many
of the representatives to the constitutional convention being
practicing lawyers.

Obtrav: Take a look at the CT skill list for Nobles. 

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:53:08 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Transponder's true nature

TravelrTNE@aol.com wrote:

>As others have pointed out this is probably due more to contractual reasons
>than not, though I do recall Loren (?) saying he thought DGP had went farther
>than GDW intended.

I'll balance that one with my thought that with TNE and Virus GDW went
further than I liked ;-)

YMMV of course.

Dom (not looking for a TNE/MT/CT flame war... not after the 1st Great GURPS
Traveller BBQ has just finished.)

PS Just picked up GT - I like it a lot. Especially the sidebars. Now, if T5
has the concise history of the Imperium in a sidebar I'll be really happy.


- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:08:22 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re: GURPS Traveller starship questions

 "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com> wrote:

>I'm a new Traveller player brought to this universe from years of GURPS. =
>I am really impressed at the expanse of background for this game and =
>can't wait to run a game.

Hello  and welcome to the TML!

>A couple if questions:
>
>1. On G:T p. 122 it shows a map of the Regina subsector. No scale is =
>given. What is the scale of each hex?

1 parsec  = 3.27 light years

>2.  What is a Black Globe? Also- What about nuclear dampeners? Will nuke =
>missiles be added to the game?

Black Globes are (normally) Ancients artifacts which absorb all energy
directed at them (hence black, like a Black Hole but without the Gravity).
It is a kind of force field in which the absorbed energy is stored in
dedicated 'capacitors' or the jump drive's 'capacitors'. If the storage is
exceeded the ship will explode catastrophically.

Ships which use black globes cannot see out or manouever unless they
'flicker' the globe. This also allows them to dissipate stored energy from
the ship. The Globe would then absorb a proportion of attacking energy.
Firing out can be synchronised with the flicker, so can avoid penalties.

BG'd ships are effectively invisible until you know they are there, after
which they can easily be engaged as they must move in a straight line under
fully globed conditions. It is possible to jump with a globe up, sail past
defending forces and then engage the rear lines. Some BG's may be
prototypes for the Imperial Navy.

At higher Traveller tech levels >TL18 IIRC the White Globe becomes
available. It isn't as stealthy but you can at least see out.

Nuclear Dampers - project forces which either accelerate the decay of
nuclear material or retard it. This will kill a nuclear missile if focused
on it.

Nuclear missiles are strictly the reserve of Imperial vessels (under the
Imperial Rules of War - which may not be in GT), as are biological and
chemical weapons. However, some systems may use them. In TNE and T4
(previous editions) missiles became nuclear detonation lasers (a nuclear
bomb 'pumps' an X ray laser). However, GT is based on Classic Traveller and
MegaTraveller which used conventional nuclear warheads.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:10:36 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:

>I always hated reading more than about a half dozen pages of text
>electronically. If it's longer, I prefer paper.

And you can take paper books to the toilet...

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:25:57 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: 101 Vehicles

Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:

>Please do me a favor and title it 201 vehicles, since there was already a 101
>vehicles published (DGP?). I am easily confused...:-)

Then we'd need to print it in a small font or change to A4 (MT) style size
not A5 (CT).......

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:28:44 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: SDB

Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:

>I have not seen any. I know the plans are in LBB Supplement #9, and Seeker
>games printed a set in 15 and 25mm. Sooner or later someone will scan
>them...hint, hint. BTW; who knows where the jump shuttle crews sleep. I once
>saw a deckplan, and the shuttle had no staterooms. This is strange, as the
>shuttle could operate on its' own without an SDB attached.

Nope... they're in LBB Supplement 7 Traders and Gun Boats. 9 is Fighting
Ships which is HG stats and no deckplans.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:13:21 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re: Democracy in Traveller

Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com> wrote:

>Phillip McGregor wrote:
> IMTU, there is a long-standing minority democratic
>faction in the Moot. As long as they don't incite armed rebellion
>against the Emperor or his officials, they are tolerated as mostly
>harmless.
>
>Could a group that is in principle opposed to the whole idea of the
>Imperium actually support it?

I wrote a scenario which BITS used for a tournament called 'web of deceit'.
It was set in 98, in M0, with the players becoming aides to a Duke (of
Shudushaam) who was involved in opposing Artemus' actions incorporating the
worlds bypassed under the Xahdunemo policy, and was looking to a return to
a republic (an idealised Sylean Federation). The players become caught
between the Imperial BIA, the moderate faction, and the extremists who want
to kill Artemus (who will probably fragment the Imperium). Anyway, the
adventure ends with a resolution of sorts, with the players and the Duke
heading for Sylea for his acceptance/recognition at the Moot.

I plan to write the second part this winter for next summers' cons. This is
the one were the players become inconvenient to Artemus, foil the coup, and
end up being ennobled, and effectively exiled to the frontier to establish
a colony. They are led off by an older man who describes himself as
'troubleshooter' for the colonisation effort, and mentions his name is
Cleon... Anyway, the point is the moderates will end up supporting the
status quo to avoid the chaos of reversion to something like the Sylean
Federation...

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:45:15 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM co...

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Phillip McGregor wrote:
>
>>What I really wanted to do was to get people to realise *consciously*
>>that the
>>Imperium *is* the "Evil Empire".

I see where you're coming from now. Personally, I'm working on breaking it
to the players ever so gently, and ending up with them having to make an
awkward decision about morals and ethics, and which is the lesser evil.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:34:14 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs (was the RoM coup)

John Macek <macek@erols.com> wrote:

>> Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy as
>>expressed in
>> Traveller is anti-democratic?
>>
>Yes.  The ZS was a totalitarian state.  The TC *became* a totalitarian
>state.

>> Why is Traveller so caught up in this anti-democratic fervour? Is it an
>>American
>> thing? Why?

<RANT>

Milieu 0 was slated for being too dark and repressive. Some people on the
list questioned the whole ethos of the game, asking where all the heroes
had gone to, why was it so brutal, etc.....

Well, to be blunt, empire building isn't nice. The British Empire wasn't
'nice'. The Colonies weren't set up on a democratic basis, even if the home
islands were a democracy(*). It was all driven by money, profit, trade and
perhaps an urge for glory.

Anyone who thinks that the Imperium was built with fluffy niceness is
naive, IMO. We demand scientific realism from the game but fail to look at
the historical precedents for a realistic background. It isn't *Star Trek*.

>IMTU, it is still alive on countless worlds both inside and outside of
>the 3I.

Worlds may be democracies in Traveller but the Imperium is feudal and
repressive (when it wants to be). Look at Adventure 1 (/The Kinuir/) and
the imprisoned senator if you don't believe me. There may be great beliefs,
but there is also a harsh reality. A democracy of 30 Trillion people
spanning hundreds of parsecs and thousands of systems is not workable from
a time basis alone.

</RANT>

The Moot is the closest thing to a democratic body in the Imperium. It
does, at least, debate things. And the Traveller background has always had
the opportunity to become noble for your acts etc..

Dom

* And you can argue that the UK wasn't a democracy in the sense that all
had equal rights.

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:14:00 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: 101 Religions & Bloo - Re: Archbishop Snerd

steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com> wrote:

>SD Mooney wrote:
>> I would like to second this apology on behalf of BITS - I've forwarded the
>> correction to Andy for changes in reprints. I don't know where this went
>> wrong, (probably in the transfering from Tim to me to Andy) but I feel bad
>> about this. Sorry Steve.
>
>No worries.  It is enough that Monadin: The Cult of One was deemed fit
>for publication.  :-)


FORWARD FROM ANDY LILLY:
- ------------------------
Hi Dom/tc,

Please inform Steve, and the TML if appropriate, that I apologise for the
mistake (as publisher it's my responsibility to ensure we get it right!) and
the next print run of 101 Religions will be updated to include Steve's name.
We only did a short run for launch at Gen Con, so the major print run will
have the corrected version.

Andy

- -----

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:06:09 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

>The purpose of the IHTIT rule is to counter the higher value of
>characteristics when the level of skill is low.

I like the idea. Will experiment on players when I get a moment.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:15:27 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: [OFF TOPIC] Dune RPG?

Has anyone heard anything about a Dune RPG due from AEG (publishers of
LoT5R and the Dune CCG)?

Sounds interesting if it's true, as Lot5R was a very well written game.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:19:35 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser 

> Anthony Jackson wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> hmm...despite my efforts, I was not able to duplicate the degree to which the
> classic AHL sucks...oh well.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> Hmmm...if IYO it sucks so much, why did you bother?
> 
> The original CT ship design system made it difficult to create a multi-role
> ship capable of truly independent operations - you had to make some
> sacrifices. Am I getting the idea the GURPS:Traveller lets you get away
> with more in a ship?

That is the way it is in the 'real world', too.  A Swiss Army knife makes a 
good emergency toolkit, but *nothing* beats a good chest full of dedicated 
tools.  The CT and HG design philosopies reflect this.

> You want max performance, get yourself a battle rider. <g>

Depends on what you mean by performance.  You want something that will survive 
a full blown firefight, go with a battle rider.  You want something that you 
can run like hell if the battle goes south, get a real starship.

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #941
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 13 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 942



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

The Half-Die and T5
re: Piracy
Border Worlds
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser 
Re: Piracy
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: :arry ELmore
Re: Marc Miller and the Half Die
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: [OFF TOPIC] Dune RPG?
PING Jo Grant
TWG?
Re: [OFF TOPIC] Dune RPG?
Re: Azhanti High Lightning
Re: Piracy
"Rift-Jumper"
Re:  Low Tech levels
Re: Drop tanks
Re: Piracy
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Discovery of a machine race
Re: Piracy
Re: The History of Medicine
Re: PING Jo Grant
Re: 101 Religions & Bloo - Re: Archbishop Snerd

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:16:34 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: The Half-Die and T5

> The risk I take in discussing the Task Resolution system on the net is
that
> some people will want to revise it, rather than comment on it and how it
> works. If the discussion is "I won't use it because it uses the half
die,"
> then perhaps they should continue to use MT or CT or even GT. There is
clearly
> little (if any) possibility that the half-die will be eliminated. In
fact, the
> argument that the half die is only used in tasks has prompted me to
consider
> other places where it can logically be used as well.

One area where this could be used. obviously, is in damage ratings for
weapons, to give a little more variation than was present in T4.
Bottom line: It's your game. The presence of the half-die, which never
bugged me all that much (despite a recent post in which I said I wished for
a task system without it), will not deter me from using T5, if it's a
well-designed and generally excellent game. I admit, it will take a LOT at
this point to get me to run Traveller in anything other than the GURPS
system, but that's simply because I like and am very familiar with GURPS.
But if t5 is good enough, anything is possible. and I will most certainly
test it out and say what I think :) and yes, I will be buying T5 when it
finally comes out.

Allen

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:18:59 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Piracy

John MacPherson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
	But a High pop world will have more than enough SDBs to make 
piracy an extremely hazardous if not impossible proposition.  Worlds with 
enough trade to be worth pirating are worth defending.  Worlds not worth 
defending have little trade worth pirating.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You will have temporary disparities between SDB levels and amount of
trade. A corsair may be able to show up at a new motherlode belt
strike before the newly-elected Miner's Rights Committee even gets
around to levying taxes, much less buying SDB's. And there will
always be star systems that don't percieve a threat, and therefore
underbuy their SDB coverage, or overestimate the capabilites or
readiness of their SDB coverage. They'll quickly get the hint, but it 
may take months to obtain new (or replacement) patrol craft. 

Of course, the moment the brand new SDB's show up, the pirates will
make themselves scarce. It won't be long before the taxpayers
start wondering why a MCr200+ each fleet is doing search & rescue.
"Pirates? There aren't any pirates around here!" - and thus the cycle
will begin again, the SDB flotilla suffering cutbacks until it can't
do it's real job of piracy suppression anymore.

(This assumes we aren't talking about a world prepping to defend itself
against another state like the Zho - such a system would almost
always be suicide for a pirate)

A couple nice 400tn Patrol Cruisers (like the one from CT, or the
famous Gazelle-class CE) could solve this problem for a rack of
worlds that can't each effectively field an SDB force. Circulate the
patrol through the group of worlds on anti-piracy duty, their possible
presence may be enough to discourage pirate activity. I could even
see a single medium-pop world surrounded by low-pop worlds
footing the bill itself: even if your SDB force is up to snuff, it may
not be able to do it's job if unpatrolled pirate havens are one jump
away from you.

I suppose you could buy a couple of tenders and ship SDB's to these
frontier worlds if you wanted to instead.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:04:48 +0100
From: "MJ Dougherty" <martinjd@globalnet.co.uk>
Subject: Border Worlds

Full data and post FFW history are in Behind The Claw.

MJD

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:30:09 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser 

> In a message dated 10/12/98 6:21:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ajackson@iii.com
> writes:
> 
> << hmm...despite my efforts, I was not able to duplicate the degree to which
> the
>  classic AHL sucks...oh well.
>   >>
> 
> She looks better than the HG design.... BTW; does anyone know what the effect
> of "Heavy or Total compartmentalization" does for a ship? GT gives the cost
> and weight penalties, but the Starship Combat rules don't seem to show any
> modifiers, etc. for them.

Common-sense answer sez, if your hull gets holed, you're going to lose what 
was in the compartment.  Total compartmentalisation would limit the damage to 
that compartment.  An uncompartmentalised ship could take collatteral damage 
in adjacent compartments.

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:40:31 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 08:10 PM 10/13/98 +0000, you wrote:
>>The point, however, is that hi pop worlds will be able to buy a good SDB
>>defense, since hi pop worlds tend to have lots of credits to throw around.
>>And a good SDB defense kills piracy dead, dead, dead -- dead as freakin'
>>stone. ;-)
>>
>
>You jump them BEFORE they get to the high pop. world.  The jump route is
>what you get from your industrial spy.  And just how many SDBs does it take
>to take on two Varga pirate cruisers (plus support ships) each armed with
>meson gun spinal mounts?  AKA the traveller adventure?

I believe this was an exception and not the rule.  I would think that the
IN would get mighty annoyed at having foreign flagged or outlaw cruisers
running around preying on merchant traffic.  Remember the campaign at the
end of the FFW?  The IN devoted fleets to run down and eliminate the Vargr
renegades.

Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:31:19 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

 dberry@hooked.net wrote:

>Sudden thought...
>
>With the IHTIT rule, we now have a perfect use for Jack-of-all-Trades
>skill.  Using J-o-T to raise the effective skill to avoid the IHTIT.
>
>Skill required 3, Skill possessed 1, If the PC has JoT-2 he avoids the
>penalty.

Storming Idea!

I like it.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:35:30 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: :arry ELmore

 buzz@funkadelic.com wrote:

>Larry Elmore? Ol' SnarfQuest Larry Elmore? Please... no. I'll feel like
>I'm playing Star Frontiers. Liz Danforth and that Dietrich fellow, no
>there you go.

Look at it before you criticise it. It is quite good.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:38:14 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Marc Miller and the Half Die

Marc Miller / CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

>The risk I take in discussing the Task Resolution system on the net is that
>some people will want to revise it, rather than comment on it and how it
>works. If the discussion is "I won't use it because it uses the half die,"
>then perhaps they should continue to use MT or CT or even GT. There is clearly
>little (if any) possibility that the half-die will be eliminated. In fact, the
>argument that the half die is only used in tasks has prompted me to consider
>other places where it can logically be used as well.

>The current task and skill system is available as a zipped file from
>FarFuture@AOL.com. My hope is that people will use it and play it and point
>out failings and inconsistencies in it so that it can be well-edited and
>tested when it comes out in T5.

I didn't like the idea at first, then I played it. It doesn't bother me
anymore. I hope you carry on trialing material broadly either here on the
TML or on the TWG.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:25:57 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs 

>Replace manager with duke, sub manager with barons... and you see that many
>of us still live (for 7-8 hours a day) within a feudal system. These larger
>companies can and do influence governments. Some governments wish to
>emulate the success of large companies (economic rationalism).
>
>Is this how the terran government was slowly replaced with a feudal system?

Same could be said of Military structures, albeit with mroe levels.... and
a military occupation already has rules of succession in force until
replacements arrive.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:00:45 -0500
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU> wrote:

> Aerron Winsor wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> PS:  Does anybody have an idea about the support\escort ships a AHL class
> would have in a patrol or 'show the flag' mission?
> ***************
> some scouts/fleet couriers....A Fer-de-lance or six for taking out
> missiles.  a Fleet Tanker,  a Fleet Escort or two.  a troopship/assault
> shuttle carrier.  some Patrol Cruisers.....just about anything you want to
> add, but as a cruiser it should be able to operate by itself.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> Most of these craft wouldn't be able to keep up. It's been a tenet
> since the 1940's that you group your combat units by mobility.
>
> The only reason to use an AHL is it's Jump-5 capability. With the
> exception of a couple cruiser models (_Gionnetti_?), there's little in the
> Imperial fleet built to that standard.
>
> I'd say some fleet couriers would come along, Jump-6.                     

Hear, hear!

Most of the IN ships that we've seen have been built to a J4/6G standard,
which is enough to keep up with most BatRons, but insufficient for CruRon
support.  Of course, high-jump ships are exceptionally expensive, so it's
not a major surprise.

If you think the obsolescent AHL has it bad, consider the rift cruiser;
the only other thing that can pace them *are* those jump-6 fleet couriers,
which may lead to fleet couriers being used as very pricy close escorts in
that sort of CruRon.  (Interestingly, acceleration isn't an issue -- like
the AHL, the rift cruiser has "short legs".)

  -- Steve Bonneville

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:06:18 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Dune RPG?

> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:15:27 +0100
> From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
> Subject: [OFF TOPIC] Dune RPG?
> 
> Has anyone heard anything about a Dune RPG due from AEG (publishers of
> LoT5R and the Dune CCG)?
> 
> Sounds interesting if it's true, as Lot5R was a very well written game.

Last I'd heard, the DUNE RPG was licensed to Last Unicorn Games, the folks
who have out out the excellent Star Trek the Next Generation game.

Allen

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:27:46 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: PING Jo Grant

Jo, if you're reading this list, your e-mail address that is
subscribed to the TRAVLANG list is bouncing mail at the LOTUS
end, claiming that there are multiple matches.  Please contact me
with a correct and unique address so that you can resume
receiving the list.
- --
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:25:32 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: TWG?

>I didn't like the idea at first, then I played it. It doesn't bother me
>anymore. I hope you carry on trialing material broadly either here on the
>TML or on the TWG.

I've seen references to the TWG recently.  How does one subscribe?

Thanks

Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:12:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] Dune RPG?

Dom Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com> wrote: 

> Has anyone heard anything about a Dune RPG due from AEG (publishers 
> of LoT5R and the Dune CCG)?

> Sounds interesting if it's true, as Lot5R was a very well written game.

Actually the Dune RPG (like the Dune CCG) is being put out by Last
Uniciorn Games, the folks who recently did the Star Trek RPG.  The Dune
RPG will use the same rules engine as the Star Trek game.  It will be out
sometime in 1999 (I currently have no idea of a more accurate date).  It's
being written now. 


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:16:46 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Azhanti High Lightning

In a message dated 10/13/98 12:45:43 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU writes:

<< 
 The only reason to use an AHL is it's Jump-5 capability. With the
 exception of a couple cruiser models (_Gionnetti_?), there's little in the 
 Imperial fleet built to that standard.  >>

Well; you could use Gazelles - ONCE...., unless of course the AHL carries
extra drop tanks as cargo for the Gazelles....

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:21:27 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Kurt Feltenberger wrote:
> 
> At 08:10 PM 10/13/98 +0000, you wrote:
> >>The point, however, is that hi pop worlds will be able to buy a good SDB
> >>defense, since hi pop worlds tend to have lots of credits to throw around.
> >>And a good SDB defense kills piracy dead, dead, dead -- dead as freakin'
> >>stone. ;-)
> >>
> >
> >You jump them BEFORE they get to the high pop. world.  The jump route is
> >what you get from your industrial spy.  And just how many SDBs does it take
> >to take on two Varga pirate cruisers (plus support ships) each armed with
> >meson gun spinal mounts?  AKA the traveller adventure?
> 
> I believe this was an exception and not the rule.  I would think that the
> IN would get mighty annoyed at having foreign flagged or outlaw cruisers
> running around preying on merchant traffic.  Remember the campaign at the
> end of the FFW?  The IN devoted fleets to run down and eliminate the Vargr
> renegades.
> 
IMTU, quite a few IN warships carry traditional Terran names, thus
leading to the old saying, "If you can't bring the Vargr pirates to
Missouri, bring MISSOURI to the Vargr pirates!"  (HIMS MISSOURI is, BTW,
a TL-15 500,000 Td battleship, currently being reworked under Andrew
Akins' FF&S spreadsheet ver 3.2 [updating from ver 2.6].)

> Kurt Feltenberger
> 
> “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
> habit.”
> --- Aristotle ---
> 
> mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:56:26 -0700
From: "Brian Mays" <bmays@genscope.com>
Subject: "Rift-Jumper"

Has anyone ever designed a ship that could carry smaller (non-military)
ships across the Great Rift?  The smaller, less jump-capable ships are
carried across by a larger ship that is basically a giant container with a
jump drive and fuel storage.

Would such a thing even be feasible?

Brian

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:01:03 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Re:  Low Tech levels

>>>>
ObTrav:  The frequency of low-TLs can be partly explained by the 
misguided policies of gov'ts or the short-sighted avarice of 
off-worlders.  Balance of Payments and debt crises like we're seeing
in 
the Real World could also be novel settings for adventures
>>>>
IMTU only a minority of the low TL worlds actually have low tech
levels.  The majority, especially those with small populations, don't
have local production facilities for high TL equipment but actually do
use fairly high TL equipment.  For example, the areas on the Navajo
reservation that are not high population density (most of it) don't
typically have high tech manufacturing abilities.  I can't think of
any plants that produce modern microprocessors for example.  On the
other hand, most homes have TVs, VCRs, fairly new trucks, etc.  The
local construction industry is still mainly concrete for some floors
and a few walls, and timber with mud chinking for most walls and some
ceilings.
Certainly there are some planets that have a genuinely low TL, but
those are mostly the high population worlds that have low TLs. 
Smaller populations don't have the resources to maintain a high TL in
most cases.  The low pop/low TL worlds tend to be places that are
mining camps or specialized agricultural products, etc. based in their
economies and just import whatever technical products they need.
- - Joseph

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:21:02
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Drop tanks

>That would make nonsens of the TNS newsbriefs which speaks of established
>commercial services which use drop tanks. My suggestion is that the period
>is one of transition to drop tank transport. It takes time to replace the
>existing body of merchant ships; furthermore, drop tank traffic lacks
>flexibility and requires a certain minimum of trade. Thus drop tank services
>are still few and only between systems with a lot of traffic. 

In My Campaign...

The major commercial freight and passenger services have monopolised the
'trade routes' that are so laboriously mapped out on the sector maps, to
the point that there are no 'free traders' operating on those lines.  The
free traders operate between worlds on the trade routes, and worlds off of
them.  Their service is pricier and less reliable, but beggars can't be
choosers.  

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:30:31
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 03:36 PM 10/13/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte writes:
>
>>I was thinking Vargr pirates.  You are right about unsupported pirates being
>>good target pratic for the local navy.  They can only run so far so fast but
>>with a border to cross...
>
>The pirates-are-not-economically-viable crowd, of which I am a member,
>believe that pure piracy is not, well, you guessed it, economically
>viable. Now, you can come up with lots of examples from the Real World of
>activities that are not economically viable and are still attempted by a
>lot of people (prospecting for gold in the Old West is a good example).
>But I can't come up with a single such activity that requires a multi-
>million dollar investment.

It's not a multimillion dollar investment if you kill your captain and run
off, or spend a few thousand on tickets and take over the ship.

>If we are wrong and pirates can expect a reasonable average profit, then
>IMO pirates would certain exist. Even if most pirates crap out, if the
>odds of a big return is sufficiently high, I think you could propably find
>investors to support pirate activity.
>
>But if we are right, then someone must be footing the bill and they must
>be after something other than money as a return. That's where we get to
>the subsidized raiders. But whoever is subsidizing them must be getting
>something in return that is worth millions of credits. It's not enough to
>say: "Well, pirates are possible if someone subsidized them. You must also
>come up with a plausible reason for them to plunk down the money. 

Privateering is the usual answer... the supporters are trying to do damage
to the enemy infrastructure.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:46:11
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

At 11:58 AM 10/13/98 EDT, Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 10/12/98 6:21:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
ajackson@iii.com
>writes:
>
><< hmm...despite my efforts, I was not able to duplicate the degree to which
>the
> classic AHL sucks...oh well.
>  >>
>
>She looks better than the HG design.... BTW; does anyone know what the effect
>of "Heavy or Total compartmentalization" does for a ship? GT gives the cost
>and weight penalties, but the Starship Combat rules don't seem to show any
>modifiers, etc. for them.

I have independently decided that they offer +50% and +100% hit points,
respectively, and they represent not only toughening up the bulkheads but
also redundant cabling and armor on critical systems.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:50:54
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

At 09:29 AM 10/13/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Fred and Evelyn Wolke writes:
>> 
>> What system was used to create this?  I'd like to see the data on how the
>> fusion guns were set up, I'd like to port it over to GURPS: Traveller
>> (official version)
>
>This was done with my alternate modules, which were posted on this ML a bit
>ago.  You can find them in the gurpsnet archives, at:
>http://www.io.com/GURPSnet/Archive/Vehicles/Construction/traveller_modules
>
>Fusion guns are created as N-PAWs with a *1.5 cost multiplier (*15 if
below 10
>megajoules).  These particular ones are 1 gigajoule extreme range compact
>weapons with full stabilization and a universal mount; damage is 6d*500,
draws
>33 megawatts to fire once/second, 1/2D 4200 mi (i.e. same space combat hex),
>Max 12,600 mi (immediate adjacent hexes), Acc 30.  16.8 tons, takes up 1.5
>spaces(2/turret), $2.32 million.

Thank you.

Since the GT system assumes power included with each weapon, I will have to
reduce the power somewhat to make it fit that system, and add accumulators
to make it fire once per minute instead.  Unfortunately, that is likely to
reduce the range even further...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:09:12
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Discovery of a machine race

>ObTrav: Assuming that Virus never happens (or happened), as does the GT
>setting, what would be the Imperium's response to the discovery of a
>"mechanical" civilization of AI machines? Say a deep-space probe from a
>non-hostile, even pacifistic AI civilization jumps into Imperial space and
>initiates contact (most likely, Rimward, since all the other borders seem
>padded with non-3I states). Would immediate war result?

No, I don't think so... but relations would certainly be even more strained
than they are with the Zhodani.

I doubt the Imperium would be interested in, for example, allowing Machine
ships inside the Imperium for trade.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:29:20
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 01:35 PM 10/13/98 -0500, Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:
>[snippage of discussion between Charles and Hans -- I love piracy
discussions]
>
>>>Can you take the ship with
>>>you and how much is the ship worth to a 'ship fence'?
>>
>>Why would you need a fence?  Take it back across the border and sell it
>>openly.  It is a different 'nation' without extradition.
>
>
>That, me lad, would lead to war with the big 3I.

Would it?  Just a single ship?  If a single incident would cause the entire
Imperium to go to war, then it would probably be at war all of the time.

How about ten?  A hundred?  Perhaps the Enemy wants to know how far they
can push the 'Big 3I' and uses privateering to find out?  "When we take
thirty ships a year, they complain... when we take three hundred a year,
they send a task force...  when we take three thousand a year, they
threaten war... next year we take seven hundred and see what happens..."

>The point, however, is that hi pop worlds will be able to buy a good SDB
>defense, since hi pop worlds tend to have lots of credits to throw around.
>And a good SDB defense kills piracy dead, dead, dead -- dead as freakin'
>stone. ;-)

I don't think that most pirates engage in piracy all of the time.  I'd say
the most likely eventuality is the way the Vikings used to do it... when
they were in hostile territory, they were merchants... buying and selling
like everyone else.  When they thought they could get away with it, they'd
sail in, smash and grab, and take the loot home.  If they were ruthless
enough, they needn't give away their identities, at least not for some time.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:20:06 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: The History of Medicine

Walter Smith wrote:

> Back then, quite a few people were more than one of the above.
> George Washington was a farmer, writer, military leader, professional
> surveyor, inventor (his innovative design for a round-walled barn made
> threshing quite a bit easier, and was well-recieved), and statesman.
> He wasn't atypical in this respect, at least for a landowner.

Yes.  My point was that this kind of person doesn't really exist anymore.
_All_ carreers are more concentrated, not just lawyers.  The farmer,
military leader, surveyor, etc., etc., is largely a thing of the past.

> I haven't seen the career breakdown, but I don't recall that many
> of the representatives to the constitutional convention being
> practicing lawyers.

Well, I would be extrememly suprised if less than 60% had JDs.
The last time I paid attention, which was 15 years ago,
the vast majority had been lawyers previously.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:21:35 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: PING Jo Grant

Jeff Zeitlin wrote:

> Jo, if you're reading this list, your e-mail address that is
> subscribed to the TRAVLANG list is bouncing mail at the LOTUS
> end, claiming that there are multiple matches.  Please contact me
> with a correct and unique address so that you can resume
> receiving the list.

Let me know if this persists.  I think he lives less than 4-5 blocks
from me.
I could go knock on the door.  ;-)

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:23:06 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: 101 Religions & Bloo - Re: Archbishop Snerd

SD Mooney wrote:

> FORWARD FROM ANDY LILLY:
> ------------------------
> Hi Dom/tc,
>
> Please inform Steve, and the TML if appropriate, that I apologise for the
> mistake (as publisher it's my responsibility to ensure we get it right!) and
> the next print run of 101 Religions will be updated to include Steve's name.
> We only did a short run for launch at Gen Con, so the major print run will
> have the corrected version.

Ok.  the apologizing must stop!  :-)

Bloo (Steve)

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #942
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 13 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 943



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: "Rift-Jumper"
More statitical pondering on the Imperium
M0 statistical tables
Re: Piracy
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Piracy
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Marc Miller and the Half Die
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Reactionless Thrusters
Re: The Half-Die and T5
Re: Does anybody like this idea?
Re: Does anybody like this idea?
Re: Marc Miller and the Half Die
Re: Reactionless Thrusters
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Hardcovers
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Elections (was re: Demos...)
Lawyers of the Far Future (was Re: The History of Medicine)
Re: Hardcovers
Compartmentalization (was Azhanti High Lightning cruiser)
Re: "Rift-Jumper"
Re: Lawyers of the Far Future (was Re: The History of Medicine)
Re: Drop Tanks

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:17:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: "Rift-Jumper"

Brian Mays writes:
> Has anyone ever designed a ship that could carry smaller (non-military)
> ships across the Great Rift?  The smaller, less jump-capable ships are
> carried across by a larger ship that is basically a giant container with a
> jump drive and fuel storage.
> 
> Would such a thing even be feasible?

Sure...you use a 'stage' theory like modern rockets.  Unfortunately, the
scaling required is horrible -- you halve your available tonnage roughly every
4-5 parsecs, which means you need something like a million-ton base craft to
get a scout across the rift.  If you have drop tanks it's somewhat easier,
halving around every 8 parsecs.  Filling tanks with liquid methane and then
processing it after jump gives you another 50% or so.  Still not exactly
practical unless you can find a star in the middle.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:26:25 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: More statitical pondering on the Imperium

I applied the same analysis of government and law type for the First
survey data, which I also have in a database...

In the early days of the Imperium very few of it's citizens lived in
democratic societies, less than 1% of the population. The largest single
group, 24% live under charismatic dictatorships.

In matters of law, too, the numbers are highly skewed towards the
repressive, as less than 20% of the population lives under moderate or
less law and over half live under High law regimes...

Hmmm...looks like the 3I is getting more and more democratic all the
time, isn't it?

(I don't have my T4 books here...but unless the gov and law codes were
reworked the numbers I just gave are right.)

I also excluded Vland from this study since Vland is known to not be
correct in FS.

data to follow in another post.



- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:28:48 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: M0 statistical tables

M0 Data excludes Vland				
				
Govt	worlds	Population	%worlds	%pop
0	2073	5.82E+07	34.96%	0.00%
1	362	8.61E+07	6.11%	0.00%
2	414	5.45E+08	6.98%	0.00%
3	479	5.04E+09	8.08%	0.04%
4	500	2.93E+10	8.43%	0.22%
5	474	2.69E+11	7.99%	1.99%
6	395	5.18E+11	6.66%	3.82%
7	338	8.03E+11	5.70%	5.92%
8	283	1.01E+12	4.77%	7.45%
9	219	1.43E+12	3.69%	10.53%
A	151	3.29E+12	2.55%	24.27%
B	110	1.58E+12	1.86%	11.61%
C	80	1.54E+12	1.35%	11.32%
D	31	1.36E+12	0.52%	10.00%
E	15	1.48E+12	0.25%	10.91%
F	5	2.60E+11	0.08%	1.92%
Totals	5929	1.36E+13		

Law 	worlds	Population	%worlds	%pop	Running % (w, p)	
0	2475	1.45E+10	41.74%	0.11%	41.74%	0.11%
1	260	1.06E+10	4.39%	0.08%	46.13%	0.18%
2	307	5.53E+10	5.18%	0.41%	51.31%	0.59%
3	343	6.65E+10	5.79%	0.49%	57.09%	1.08%
4	398	1.01E+11	6.71%	0.74%	63.81%	1.83%
5	386	4.41E+11	6.51%	3.25%	70.32%	5.08%
6	358	7.12E+11	6.04%	5.25%	76.35%	10.33%
7	320	1.13E+12	5.40%	8.33%	81.75%	18.65%
8	294	6.45E+11	4.96%	4.75%	86.71%	23.40%
9	247	1.38E+12	4.17%	10.15%	90.88%	33.56%
A	160	1.22E+12	2.70%	8.99%	93.57%	42.54%
B	132	1.54E+12	2.23%	11.32%	95.80%	53.87%
C	95	1.87E+12	1.60%	13.80%	97.40%	67.67%
D	67	1.73E+12	1.13%	12.74%	98.53%	80.41%
E	40	1.58E+12	0.67%	11.65%	99.21%	92.06%
F	22	4.27E+11	0.37%	3.15%	99.58%	95.21%
G	18	3.76E+11	0.30%	2.77%	99.88%	97.98%
H	7	2.74E+11	0.12%	2.02%	100.00%	100.00%
	5929	1.36E+13	100.00%	100.00%		
						
						

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:30:45 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/13/98 13:43:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
kurt@blazenet.net writes:

<< >The point, however, is that hi pop worlds will be able to buy a good SDB
 >>defense, since hi pop worlds tend to have lots of credits to throw around.
 >>And a good SDB defense kills piracy dead, dead, dead -- dead as freakin'
 >>stone. ;-) >>

Just my small thoughts on this...

I think a good cost-effective way of dealing w/ the SDB force is to take them
out FIRST.  A couple of high-powered ships might ambush an SDB (false distress
signal, maybe?)  If you can take the ship out, thats good; if you can take the
ship, thats even better.   A nice 400-ton sub merchie can cram a lot of
troopies in the cargo bay if necessary...and if you can get the ship to a
freeport, you might be able to strip and salvage quite a bit.   SDB's will
rarely, if ever, operate in squadron size to take out one pirate...and no star
system, no matter how rich it is, will spend more money for defense than it
feels it has too.  So at worst, you may have 2 SDBs responding to a typical
distress call (you might be able to thin this out w/ other "rescues" to deal
with.) 

Granted that this requires a fair amount of starting capital...but it should
be a reasonably self-sustaining affair once it gets going.  However, this
would not be a once a week type of thing; it would require intelligence on the
target, the system, the system defenses, and a nearby staging base (maybe in-
system, around a GG moon?)   One hit a month or so, if the haul is big enough
(according to CT Trade Tables, 200 tons of Radioactives sell for 1MCr
BASE...never mind the brokers skill at selling it!)  That will pay for a fair
amount of upkeep and supplies...BCr 2.4 per year, at the above assumptions.
This will take a lot of the small-fry out of the game, but that seems
realistic to me.

A small, professional force of pirates, executing well-planned paramilitary-
style operations against very lucrative targets seems to me to be the only way
piracy worked (much like modern day art or jewel thieves)

Comments?
DustyLV769@aol.com

"Gold will not always get you good soldiers, but good soldiers will always get
you gold!"  <--Unknown

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:26:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Fred and Evelyn Wolke writes:

> Thank you.
> 
> Since the GT system assumes power included with each weapon, I will have to
> reduce the power somewhat to make it fit that system, and add accumulators
> to make it fire once per minute instead.  Unfortunately, that is likely to
> reduce the range even further...

It includes capacitors to fire every minute (it also actually only takes up 672
cf, or 1.344 spaces).  Adding a sufficient power plant is 3.33 tons and 400 cf,
for a total of 2.144 spaces; reducing it to 1.5 spaces requires a 30% reduction
in discharge energy; call it 650 MJ, reduces range and damage by 20%, weight is
21.4 tons total, 1.572 MCr, range 3600/10,700, Acc 29.

Note that the whole theory behind including the power plants in the guns is
somewhat fishy, since it means that a chunk of fusion reactor is in the turret
(which seems unlikely) and that you need to upgrade your power plant to add
weaponry (which means people can't swap out weapons very well).  This is why I
wrote up modules which separate out the power plant.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:51:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Piracy

DustyLV769@aol.com writes:
> Just my small thoughts on this...
> 
> I think a good cost-effective way of dealing w/ the SDB force is to take
> them out FIRST. <methods zapped>

If you can kill off the system defenses in a system, you aren't really pirates
any more -- you're more like well-armed raiders, and piracy is at best
incidental to what you're really doing -- if you've cleared system defenses,
you might as well loot the planet as well as sitting there gobbling up
merchants as they enter the system.  However, invading and holding a system is
the kind of thing which gets you large-scale military responses from the
relevant government....

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:32:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

- ---Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> wrote:

> > SHADEs also act as eye and hearing protective devices in hazardous
> > environs by automatically blocking out loud sounds and very bright
> > lights.
> 
> Ooh! Ooh! Do they come with Extreme Danger Sens-O-Matic shades? You
> know, they go completely black in the presence of danger, so you don't
> undergo the stress and wear and tear on your autonomic nevous system
> that comes with the stress? Zaphod Beeblbrox swore by 'em...

Akk! Not THAT series! Well, we _could_ give Arvitis a set. Not that he
pays much attention to the outside world anyways. <g>

Actualy, this sounds like a very nice peice of equipment. 

Terry
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:30:43
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

At 04:26 PM 10/13/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Fred and Evelyn Wolke writes:
>
>> Thank you.
>> 
>> Since the GT system assumes power included with each weapon, I will have to
>> reduce the power somewhat to make it fit that system, and add accumulators
>> to make it fire once per minute instead.  Unfortunately, that is likely to
>> reduce the range even further...
>
>It includes capacitors to fire every minute (it also actually only takes
up 672
>cf, or 1.344 spaces).  Adding a sufficient power plant is 3.33 tons and
400 cf,
>for a total of 2.144 spaces; reducing it to 1.5 spaces requires a 30%
reduction
>in discharge energy; call it 650 MJ, reduces range and damage by 20%,
weight is
>21.4 tons total, 1.572 MCr, range 3600/10,700, Acc 29.

Thanks for doing the math for me.

>Note that the whole theory behind including the power plants in the guns is
>somewhat fishy, since it means that a chunk of fusion reactor is in the
turret
>(which seems unlikely) and that you need to upgrade your power plant to add
>weaponry (which means people can't swap out weapons very well).  This is why 
>I wrote up modules which separate out the power plant.

Actually... they explain that the chunk of fusion reactor ISN'T in the
turret, it's down there with the reactor... which means that a three-space
turret really isn't a three-space turret at all, but something like a
one-space turret with space set aside elsewhere for the power and the
capacitors.

It makes things a bit easier when designing the ship.

As for swapping out weapons, on paper at least it makes it easier, because
you can swap out the weapon and the power it needs at the same time.

One thing it doesn't allow for is the ability to design a ship with less
power than it needs to operate ABSOLUTELY everything, in other words, to
design a ship with a doctrine that states that (for example) the spinal
mount particle beam and the maneuver drive will not be used simultaneously.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:34:27 -0700
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Marc Miller and the Half Die

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> The risk I take in discussing the Task Resolution system on the net is that
> some people will want to revise it, rather than comment on it and how it
> works.

You should not look at my comments as venomous, but as constructive, as they are
meant to be.  I love the game, and I would like to see the game be the best it can
be.  The half die in your system seems very haphazard to me, and I am incredulous
that you insist on keeping it in there.

I feel about this the way I do about the movie Aliens IV.  They've got this great
franchise.  They've got a good first movie and a awesome second movie (and a third
that's not so hot).

Then, they go in and mess up the genre with that super-action comic-booky mess
they put on the screen with Aliens IV.

It's like when Kirk died in the Star Trek films:  does anybody here not know in
their hearts that Kirk should have died on the bridge of a ship, snapping out
order, sacrificing himself and his ship in order to save the day?

The half die in Traveller's task system is like Kirk falling off that bridge.  It
just shouldn't be done.  We shouldn't have to fix it later after we buy the book.

I know people, especially Marc, are tired of this topic, so I guess I should just
acquiesce and accept the doggon thing.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:35:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Fred and Evelyn Wolke writes:
 
> As for swapping out weapons, on paper at least it makes it easier, because
> you can swap out the weapon and the power it needs at the same time.

However, in the shipyard it makes it harder, because most likely a pre-existing
power plant isn't _designed_ to suddenly have an X megawatt chunk added to it,
which means that if you put in a new weapon system you put in a new engine...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:45:29 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

>I have long considered that the "reactionless" thrusters in CT/MT/T4
>really do run by reaction, but they just don't have the reaction mass
>coming out a nozzle.  The reaction is of the ship against the gravity
>well, distorting the gravity well in a way that moves the ship in the
>desired direction.  In essence, a ship moving out to 100 diameters is
>moving the planet the other direction by a small amount 

This is why the arguments about conservation of energy are important; if you
do the above you find you don't conserve energy. (In essence, in a frame in
which the planet is at rest, moving it in any direction *adds* to the planet's
energy, while moving the spacecraft adds to the spacecrafts energy - and
adds more energy per unit time the faster the spacecraft is going.)

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:47:11 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: The Half-Die and T5

In a message dated 10/13/98 3:30:07 PM Central Daylight Time, ashock@gte.net
writes:

<< I will be buying T5 when it finally comes out. >>

I appreciate the vote of support.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:09:16 -0700
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Does anybody like this idea?

Colin Hutchinson wrote:

> >Summary:  We would probably want to play with the numbers a bit.  I
> >think 18+ on 3D6 is a little harsh for a Difficult task for an average
> >joe with a level 2 skill.  But, I'm talking concept here, not finished
> >product.
> >
> 18+ on 3d6 is 216:1 against.  Maybe if we added 2 dice per level, (or 1.5 :) )
> It looks a little unwieldy at the moment.

Like I said, the numbers have to be played with.  I think, ideally, that a
Difficult task for an average joe should have about a 20% chance of success.

Just like the quote you used above, I'm talking concept:  subtract stats from the
difficulty number;  skills give you a bonus of die equal to the level.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:11:00 -0700
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Does anybody like this idea?

Eris Reddoch wrote:

> I've seen better ideas from you on this idea, Ken. Your (Stat +
> Skill*D6) idea is better.

What wrong with it?

> For non-d6 people, how about a modification of the TNE system where
> you don't divide or multiply the asset, instead you have flat +/- 4
> for each level around Difficult?  The uniform distribution of a d20
> means each Task level is 20% harder/easier than the ones around it.

I'm in the D6 crowd.  Traveller should stay D6.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:56:00 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Marc Miller and the Half Die

In a message dated 10/13/98 7:41:29 PM Central Daylight Time,
dreamer@brokersys.com writes:

<< You should not look at my comments as venomous, but as constructive, as
they are
 meant to be.  I love the game, and I would like to see the game be the best
it can
 be.  The half die in your system seems very haphazard to me, and I am
incredulous
 that you insist on keeping it in there.
  >>

I don't take your comments as venomous. I actually think you are trying to be
constructive from your point of view.

But I also thought I had come to a conclusion on this point several months
ago, and moved forward from there. Reaching back and talking about wholesale
revision of the task system at this point misses the current goal I have... to
make what I have here consistent and workable with the errors rooted out of
it.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:59:42
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

At 05:45 PM 10/13/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>I have long considered that the "reactionless" thrusters in CT/MT/T4
>>really do run by reaction, but they just don't have the reaction mass
>>coming out a nozzle.  The reaction is of the ship against the gravity
>>well, distorting the gravity well in a way that moves the ship in the
>>desired direction.  In essence, a ship moving out to 100 diameters is
>>moving the planet the other direction by a small amount 
>
>This is why the arguments about conservation of energy are important; if you
>do the above you find you don't conserve energy. (In essence, in a frame in
>which the planet is at rest, moving it in any direction *adds* to the
planet's
>energy, while moving the spacecraft adds to the spacecrafts energy - and
>adds more energy per unit time the faster the spacecraft is going.)

What???

Let's take a frame in which the planet is at rest.  Here's the sequence of
events:

The ship grabs up some hudrogen, fuses it into helium, and releases a
little bit of that matter into energy.  Some of that energy goes to the
ship's engines, which pushes the ship and the planet apart.  The ship gains
momentum, the planet gains momentum, and the fuel tank loses a little fuel.

What is the problem with this?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:02:03
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

At 05:35 PM 10/13/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Fred and Evelyn Wolke writes:
> 
>> As for swapping out weapons, on paper at least it makes it easier, because
>> you can swap out the weapon and the power it needs at the same time.
>
>However, in the shipyard it makes it harder, because most likely a
pre-existing
>power plant isn't _designed_ to suddenly have an X megawatt chunk added to
it,
>which means that if you put in a new weapon system you put in a new engine...

And if you do the *bookkeeping* differently, racking up the power
requirements as you go along and installing a power plant at the end that
fulfills these requirements, how is it different?  The only difference is
in the design phase... in both cases, at the end, you still have one power
plant.

Remember, this is only a bookkeeping stratagem, to make designing ships
easier.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:57:21 -0400
From: "johannes" <johannes@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Hardcovers

Screw that, let the collectors fight over 'em.  I just play the damn game, I
don't worship it!

John

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:02:24 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Charles Pravatte wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Wasn't there some escorts listed for it in the AHL class book?  I though
they were lower jump but the AHL just short jumped and had fuel to run if it
needed to.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'd hate to be the crews of those one-shot escorts. 

AHL Captain: "Too many Zho's out there. Astrogator, prepare for
jump. Escort flotilla, prepare to die..."

They mentioned an AHL ship rendezvousing with a flotilla of Gazelles
for commerce raider duties, so they would have been operating at
Jump-4 (unless the AHL or a support ship with them had spare
drop tanks along). Considering how many ops you can do at Jump-2,
you should often have at least half tanks.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:10:11 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Elections (was re: Demos...)

William F. Hostman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>I think you're multiplying the same fraction against itself. "Electorate",
>in American usual usage, includes all citizens above the minimum
>voting age (with the exception, IIRC, of prisoners). The technical term
>might be limited to only those who register, but I'll wager that both your
>approx. 30% figures refer to the same statistic - how many Alaskans
>participate in their government by voting.

sorry Walt, you lose that wager. 1/3 of elligibles to register do so, if
that.  Since I work elections, I get to see turnout directly as a % of
REGISTERED voters - usually 23-28 %.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Too bad for the Alaskans then. And anyone else who gives up and
stops paying attention. As I said before, they'll get the government
they deserve. I'll have to share some of it, which sucks, but hey,
life is seldom fair.

Your view of the US as a "self selecting oligarchy" is just downright
silly, though. You can't blame those who decide to take part in
their government for the irresponsibility of those who don't.

You don't have to have served in the military. You don't need to be
gainfully employed. You can even be a convicted felon, as long as
you aren't locked up at the time. You don't even have to know how
to read the ballot. Tell me again how this exclusionary system works
to create an oligarchy?

Heck, I've even seen some evidence that we allow more people to 
vote than the founding fathers ever intended. :)

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:19:19 -0400
From: "johannes" <johannes@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Lawyers of the Far Future (was Re: The History of Medicine)

- -----Original Message-----
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Tuesday, October 13, 1998 1:17 PM
Subject: The History of Medicine


>
>ObTraveller: Hopefully, the far future has far less lawyers than the USA
>does at present.
>

Since anyone with Admin-1 or better can function as a a lawyer, probably
they've got more.  Maybe there aren't as many full time lawyers though,
since futuristic data-retrieval would make it easier to research precedents
and such, and oratory skills aren't as important when arguing before an
Imperial Tribunal.  Maybe it's something people do on the side, like being a
Notary Public is now?

John

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:30:24 -0500
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: Hardcovers

Some of us went ahead and reserved a hardback from SJG
You got to support local industry.

TV

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 20:48:29 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Compartmentalization (was Azhanti High Lightning cruiser)

From GURPS Space (First Printing, Copyright 1988, pg. 79):

"Warships, prospectors, and so on can be built with extra
compartmentalization. This means that more interior walls are
pressure-tight, and there are more pressure doors.

"Standard compartmentalization ... means that walls and doors are DR 6, HT
20, and pressure walls and doors, where encountered, are DR 12, HT 40.

"Heavy compartmentalization means ... . Pressure walls and doors are more
common and are DR 16, HT 50.

"Total compartmentalization ... means that every door is a pressure door
unless the designer specifies otherwise. All walls and doors are DR 16, HT
50."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:09:45 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: "Rift-Jumper"

In a message dated 10/13/98 4:04:16 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
bmays@genscope.com writes:

<< Has anyone ever designed a ship that could carry smaller (non-military)
 ships across the Great Rift?  The smaller, less jump-capable ships are
 carried across by a larger ship that is basically a giant container with a
 jump drive and fuel storage.
 
 Would such a thing even be feasible?
 
 Brian >>

It's called a Battletender...:-). Seriously; it can be done; just remember
that a larger chunk of the ship is eaten up by jump fuel (ex. 60% in HG). In
HG, I designed a million ton tender with jump 6. It could carry a 10000 ton
fuel tender and 5x25000 ton battleriders. This is not very effiencent or cost
effective, but it can be done....

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:46:28 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Lawyers of the Far Future (was Re: The History of Medicine)

johannes wrote:

>
>
>
> >ObTraveller: Hopefully, the far future has far less lawyers than the USA
> >does at present.
> >
>
> Since anyone with Admin-1 or better can function as a a lawyer,

I'm not sure where you get this.  And even if it is canon somewhere,
I beg to differ with it.  Very strongly.

> probably
> they've got more.  Maybe there aren't as many full time lawyers though,
> since futuristic data-retrieval would make it easier to research precedents
> and such, and oratory skills aren't as important when arguing before an
> Imperial Tribunal.

Beg to differ again.  You've got to speak the language so you know
what precedent really says, assuming precendent is binding, which it isn't
in most of the planet, and IMTU, not to the Imperium.  And oratory skills
are vital!  Especially before an Imperial tribunal.  They can and do make
huge differences.  Their even more important in systems in which
precedent is not binding.

>  Maybe it's something people do on the side, like being a
> Notary Public is now?

If being a lawyer were that easy, there would be a lot more
than there are.  FYI, there are less than 1,000,000 practicing
lawyers in the United States.  The number is actually between
800k and 700k.  Pakistan has a higher lawyer pre capita ratio
than the US.


Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:21:27
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Drop Tanks

>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
>Subject: Re: Drop tanks
>
>Ian Whitchurch writes:
>

>>I strongly recommend increasing the misjump chance when using drop tanks to
>>about 1 in 36. This will make them commercially unviable, but militarily
>>still worthwhile.
> 
>That would make nonsens of the TNS newsbriefs which speaks of established
>commercial services which use drop tanks. My suggestion is that the period
>is one of transition to drop tank transport. It takes time to replace the
>existing body of merchant ships; furthermore, drop tank traffic lacks
>flexibility and requires a certain minimum of trade. Thus drop tank services
>are still few and only between systems with a lot of traffic. 

This is true, however if the drop tank services are new, they may not know
about the increases in misjump chances.

Ian

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #943
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 14 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 944



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Paperless Imperium
Re: Marc Miller and the Half Die
Traveller Navigator software
TWG list
Re: Rolnam sector (was Malorn) and where it is.
Re: T5 Task Resolution and Skill List Available
Re: Piracy
G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves
Re: Grayson
Re: Discovery of a machine race
Task System Idea NOT for T5
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Hardcovers
Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves
Re: Piracy
Re: Reactionless Thrusters
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #937
Re: Reactionless Thrusters
Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves
Re: Discovery of a machine race
Re : The History of Medicine
Re: The History of Medicine

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:12:52 -0700
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: Paperless Imperium

Dom types:
>Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:
>>I always hated reading more than about a half dozen pages of text
>>electronically. If it's longer, I prefer paper.
>And you can take paper books to the toilet...

    PDA's are capable of having books loaded on 'em.  I've got several chapters of ERB's
"The Mucker" and "The Shadow Unmasked" loaded on my PalmPilot.  As well as The Book 
of Five Rings and multiple character notes.

   Of course, a paper book can be real useful if you can't figure out what
the three seashells are for... :-)


- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com -- These opinions are mine, no one else wants `em.
      Smith&Wesson -- The Ultimate "Point & Click" User interface.
                 http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:11:10 -0700
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Marc Miller and the Half Die

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> I don't take your comments as venomous. I actually think you are trying to be
> constructive from your point of view.

Thanks for seeing that.  I am.

> But I also thought I had come to a conclusion on this point several months
> ago, and moved forward from there. Reaching back and talking about wholesale
> revision of the task system at this point misses the current goal I have... to
> make what I have here consistent and workable with the errors rooted out of
> it.

I understand.  You know my stance on this.  I'll shut up about this from now on.

Thanks,

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:15:29 EDT
From: Kagehira@aol.com
Subject: Traveller Navigator software

	It's available on the HIWG CD...... I believe one website still hosts it, but
I don't know which one. Also contained is the travel time calculator they had.
	As far as I know, shipyards never made it out, nor did they release it into
the PD. If GDW had survived one more month the playtest copy would have been
available.

Bryan

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:20:01 EDT
From: Kagehira@aol.com
Subject: TWG list

	Instructions on how to join should be posted on the main HIWG site (or will
be soon, along with other lists).

	In any case, send a message to:
Majordomo@qrc.com
	With the following:
subscribe [listname] [youraddress]
	or
subscribe [listname-digest] [youraddress]

	in this case listname would be Hiwg-Twg.

Bryan
HIWG CS

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:42:55 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Rolnam sector (was Malorn) and where it is.

In a message dated 10/11/98 10:49:26 AM Central Daylight Time,
guillemp@ciberia.es writes:

<< One sector coreward Kring Noor sector, or five sectors trailing and two
 sectors coreward of Amdukan sector, the corewardest and trailingest
 sector of imperium charted space (as in TNE rulebook).
  >>

I carry this sector in my records at Koog (probably a K'kree name). I'll add
Rolnam to my records as an Anglic name.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:11:07 -0700
From: Jim Cooper <Jim_Cooper@bc.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: T5 Task Resolution and Skill List Available

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:
> 
> The current version of the T5 Task Resolutions System system is now available
> as a Zip file. It contains the T5 Task text, a list of skills, and the text of
> the skill chapter. Skills are extensively illustrated with task examples.
> 
> The files themselves are in Word for Windows 95 format (sorry, no other
> formats available) and have been Zipped.
> 
> Please request the file from
> 
> FarFuture@AOL.com
> 
> and you'll get it by return email.

I would like to have a copy please. 

Thank you,

	Jim_Cooper@ba.sympatico.ca

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 01:31:42 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/13/98 17:07:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
ajackson@iii.com writes:

<< f you can kill off the system defenses in a system, you aren't really
pirates
 any more -- you're more like well-armed raiders, and piracy is at best
 incidental to what you're really doing -- if you've cleared system defenses,
 you might as well loot the planet  >>

Thats not exactly what I meant...it doesn't necessarily take the total
destruction of all system defenses to make it easier to cut out a juicy
target...these could also take the shape of harrasing attacks; do it 2 or 3
times and then the defenses will concentrate together...just don't be where
they are then!  Besides, replacing system defenses, for a lot of systems, will
take time and money...which may not always be available.

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 01:40:24 -0400
From: "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>
Subject: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves

According to G:T, when performing space movement you can be faced in any
direction and be moving in a different direction. Such as- with the "nose"
of the ship in the opposite direction of acceleration.

I have been looking at the deckplans for several Traveller ships. If
direction makes no difference then why do the ships have those big engines
to the rear?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 00:37:11 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Grayson

On 10/13/98 at 03:22 AM,  "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net> said:

>> At 11:10 AM 10/12/98 +0000, you wrote:
>> >You've got Haven = France; Manticore - United Kingdom; Silesia = Prussia;
>> >Solarian League = America (a very much out of time America).

That was my take on it, too.  Of course, Weber isn't creating exact
duplicates of the Napoleanian era nations.

>> >Has anyone figured out what Grayson is the equivalent of, historically
>> speaking?

>> >I haven't ... maybe there *isn't* a parallel?

I don't think thre is *one* nation that parallels Grayson.
 
>> As one currently living in the midst of it, I always assumed that Grayson
>> was the "Mormon Empire" writ large. Many of the cultural, social,
>> historical, and (to a lesser degree) religious aspects are certainly
>> similar, which is not a suprise, considering *where* the Graysons are
>> supposed to have migrated from in the first place - Idaho and the
>> surrounding western American states.

>The impression I got from the books is, the state religion, the
>Church of Man Unchained, was more of a 'holy roller'-style
>Pentacostal movement.  Mormons aren't Pentacostals.  I can almost see
>Austin himself chitchatting with Oral Roberts and Billy Graham and
>holding his own.

Yep, the feel is Fundimentalist, not Mormon...at least to me.  The
"country music opera" was a dead give away. ;->

>FWIW, I see a bit of a parallel with Grayson as Japan before Perry. 
>You have various and sundry 'warlords' (Steadholders) keeping on top
>of an almost figurehead Emperor (Protector).  In their steadings, the
>Steadholder gets an almost *fanatical* devotion from his subjects and
>of course his own personal army.

Interesting take, and I can see it too.  Then there is that Grayson
dueling style that, although not detailed, sure sounded very
Kendo-ish.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:25:29 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a machine race

> From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
> >ObTrav: Assuming that Virus never happens (or happened), as does the GT
> >setting, what would be the Imperium's response to the discovery of a
> >"mechanical" civilization of AI machines? Say a deep-space probe from a
> >non-hostile, even pacifistic AI civilization jumps into Imperial space and
> >initiates contact (most likely, Rimward, since all the other borders seem
> >padded with non-3I states). Would immediate war result?
> 
> No, I don't think so... but relations would certainly be even more strained
> than they are with the Zhodani.

You never know...  The 3I might just see this as a way to extend their
power...

Think of it this way, in the next war, ½ the navy may be made up of AI
controled ships...  Could lower the loss of life & increase force
projection...

The crew quarters are now fuel....

> I doubt the Imperium would be interested in, for example, allowing
Machine
> ships inside the Imperium for trade.

Maybe, maybe not...  If the 3I will let Sho ships in to trade, why not AI
ships?

Legate Legion, Militant Jewish Terrorist
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

We are Microsoft of Borg.  Your distinctive capabilities will be adapted to
service us.  Resistance is futile.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 01:17:06 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Task System Idea NOT for T5

On 10/13/98 at 10:31 PM,  Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz> said:

>>Easy        Asset + 8
>>Routine     Asset + 4
>>Difficult   Asset
>>Formidable  Asset - 4
>>Impossible  Asset - 8

>>For me that's easier to remember and use.

>Personally I think that multiplying/dividing by two, as in TNE, is a
>wonderful idea. 

Each to their own, but given the choice between, "Quick!

"...what is, "14/4?"  and  "...what is 14-8?

I'll take the subtraction. ;->  But that's just me.

Unlike some people, I'm not making suggestions to Marc about task
systems for T5.  He's decided what he wants to do, so there's no
point.  OTOH, the task, chargen, combat, or whatever systems each of
us choose to use when we play Traveller doesn't *have* to conform to
any published version of the game, that's our individual business.
I'm content to post ideas, ignore them if you aren't interested,
comment if you are. 


Now a more fleshed out idea...

How about including another Task level on either side of Difficult
and matching the Tasks with FUDGE like description Skill Levels?
And while we're at it, though in a little touch of point
distribution.

   Task        Task     Skill/Stat   Skill/Stat
Description  Modifier   Description     Level
===============================================
Easy           +12      Terrible          1
Routine         +8      Poor              2
Moderate        +4      Mediocre          3
Difficult        0      Fair              4
Formidable      -4      Good              5
Staggering      -8      Great             6
Hopeless       -12      Superb            7
Impossible     ---      Legendary         8+

Distribute 24 points among 6 Characteristics (1 to 6) [4 points per
characteristic if you use more or less than 6].  The only way to get
above 6 is to roll it during a career.

Careers are rolled up using a system similar to T4/T5, or TNE or MT
for that matter.  ;-) Personally, I'd like to get some occupational
specialization into the system.  Foex, it's fine to have a Navy
Career, but within the Navy you have Line, Staff and Engineering
Departments with pretty different skill sets...this is more CTA or
MT like than the later systems.

Roll 1d6-1 the first time each skill is learned.  On subsequent
selection of each skill increase the level by 1.  This simulates the
boost to learning on first exposure and the slower pace on later
exposures.  I suppose getting a 0 for first learning is also
realistic, the person with very low aptitude for the subject.

Assets are always a combination of two Characteristics, two Skills
or 1 Characteristic and 1 Skill.  Roll less or equal to the Asset
modified by Task difficult and other DM's.

I've toyed with using a 3d6 or 2d6 scale rather than 1d20, but to be
honest I think the 1d20 works better.  Probably, not as "realistic"
as it's a uniform rather than a normal-like distribution, but this
is a game and, IMO, simple and fast beats realistic.  

I really like having that 1 die for Task resolution, and being
non-d6 is actually an advantage.  For combat I can put the 1d20 and
a handful of d6's in a cup and roll them at once.  If the d20
indicates a hit, I already have the damage rolled on the d6's.

Anyway, just an idea.


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:29:50 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Anthony Jackson wrote:

> It has _different_ constraints -- GT bases performance on mass, not volume.  As
> a result, you tend to get higher acceleration in designs which have a lot of
> fuel space and relatively light armor.  You also get _lower_ acceleration in
> designs which have heavy armor, my attempts to design a Tigress aren't doing
> too well.

  You must admit it does make sense.

Paul Bendall

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:39:20 +0100
From: Paul Bendall <pbendal@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: Hardcovers

Loren Wiseman wrote:

> >From the SJ Games Daily Illuminator 13 October 1998:
>
>           "We ordered only 2,000 each of the GURPS Basic Set and GURPS
> Traveller hardcovers.
>            Apparently the printers gave us some extra. A good thing, too,
> because we came

Does this mean that the G:T Hardcover pre-orders are now shipping?Please say yes
as the wait is driving me mad!!!!!

Paul Bendall

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:59:18 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves

N. Eric Phillips wrote:

> According to G:T, when performing space movement you can be faced in any
> direction and be moving in a different direction. Such as- with the "nose"
> of the ship in the opposite direction of acceleration.

Thats for space combat.  In the time of a round, its assumed that you can
change
the facing and thrust vector to whatever you want because you have the time
to make such changes..  But the manuever drive still pushes the ship in the
direction of its 'nose'

> I have been looking at the deckplans for several Traveller ships. If
> direction makes no difference then why do the ships have those big engines
> to the rear?

I think its also assumed that minor thrusters are placed in appropriate places

to provide attitude control, i.e., yaw, pitch, and roll.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:50:05
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>In a message dated 10/13/98 13:43:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>kurt@blazenet.net writes:
>
>
>I think a good cost-effective way of dealing w/ the SDB force is to take them
>out FIRST.  A couple of high-powered ships might ambush an SDB (false
distress
>signal, maybe?)  If you can take the ship out, thats good; if you can take
the
>ship, thats even better.   A nice 400-ton sub merchie can cram a lot of
>troopies in the cargo bay if necessary...and if you can get the ship to a
>freeport, you might be able to strip and salvage quite a bit.   SDB's will
>rarely, if ever, operate in squadron size to take out one pirate...and no
star
>system, no matter how rich it is, will spend more money for defense than it
>feels it has too.  So at worst, you may have 2 SDBs responding to a typical
>distress call (you might be able to thin this out w/ other "rescues" to deal
>with.) 

Sending a SDB to respond to a distress call is, in my opinion, like sending
a Los Angeles class nuke boat to respond to one. You use launches,
preferably ones with specialised medical etc equipment.

False distress signals also run an amusing risk ... an ethically-challenged
civilian (or, for that matter, an ethically-challenged planetary
government) may put a couple of laser bolts into you to make sure there
wont be any objection to claiming you as salvage.

I also disagree about sending out SDBs in squadron size to take out
identified pirates. Why not send three ships and make it an unfair fight ?

Thruster-plate powered missiles also make excellent fire support. If it
turns out to be an actual civilian, turn it for home.

>
>Granted that this requires a fair amount of starting capital...but it should
>be a reasonably self-sustaining affair once it gets going.  

Can we quantify how much starting capital ? By my numbers, it is well over
MCr 300. That is serious money.

>However, this
>would not be a once a week type of thing; it would require intelligence on
the
>target, the system, the system defenses, and a nearby staging base (maybe in-
>system, around a GG moon?)   One hit a month or so, if the haul is big enough
>(according to CT Trade Tables, 200 tons of Radioactives sell for 1MCr
>BASE...never mind the brokers skill at selling it!)  That will pay for a fair
>amount of upkeep and supplies...BCr 2.4 per year, at the above assumptions.
>This will take a lot of the small-fry out of the game, but that seems
>realistic to me.

Any ship carrying high-value cargos is going to have serious amounts of
firepower itself, if the space lanes are not secure. Our hypothtical
MC1/dton cargo would be far more likely to be carried in something like a
2000 dton Elisabeth-class 'Frontier Trader' (2.1 gigajoules of laser output
and all) than a dinky little 200 dton Far Trader.

>
>A small, professional force of pirates, executing well-planned paramilitary-
>style operations against very lucrative targets seems to me to be the only
way
>piracy worked (much like modern day art or jewel thieves)
>
>Comments?

Yeah. Modern day jewel thieves dont use or need privately-owned frigates.
What does a only-one-owner rocket cutter sell for these days, anyway ?

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 01:01:22 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

 
>>[thrusters don't conserve energy]
>What???
>The ship grabs up some hudrogen, fuses it into helium, and releases a
>little bit of that matter into energy.  Some of that energy goes to the
>ship's engines, which pushes the ship and the planet apart.  The ship gains
>momentum, the planet gains momentum, and the fuel tank loses a little fuel.
>What is the problem with this?

This has been discussed in enormous mathematical detail -see the archives.
The very short version is that if you do the numbers, under most 
circumstances you find the kinetic energy of a t-plate ship is going up
much faster than the amount of power going into its engines. If you look
at it slightly more closely, you discover that the rate of kinetic energy
gain of a constantly-accelerating ship is not constant, but proportional to
its velocity, and hence once they're moving fast enough t-plate ships will
always break conservation of energy no matter how high you set the power
requirement. (Proof left as excercise for reader - please look in the
archives.) 

It's from this little fact that relativistic rocks and planet-busting-lifeboats
arise...

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:20:25 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #937

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:03:40 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 06:29:42
>From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
>Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy
>
>>Well, like I said (in another post), all an Interstellar Government
>*really* has
>>to do is to protect trade and enable the safe carriage of the mail. It can
>leave
>>pretty much everything else to the individual worlds.
>
>Isn't that what the Traveller Imperium is supposed to do?

That's the *theory* ... but it *actually* does a whole hell of a lot more ...
all, in reality, to keep itself in control and with absolute (if not always
obviously used) power.

"Power corrupts, and absolute Power corrupts absolutely."

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 05:46:35
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

At 01:01 AM 10/14/98 -0700, you wrote:
> 
>>>[thrusters don't conserve energy]
>>What???
>>The ship grabs up some hudrogen, fuses it into helium, and releases a
>>little bit of that matter into energy.  Some of that energy goes to the
>>ship's engines, which pushes the ship and the planet apart.  The ship gains
>>momentum, the planet gains momentum, and the fuel tank loses a little fuel.
>>What is the problem with this?
>
>This has been discussed in enormous mathematical detail -see the archives.
>The very short version is that if you do the numbers, under most 
>circumstances you find the kinetic energy of a t-plate ship is going up
>much faster than the amount of power going into its engines. If you look
>at it slightly more closely, you discover that the rate of kinetic energy
>gain of a constantly-accelerating ship is not constant, but proportional to
>its velocity, and hence once they're moving fast enough t-plate ships will
>always break conservation of energy no matter how high you set the power
>requirement. (Proof left as excercise for reader - please look in the
>archives.) 
>
>It's from this little fact that relativistic rocks and
planet-busting-lifeboats
>arise...

I was not commenting on the quantitative non-conservation aspect of
reactionless thrusters.  I was commenting on the qualitative comment that
since the ship and the planet had both gained momentum (energy) then there
was therefore a lack of conservation.

I just wanted to point out that the energy to accomplish this was supposed
to come from the power plant.

Now I personally know that if a reactionless thruster produces any more
thrust per kW than a laser, then it is inherently non-conservational.  The
same with contragravity of any kind.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 05:32:41
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves

At 01:40 AM 10/14/98 -0400, you wrote:
>According to G:T, when performing space movement you can be faced in any
>direction and be moving in a different direction. Such as- with the "nose"
>of the ship in the opposite direction of acceleration.
>
>I have been looking at the deckplans for several Traveller ships. If
>direction makes no difference then why do the ships have those big engines
>to the rear?

Perhaps because the thrust vectoring systems can fail.

Perhaps because the thrust vectoring systems don't work that way in
atmosphere (the ships you are looking at are streamlined)

Perhaps because it protects them from enemy fire (the weapons and heaviest
armor in front, drives and other important systems in back)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 05:34:21
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a machine race

At 10:25 PM 10/13/98 -0700, Legate Legion wrote:
>> From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
>> >ObTrav: Assuming that Virus never happens (or happened), as does the GT
>> >setting, what would be the Imperium's response to the discovery of a
>> >"mechanical" civilization of AI machines? Say a deep-space probe from a
>> >non-hostile, even pacifistic AI civilization jumps into Imperial space
>and
>> >initiates contact (most likely, Rimward, since all the other borders
>seem
>> >padded with non-3I states). Would immediate war result?
>> 
>> No, I don't think so... but relations would certainly be even more
>strained
>> than they are with the Zhodani.
>
>You never know...  The 3I might just see this as a way to extend their
>power...
>
>Think of it this way, in the next war, ½ the navy may be made up of AI
>controled ships...  Could lower the loss of life & increase force
>projection...
>
>The crew quarters are now fuel....
>
>> I doubt the Imperium would be interested in, for example, allowing
>Machine
>> ships inside the Imperium for trade.
>
>Maybe, maybe not...  If the 3I will let Sho ships in to trade, why not AI
>ships?

IMC, the Third Imperium has as much or more of a prejudice against
robot-controlled weaponry as they do against psionics... witness the lack
of internal guidance on G:T missiles.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:32:27 +1000
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Re : The History of Medicine

Peter Newman wrote :-


> ObTrav: To what extent do you think that pharmaseutical research in the
> Third Imperium depends on finding & duplicating the healing effect of
> natural plants and to what extent do you think that medical  problems
> are solved with scratch built synthetic designed for a specific effect?
>
Given current trends and likely developments in molecular biology,
pharmacology, and chemical engineering, tailor-made synthetics will
dominate, in my opinion.

N.B. : 'synthetic' equals production by modified organisms (metabolic or
gene level - hormone modulators, gene therapy etc.), artificial
factories (cell culture, protein machines, nanites), and purpose built
substances.

This is not to underestimate the value of ethnopharmacology, etc.
I just feel that combinatorial chemistry will be a more efficient
(unfortunately not conducive to adventuring in exotic locales)
solution to the problem.

Alternative med in space is a cool idea ; but at average stellar+
tech levels, it isn't necessary.

Robert O'Connor
Medico, Gearhead and Gaming Enthusiast

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:35:21 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Lars Adler <adler@hartree.pc.Uni-Koeln.DE>
Subject: Re: The History of Medicine

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Peter Newman wrote:

> I thought this was interesting
> 
> The History of Medicine
> =========================
> 2000 B.C. - Here, eat this root
> 1000 A.D. - That root is heathen. Here, say this prayer.
> 1850 A.D. - That prayer is superstition. Here, drink this potion.
> 1940 A.D. - That potion is snake oil. Here, swallow this pill.
> 1975 A.D. - That pill is ineffective. Here, take this antibiotic.
> 2000 A.D. - That antibiotic doesn't work anymore. Here, eat this root.

:-)

> ObTrav: To what extent do you think that pharmaseutical research in the
> Third Imperium depends on finding & duplicating the healing effect of
> natural plants and to what extent do you think that medical  problems
> are solved with scratch built synthetic designed for a specific effect?

(IMTU) That depends on tech level. finding & duplicating means extracting
the effective substance from the plant (or others), while synthezising
these and specially designed ones needs some more advancemant in
biochemistry.

In Chemistry History the isolation came before analyzing and before
synthesizing. Chlorophyll is a good example for this.

L.A.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #944
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 14 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 945



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: The History of Medicine
Re : The History Of Medicine
Re: Physics - Help!
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re: Planetology 101 part 3
Re: Re : GURPS Trav power plants
Re: "Dogs" in traveller
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: Planetology 101 part 5
Re: compulsory voting
Re: Archival materials
Re: Reactionless Thrusters
Re: Weber & history
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Reactionless Thrusters
Re: Physics - Help!
Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves
Re: "Rift-Jumper"
Re: Discovery of a machine race
RE : Reactionless thrusters

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:44:04 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Lars Adler <adler@hartree.pc.Uni-Koeln.DE>
Subject: Re: The History of Medicine

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Fred and Evelyn Wolke wrote:

> Disease usually makes a poor environment for roleplaying, however.  I, as a
> GM, would use it more as a prod for moving people than to actually have
> them catch a disease...
> 
> "The Traveller's Aid Society is reporting a breakout of Yarbu plague in
> many Lunion subsector starports, so we're going to take a shortcut through
> the Sword Worlds."

Makes good for an adventure once. I thought about letting my group catch a
virus on downport, becoming active when they're half through jump space.
The disease is not yet deadly, but the ill ones get soon disabled to work.
Now the problems they've got are:
 
What to do with panicking passengers?
What about the quarantine?
Who will be the next one to become ill?
Who will land the ship, if the pilot gets ill? 
and is a doctor aboard, to find a medicine?

Anyone played such an adventure before?

L.A.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:50:39 +1000
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Re : The History Of Medicine

Bloo wrote :-

> At law school, the good joke we learned for doctors who hate lawyers is
> just to say:
>
> Over two hundred years ago your professional ancestors were bleeding people
>
> with leeches, while my professional ancestors were writing the United
> States
> Constitution.
>
> I usally add that the Constitution, great as it is, might have been better
> if
> those 'doctors' hadn't been bleeding some of the founding fathers to death.
>
> George Washington had 4 doctors all doing independent bleedings of him
> before he finally gave up the ghost.
>
Sigh.
On doctors v lawyers :-

Two hundred plus years later, the lawyers have filled the leeches'
ecological niche.
Doctors are waiting for the next class action or product liability
suit to further limit what they can do for their patients.

Etc.

Robert O'Connor
Medico, Gearhead and Gaming Enthusiast

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:54:34 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Lars Adler <adler@hartree.pc.Uni-Koeln.DE>
Subject: Re: Physics - Help!

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Smart, David J (David) wrote:

> This is one for the science gurus on the list.
> 
> Can anyone tell me what phonons and ronons are (*not*
> photons and ronin..I know what those are)? I heard
> they're examples of quantum particles related to a quantum
> fluid (whatever that it) but I'm a layman when it comes to
> quantum physics and I've never heard of these things before.
> 
> BTW, what's a quantum fluid?
> 

Phonons are low-frequent oscillations aof the atoms that go through a
crystal. They are coupled vibrations of all atoms of this crystal, so
the phonons can wander through it.

My only contacts with this theme comes from theoretical chemistry, in
which the normal oscillations of molecules and crystals be calulated 
and viewed.

I'd guess, that 'ronons' stem from rotational motion as 'phonons' come
from the vibrational. But I do not know.

L.A.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:12:13 +1000
From: Morgan <jasper@uq.net.au>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

steve daniels wrote:

> dberry@hooked.net wrote:
>
> > Sudden thought...
> >
> > With the IHTIT rule, we now have a perfect use for Jack-of-all-Trades
> > skill.  Using J-o-T to raise the effective skill to avoid the IHTIT.
> >
> > Skill required 3, Skill possessed 1, If the PC has JoT-2 he avoids the
> > penalty.
>
> Very nice!
>
> The Its-Harder-Than-I-Thought-But-I-Think-I-Know-A-Trick Rule.
> ;-)
>
> Bloo

  Don't you mean the McGuyver rule?

Morgan     :-)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 01:41:30 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Planetology 101 part 3

In mail you write:

> Thad Coons wrote:
>> 
>>      Stars are far too hot for water to exist as a compound. It's
>> present in gas giants, but since it's denser than hydrogen, you can expect
>> to find it mostly in their lower layers. (These are no place for for beings
>> with ideas of space travel to go looking for it).
>
> Oooohhh NAAAaaarrrrrrrffff!
>
> What a setting: "drilling" rigs floating in a GG atmosphere, sucking water 
> and other valuable materials from the depths...

It'd be easier trying to mine iron from the Earth's core. It's tens to
*hundreds* of thousands of km to that ice.

It's *much* simpler to mine commets and moons.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:00:48 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Re : GURPS Trav power plants

In mail you write:

>>         Thrust leads to a change in velocity, therefore a change in kinetic
>> energy. Change in velocity is proportional to the time you thrust ...
>> but the change in KE is proportional to the change in velocity
>> squared so the input energy is proportional to time, but the
>> resulting change in KE is proportional to time squared--so energy is
>> being created out of nothing.
>>
> It's a little more obvious than the above quote would suggest :-
> momentum is not being conserved, hence the term
> 'reactionless thruster'. This is the physical law being mangled.

We worked out the rules for a "thruster" that worked by pushing on
another body (such as a planet). It didn't break any laws, but the
power requirements quickly got nasty. Or with a constant power input,
the acceleration dropped rapidly.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:03:00 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: "Dogs" in traveller

In mail you write:

> There's a thought.  Your trader docks with a Vargr to - trade - and your
> pet dog gets loose...  "Slavers!" cry the Vargr, going for their guns...

Why? Would you do that if a Vargr docked to trade and his pet chimp got
loose?

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:04:57 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

In mail you write:

> Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:
>
>>I always hated reading more than about a half dozen pages of text
>>electronically. If it's longer, I prefer paper.
>
> And you can take paper books to the toilet...

You don't have a terminal in the bathroom? :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:11:39 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Planetology 101 part 5

In mail you write:

>     Unlike hydrogen compounds and carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides require
> energy to form: they are not normally present in large amounts. If they do
> form, they tend to spontaneously decompose to a mixture of oxygen and
> nitrogen. (Sound familiar, Terrans?)  The nitrogen oxides can be stabilized
> somewhat by reacting with water (as in nitric and nitrous acids) or with
> hydrocarbons.

Alas, the acids rapidly react with metallic ions to form nitrates.
Nitrates are *very* soluble. In fact *no* nitrate is insoluble. So all
the nitrates would wind up in solution. Which tends to result in water
containing *lots* of metal ions.

>       Ammonia is somewhat more volatile than water, (lighter and
> lower-boiling) but somewhat less than methane. This puts it more on the
> high-hydrogen end of the scale. 
>      As with methane, a planet that can't hold its hydrogen is likely to
> start losing it from its ammonia as well, with nitrogen as the remainder.
> (as on Titan and Earth). Ammonia is somewhat closer to water in its
> properties, so it might stick around a bit better than methane.
>     The difficulty is that a planet that can keep its ammonia is even more
> likely to keep its water, which is up to a hundred times more abundant in
> the first place. Ammonia dissolves quite well in water, and dissolved
> ammonia acts as an antifreeze. This could extend the life zone into colder
> regions. On the other hand, once dissolved, there are plenty of negative
> ions for ammonia to react with: it might get locked up in the crust.

Ammonia forms the ammonium ion in water. Which freely decomposes into
free ammonia, and a hydrogen ion. Ammonium compounds tend to be rare
for this reason.

So as with nitrates, it's very unlikely that you'd get mineral deposits
in corporating ammonium compounds.

BTW, ammonia water mixtures will give *really* weird weather because of
the complex phase diagrams involved.

> Sulfur
>      This is even less abundant than nitrogen, and is a major
> component of planetary envelopes only in exceptional cases.
>      Sulfur has a volatile compound with hydrogen: hydrogen
> sulfide. In a hydrogen poor environment, Sulfur does tend to form
> chains as carbon does, but it cannot form the side branches and
> multiple rings that make carbon chemistry interesting and
> complex.

Hal Clement had a race of aliens who lived in a *gaseous* sulfur
atmosphere! 

>     In an oxygen rich environment, sulfur combines with oxygen to
> form sulfur oxides. These, like carbon dioxide, can be
> mineralized and locked up in the crust. When other volatiles are
> gone, sulfur and sulfur oxides are next in line. In Sol system,
> there is Jupiter's satellite Io with its sulfur volcanoes, or the
> sulfuric acid clouds which have scavenged what little water
> remains on Venus.

Sulfates do form mineral deposits, but sulfides are a lot more common.
Sulfur is almost as active as oxygen at mineral forming temperatures. 

Sulfur compounds also form the basis of the ecology of deep ocean vents
and deep rock bacteria.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:32:18 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: compulsory voting

In mail you write:

> for example in Brasil there is also compulsory voting....this means that
> whoever is first on the ballot (drawn at random) generally wins....people
> have to vote (if you don't vote you can't work) so they just mark down the
> first one and go home.  do you get a 'none of the above' option?  or a 'it
> doesn't matter' option...if so why compulsory voting?  you don't even have
> the freedom to *not* vote...how is that more 'democratic'?

Which is why ballots in Oregon have the order shuffled around. If
everyone voted for the first person on their ballot, the votes would be
divided evenly among the candidates.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:37:33 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Archival materials

In mail you write:

>>>>>
> Anyway, once you get into the well sealed vault, you'd have the rock
> carvings or inscribed metal plates. They'd contain enough info to
> (hopefully) enable the finders to decode the more compact media,
> which
> would be the bulk of the archives. 
>>>>>
> A number of different cultures have used a gold alloy in foil or
> plate form to create bound books.  The characters were incised in the
> plates/foil.  This has got to be a bit tedious (as well as expensive),
> but lasts well for thousands of years.

Could you name these cultures? And sorry, but the Book of Mormon does
*not* count as a reference.

The problem is that gold is too flimsy. You can't use gold foil, you
have to use plates. Which makes things bulkier. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:53:34 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

In mail you write:

> Joseph Kimball writes:
>
>> I have long considered that the "reactionless" thrusters in CT/MT/T4
>> really do run by reaction, but they just don't have the reaction mass
>> coming out a nozzle.  The reaction is of the ship against the gravity
>> well, distorting the gravity well in a way that moves the ship in the
>> desired direction.  In essence, a ship moving out to 100 diameters is
>> moving the planet the other direction by a small amount (thus you get
>> to 100 diameters just a wee bit sooner than a strict accel/decel
>> equation would predict, but the difference is fairly small -- a few
>> minutes at most).
>
> Heh.  If you do this (a) performance should drop rapidly with distance (like 
> contragravity),

Why? It doesn't *have* to be inverse square based. It could be the
equivalent of a well collimated beam.

> (b) any changes in acceleration should be subject to a delay
> equal to no less than the time required for light to travel from you to your
> anchor mass and back again,

Nope! If you check, you will find that gravity and electrostatic forces
do *not* act that way. Really! Virtual particles do things real
particles can't.

For example, if such a lag existed in gravity, planetary orbits would
be really weird. This is sometimes claimed to be a violation of
relativity, but apparently isn't (I've seen the arguments on
rec.arts.sf.science far too many times).

> and (c) power requirements become complex (equal to no less than the
> dot product of force and velocity relative to anchor mass) and _much_
> higher than are listed for reactionless thrusters.

We worked out the formulas for speed, acceleration, and time as a
function of distance (given a steady power input). They're pretty sad. :-)

> Make all those changes and you no longer violate any conservation
> laws, though it still violates physics as we know it.

How?

It becomes something we don't know how to do. But that doesn't mean it
violates physics.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:44:16 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Weber & history

In mail you write:

>
>>*I* thought that Rob. S. Pierre and the planet of New Paris were dead 
>>giveaways!
>
>    I remember reading at one of the HH sites that his editors thought the
> name was a bit heavy handed.
>
>    His editors did make him cut a scene he wrote in protest of the cover
> art of "Field of Dishonor."
>
> It went something like this...A historian of old Earth meets with
> Steadholder Harrington.  He takes care to examine her hands, and is visibly
> relieved not to find her wearing one sequined glove...

Frankly, I'd like to shoot *all* the cover artists... Not only does
Honor not look like her descriptions, but the ships don't either. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:08:47 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

In mail you write:

> Bruce Johnson writes:
>
>>Fundamentally, it's harder to propagate TL changes the larger your Area
>>of Operations are. The Terra (pre-IW period) are able to move tech very
>>rapidly because they are considerably smaller. With something the size
>>of the 3I (or 1I or 2I) maintaining a stable technological base over the
>>size of the Imperium is going to slow things down considerably since the
>>infrastructure to support a higher TL has to propogate out from the area
>>of innovation.
>
> But individual planets are not bound by that restriction. If that was the
> only reason why the 3rd Imperium was only TL 15, then there would be scores
> of TL 25 planets around. 

That's assuming that a single planet has the population required to
"invent" TL25.

What I'm thinking of is the fact that inspirations of a given "level"
seem to be proportional to size of the "intellectual population". Thus
the larger the "community" of scientists/engineers/innovators who are
able to exchange idea, the more likely you are to get an advance. 

But the farther you go, the larger the required community is *or* the
more slowly the advances come. Thus there ought to be a TL at which the
odds of a single planet being able to make to jump to the next level
become too low for it to be a likely occurence. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:02:06 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

In mail you write:

>>I have long considered that the "reactionless" thrusters in CT/MT/T4
>>really do run by reaction, but they just don't have the reaction mass
>>coming out a nozzle.  The reaction is of the ship against the gravity
>>well, distorting the gravity well in a way that moves the ship in the
>>desired direction.  In essence, a ship moving out to 100 diameters is
>>moving the planet the other direction by a small amount 
>
> This is why the arguments about conservation of energy are important;
> if you do the above you find you don't conserve energy. (In essence,
> in a frame in which the planet is at rest, moving it in any direction
> *adds* to the planet's energy, while moving the spacecraft adds to
> the spacecrafts energy - and adds more energy per unit time the
> faster the spacecraft is going.)

The frame you describe is *not* an inertial frame. It's an accelerated
one. So you need a different frame. Probably one in which the impulse
given to the planet and to the ship are equal and opposite. In *that*
frame, energy should wind up being conserved.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 03:27:56 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Physics - Help!

In mail you write:

> This is one for the science gurus on the list.
>
> Can anyone tell me what phonons and ronons are (*not*
> photons and ronin..I know what those are)? I heard
> they're examples of quantum particles related to a quantum
> fluid (whatever that it) but I'm a layman when it comes to
> quantum physics and I've never heard of these things before.

Phonons have to do with "vibration". Sort of. I don't fully understand
it, but they have to do with some wave phenomena.

> BTW, what's a quantum fluid?

It's a fluid composed of particles whose interaction is dominated by
quantum effects as opposed to molecular or atomic forces. Helium 2 is a
"state" of liquid helium (helium 4, not helium 3) where it has become a
superfluid. It's a quantum fluid of sorts. 

You also get a quite *different* sort of quatum fluid in the core of a
neutron star. 

But I'm getting *way* out of my depth here.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:44:27 +0200
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves

>At 01:40 AM 10/14/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>According to G:T, when performing space movement you can be faced in any
>>direction and be moving in a different direction. Such as- with the "nose"
>>of the ship in the opposite direction of acceleration.
>>
>>I have been looking at the deckplans for several Traveller ships. If
>>direction makes no difference then why do the ships have those big engines
>>to the rear?

Those are not engines, they're cooling vents. The eject superheated
hydrogen to cool off the ship (this is the blue glow seen in Star Wars and
other documentary starship films). If they were mounted on the front the
delicate sensor surfaces of ship sensors would be plated with superheated
hydrogen when the ship accelerates. Bruces notes about reducing your IR sig
to a certain enemy simply means pointing your rear away from him.

All this with my tongue only slightly pressing against the inner side of my
cheek.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 04:05:58 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: "Rift-Jumper"

Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com> wrote

> Brian Mays writes:

> > Has anyone ever designed a ship that could carry smaller 
> > (non-military) ships across the Great Rift?  The smaller, less 
> >jump-capable ships are carried across by a larger ship that is 
> > basically a giant container with jump drive 

> Sure...you use a 'stage' theory like modern rockets.  Unfortunately, 
> the scaling required is horrible -- you halve your available tonnage 
> roughly every 4-5 parsecs, which means you need something like a 
> million-ton base craft to get a scout across the rift. 
> not exactly
> practical unless you can find a star in the middle.

So pick the right route and it is "easy" to get across the great rift.

To cross the Great Rift from the main part of the Imperium to the
Spinward Marches the easiest route will take you across the rimward edge
of Corridor Sector using the following optimum route.

You will preferably need a Jump 6 ship with fuel purification.

Take the following route

From Capitol of other start point take the shortest Jump 6 route to 

Jafla/Corridor 1840	A 898114-E

you need to make Jump 7 to get to the next planet

Tristara/Corridor 1140	C 870740-5

Options

1) Use a ship with enough fuel for Jump 6 + an additional Jump 1 (or
more).  Possbile with MT or TNE rules, but nearly impossible with other
rules.

2) Transport your ship in a really big transport with Jump 1 drives &
enough fuel for 2 Jump 1's.  It will be able to transport another ship
of about half its tonnage as cargo.

3) Use jump tanks 

4) Assume that the Imperium does this all the time & use the secret
Imperial Naval calibration point set up to make this easy.  (It would be
best if you had the Navys permisiion & knew where the Calibration point
is or you'll be SOL.

from Tristara go to

Esi-Obe/Corridor 0638	A 542886-C	a Jump 5 from Esi-Obe go to
Ishirdu/Corridor 0338	X 776301-0	a Jump 3 from Ishirdu go to

According to DPG library data Ishirdu is Red zoned because its native
sentients are psionic.  It seems like quite a bit of effort to maintanin
a Red Zone in the middle of the rift.  Only the planet is interdicted so
you can refuel at the gas giant. (Early Adventures, Library Data, DGP)

Lorin Antune/Deneb 2734 D 525867-3	this will require a jump 8 so you
will need to use one of method 1,2, or 4 listed above (you can't use
option 3, drop tanks, because you can't get drop tanks at Ishirdu).

This area is the best point for the Imperial Navy to have a Naval
Calibration Point.  They can use the excuse that they need it to supply
the interdiction fleet at Ishirdu but it is really there to control the
most viable route across the rift.  In the campaign I played in the
Calibration point was in Deneb 3035 a Jump 5 from Ishirdu making the
route J5 capable, especially if their is another calbration point in or
near Corridor 1340 making that part of the route J5 as well.

from Lorin Atune go to

Javan/Deneb 3035 C77A135-A 	a Jump 6 from Javan.

Congratulations you have just crossed the Great Rift.  For "canonical"
information on the locations of TNE era (year 1202) Calibration points
for this area see Regency SB pg 63.

After the ship she was chief engineer of used this route (which she
plotted) to cross the Great Rift a charecter of mine went to a tshirt
shop on their next stop, Alaunpaya (Deneb 1628 C 140794-8), and had
tshirts made up for the crew that said:

"My starship crossed the Great Rift the hard way and all I got was this
lousy T Shirt"

I got a strange look from the GM when I told him what I was doing....

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:20:58 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Jens \"Spacejens\" Rydholm" <spacejens@h72.ryd.student.liu.se>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a machine race

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Legate Legion wrote:

> Think of it this way, in the next war, ½ the navy may be made up of AI
> controled ships...  Could lower the loss of life & increase force
> projection...

I doubt that the AI civilizaion would view this as a lower loss of life...

> The crew quarters are now fuel....

Wrong... the crew quarters are now a computer ;-)

+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Jens "Spacejens" Rydholm    http://spacejens.ml.org     |
| jenry023@student.liu.se     Telephone: +46(0)13-4730961 |
| ICQ UIN: 3844745            Linköping, Sweden           |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU ?tc t4 ru ge+ 3i- jt+ a ?st ls kk++ hi+ as++ va++  |
|      ?dr so- zh ?da sy+                                 |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
|               In politics, left is right!               |
+---------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:28:06 +1000
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: RE : Reactionless thrusters

Fred and Evelyn Wolke wrote :-

> What???
>
> Let's take a frame in which the planet is at rest.  Here's the sequence of
> events:
>
> The ship grabs up some hudrogen, fuses it into helium, and releases a
> little bit of that matter into energy.  Some of that energy goes to the
> ship's engines, which pushes the ship and the planet apart.  The ship gains
> momentum, the planet gains momentum, and the fuel tank loses a little fuel.
>
> What is the problem with this?
>
Initially :-
Planet is at rest. Momentum = kinetic energy = 0
Ship has some arbitrary momentum, p = mv
and energy (kinetic + gravitational potential :
(0.5 X m X v^2) + mgh).

Ship uses thrusters :-
Let thrust energy = E.
Planet gains momentum, p1 and kinetic energy k1
Ship gains momentum and kinetic energy.
Momentum = (m - dm) X (v+dv), dm mass of fuel consumed,
dv velocity change.
Kinetic energy = [0.5 X (m-dm) X (v+dv)^2] + (m-dm)g(h+dh),
dh change in altitude or distance from planet.

Test : Is momentum or energy conserved?

momentum : mv not equal to [(m-dm)X(v+dv)] - p1 ?

energy : does (0.5 X m X v^2) + mgh + E equal
[0.5 X (m-dm) X (v+dv)^2] + (m-dm)g(h+dh) + k1 ?



Robert O'Connor
Medico, Gearhead, Gaming Enthusiast

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #945
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 14 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 946



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #943
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)
Re: Discovery of a machine race
RE: Traveller-digest V1998 #945
Re: "Rift-Jumper"
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
re: [GT]Azhanti High Lightning
Re: "Rift-Jumper"
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Sabmiqys (was re: Discovery of a Machine...)
Re: The Half-Die and T5
More Cool Traveller stuff
Re: Piracy
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves
Re: Physics - Help!
Re: Does anybody like this idea?
Re: Weber & history

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:39:19 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #943

> Note that the whole theory behind including the power plants in the guns
is
> somewhat fishy, since it means that a chunk of fusion reactor is in the
turret
> (which seems unlikely) and that you need to upgrade your power plant to
add
> weaponry (which means people can't swap out weapons very well).  This is
why I
> wrote up modules which separate out the power plant.

My understanding is that this is an abstraction designed to make building
the ships easier, and that the part of the power plant associated with the
weapon is not actually IN the turret, but becomes extra power plant volume,
mass etc, thus making the plant bigger. Admittedly, the system as written
does cause problems for ship mapping etc.

Allen

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:46:19 -0400
From: "Peter H. Brenton" <pbrenton@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

>At 11:58 AM 10/13/98 EDT, you wrote:
>>In a message dated 10/12/98 6:21:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>>ajackson@iii.com
>>writes:
>>
>><< hmm...despite my efforts, I was not able to duplicate the degree to which
>>the
>> classic AHL sucks...oh well.
>>  >>
>>
>
>I read the discription but some things seem to be missing.


I also thought there were a bunch o' meson bay weapons.  Perhaps that was
one of the later variations?

Those Meson bay weapons would do serious things to smaller escorts under
Megatraveller, generally in the form of critical hits.

They are also an excellent ortillery tool.  Oh, and in combat against other
"capital" ships (wouldn't take it up against anything much bigger...except
in numbers) remember to use the "internal" damage table under MT and
CT/HG...leads to a quicker conclusion.

I'm suprised those 50 and 100 ton meson bays weren't incorporated into more
designs.  Instead I seem to recall a lot of (ptew!) fusion gun bays.
Useless.

Pete


Peter H. Brenton
MIT's Plasma Science and Fusion Center
(617) 253-3185
pbrenton@mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:31:48 +1000
From: Morgan <jasper@uq.net.au>
Subject: Re: Role Playing (was Re GURPS Players)

N. Eric Phillips wrote:

> >Hm, I see a way out of the problem of dyslexic one-handed 14-year-old
> >streetkids with loads of skills.
>
> As a GM you have to watch out for munchkins like that. High cost disads can
> impede play. As a GM I encourage my players to take more -5 point disads
> because they help to flesh out the campaign and sometimes give good story
> hooks (like a 5 point enemy). I may let them have a 10 point disad, but
> anything higher needs a really good story around it.
>
> >So? As a player of mine once showed me, give the character a 14DX and a
> >14IQ, then take 56 half-point skills. That's a load of skills at better
> >than average for a 14-year old. :-)
>
> Unless he's Star Trek's own Wesley Crusher<G>

  I call foul. You mentioned the forbidden one     :-)

I'd say a sensible limit on disads is to make all subject to GM approval, and
no high point disads which mean the entire group have to suffer because one
player wanted a 20 point disadvantage he would never have to face alone, as he
knew the whole group would have to suffer with him.

Morgan

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:21:23 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a machine race

> > From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
> > >ObTrav: Assuming that Virus never happens (or happened), as does the GT
> > >setting, what would be the Imperium's response to the discovery of a
> > >"mechanical" civilization of AI machines? Say a deep-space probe from a
> > >non-hostile, even pacifistic AI civilization jumps into Imperial space
> and
> > >initiates contact (most likely, Rimward, since all the other borders
> seem
> > >padded with non-3I states). Would immediate war result?
> >

IIRC, there has been 1 machine race...the Sabmiqys (sp?) in the Antares
sector. Now they are planetbound, being rather space-phobic (for historical
reasons).

The Sabmiqys are currently interdicted red-zone by the IISS, because of the
high TL (17) and some contact problems. There was a write up about them, in
Challenge, I think.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                         |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/ - AOL IM: Iowa Akins |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/ - AOL IM: CMS AndyA  |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+    |
|       vi+ da+                                                        |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+      |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                             |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:30:00 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1998 #945

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Legate Legion wrote:
> Think of it this way, in the next war, ½ the navy may be made up of AI
> controled ships...  Could lower the loss of life & increase force
> projection...

IMTU there is a government/society that is heavily involved with
robotics/AI...they have done just this. Most fighters, SDBs, and small ships
(Destroyers, Escorts) are actually Drones. Only the larger ships, which need
a lot more active maintenance, have sophont crew - and these have much less
than an Imperial vessel.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                         |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/ - AOL IM: Iowa Akins |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/ - AOL IM: CMS AndyA  |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+    |
|       vi+ da+                                                        |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+      |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                             |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:33:05 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: "Rift-Jumper"

At 04:05 AM 10/14/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com> wrote
>
>> Brian Mays writes:
>
>> > Has anyone ever designed a ship that could carry smaller 
>> > (non-military) ships across the Great Rift?  The smaller, less 
>> >jump-capable ships are carried across by a larger ship that is 
>> > basically a giant container with jump drive 
>
>> Sure...you use a 'stage' theory like modern rockets.  Unfortunately, 
>> the scaling required is horrible -- you halve your available tonnage 
>> roughly every 4-5 parsecs, which means you need something like a 
>> million-ton base craft to get a scout across the rift. 
>> not exactly
>> practical unless you can find a star in the middle.
>
>So pick the right route and it is "easy" to get across the great rift.
>
>To cross the Great Rift from the main part of the Imperium to the
>Spinward Marches the easiest route will take you across the rimward edge
>of Corridor Sector using the following optimum route.
>
>You will preferably need a Jump 6 ship with fuel purification.
>
>Take the following route
>
>From Capitol of other start point take the shortest Jump 6 route to 
>
>Jafla/Corridor 1840	A 898114-E
>
>you need to make Jump 7 to get to the next planet
>
>Tristara/Corridor 1140	C 870740-5
>
>Options
>
>1) Use a ship with enough fuel for Jump 6 + an additional Jump 1 (or
>more).  Possbile with MT or TNE rules, but nearly impossible with other
>rules.
>
>2) Transport your ship in a really big transport with Jump 1 drives &
>enough fuel for 2 Jump 1's.  It will be able to transport another ship
>of about half its tonnage as cargo.
>
>3) Use jump tanks 
>
>4) Assume that the Imperium does this all the time & use the secret
>Imperial Naval calibration point set up to make this easy.  (It would be
>best if you had the Navys permisiion & knew where the Calibration point
>is or you'll be SOL.
>

Easier answers.

5)  Jump 3 with the drop tanks attached then jump 4.  The mass of the jump
tanks empty will be much less and mak this posible.  Or us external tanks
made to be disassembled and stored internally.  Use them later for the
second long jump.

6) Jump 2 with a fuel ship.  Refuel and continue alone.  The fuel ship jumps
back.  Use stored calapsable drop tanks for the second long jump.

7) Jump 2 with drop tanks.  Drop the tanks full.  Jump back to refuel.  Jump
to the drop tanks.  Refuel and jump carrying the drop tanks.  Later drop
them in the other long jump.

8) Fly a battle tender and lose 60% of your remaining mass each jump 6.

9) Use a jump tug and carry fuel pods.  Lose 60% of your remaining mass each
jump 6.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:51:45 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:46:11
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
At 11:58 AM 10/13/98 EDT, Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:
>She looks better than the HG design.... BTW; does anyone know what the
effect
>of "Heavy or Total compartmentalization" does for a ship? GT gives the
cost
>and weight penalties, but the Starship Combat rules don't seem to show any
>modifiers, etc. for them.
I have independently decided that they offer +50% and +100% hit points,
respectively, and they represent not only toughening up the bulkheads but
also redundant cabling and armor on critical systems.
*************************
if you want to play it that way its fine, but it will no longer be
compatible with vehicles....and every combat design will start using total
compartmentalization, even the fighters

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:43:08 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: [GT]Azhanti High Lightning

Peter H. Brenton wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I also thought there were a bunch o' meson bay weapons.  Perhaps that was
one of the later variations?

Those Meson bay weapons would do serious things to smaller escorts under Megatraveller, generally in the form of critical hits.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Recall that High Guard didn't allow you to have weapons in more than
one size. If you had a Meson Spinal, you couldn't have Meson Bays.

IIRC, the bay weapons have been fitted with PAWs and Missiles in
different upgrades of the AHL class - don't have my supplement with
me, though.

Peter again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm suprised those 50 and 100 ton meson bays weren't incorporated into more designs.  Instead I seem to recall a lot of (ptew!) fusion gun bays.
Useless.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Meson bays have a pretty large power requirement, and are pretty
easy to stop with even smaller meson screens. And remember,
if you have a Meson spinal mount HG didn't let you have Meson
bays. The ship profile only had one digit available for each kind of
weapon's  battery factor, you couldn't have any kind of weapon with
differing factors for different batteries.

IIRC, there are some power & price advantages to fusion bays over
10-turret dual fusion gun turrets - but I'll have to check my copy of HG.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:53:02 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: "Rift-Jumper"

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:17:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: "Rift-Jumper"
Brian Mays writes:
> Has anyone ever designed a ship that could carry smaller (non-military)
> ships across the Great Rift?  The smaller, less jump-capable ships are
> carried across by a larger ship that is basically a giant container with
a
> jump drive and fuel storage.
>
> Would such a thing even be feasible?
Sure...you use a 'stage' theory like modern rockets.  Unfortunately, the
scaling required is horrible -- you halve your available tonnage roughly
every
4-5 parsecs, which means you need something like a million-ton base craft
to
get a scout across the rift.  If you have drop tanks it's somewhat easier,
halving around every 8 parsecs.  Filling tanks with liquid methane and then
processing it after jump gives you another 50% or so.  Still not exactly
practical unless you can find a star in the middle.
*****************
or build some bases to get across....like the regency calibration points.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:01:39 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

Leonard Erickson writes:
>That's assuming that a single planet has the population required to
>"invent" TL25.
> 
>What I'm thinking of is the fact that inspirations of a given "level"
>seem to be proportional to size of the "intellectual population". Thus
>the larger the "community" of scientists/engineers/innovators who are
>able to exchange idea, the more likely you are to get an advance. 
> 
>But the farther you go, the larger the required community is *or* the
>more slowly the advances come. Thus there ought to be a TL at which the
>odds of a single planet being able to make to jump to the next level
>become too low for it to be a likely occurence. 
 
Well, isn't that one of the two options I mentioned to begin with?
"Around TL 10 you hit some sort of 'wall' that slows down technological
developement considerably". With your explanation a society will reach
a wall once its technological developement reach a bit further than we
have on Earth today (Earth has a population level of 9; individual planets
don't get much higher than that, and many of the planets in Milieu 0 had
population level 10. So the technological developement in Charted Space
- --  not just the Imperium, but all of Charted Space  --  of the last 1100
years is presumably representative of the "natural" rate of advance. Old
Darrian is still a freak, but it will be that anyway. 


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:04:17 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Sabmiqys (was re: Discovery of a Machine...)

Andy Atkins wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
IIRC, there has been 1 machine race...the Sabmiqys (sp?) in the Antares
sector. Now they are planetbound, being rather space-phobic (for historical
reasons).

The Sabmiqys are currently interdicted red-zone by the IISS, because of the
high TL (17) and some contact problems. There was a write up about them, in
Challenge, I think.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
IIRC, the "contact problems" involve the Sabmiqys' habit of dissecting
first contact crews. They also blew up curious scout ships with
meson guns when first discovered, right?

Walt

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:07:39 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: The Half-Die and T5

For what it's worth, so will I. That way I can finally stop maintaining all my
rules in Word format.

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 10/13/98 3:30:07 PM Central Daylight Time, ashock@gte.net
> writes:
>
> << I will be buying T5 when it
>  finally comes out. >>
>
> I appreciate the vote of support.
>
> Marc

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:36:59 +0200
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: More Cool Traveller stuff

Does anybody know if the deadline for ordering Sanders Gamelords stuff is over?
I lost his e-mail in a mutiple harddrive crasch (how likely is it that
three drives gets hardware errors on the same day in two of my machines,
one at work and one at home - synchronocity or Murphy?)

BTW Letters of Marque was excellent, everything aok except perhaps the
deckplans.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 07:48:46 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Piracy

DustyLV769@aol.com wrote:

> A small, professional force of pirates, executing well-planned paramilitary-
> style operations against very lucrative targets seems to me to be the only way
> piracy worked (much like modern day art or jewel thieves)

Well, the best way to get away with this is never let the victim know you're
there...taking out the SDB is _going_ to raise a ruckus, as _some_ crewmember
will get an alarm out. I'd think you won't get away with this more often than
once a _year_ or so. No problem, just wait 'till there's a lucrative enough
cargo passing though, whihc means you have to finance a good, _long_ term
source of intelligence, whihc almost certainly means someone on the Port
Authority of the worlds you are contemplating hitting.

But it's workable...just remember, no matter how professional or paramilitary
you are, you _still have to say "Arrrr!" a lot and have a stuffed parrot sewn
to the shoulder of your vacc suit, or you just can't call yourself pirates.

A far mor lucrative way of stealing cargoes, btw, is to do it the way Gotti
did...don't rob the ship, rob the warehouses, particularly the _customs_
warehouses. Load the goods on your ship and leave like any other ordinary
commercial flight. This again requires considerable inside information.
Customs warehouses are good in that they're already nicely sealed. If you can
get in without raising an alarm, someone's less likely to come in and surprise you.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:24:32 +0100
From: "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

Phil wrote:

> This is a sort of a philosophical post. Just some things that
> are (sort of, allowing for the fact that, in theory, its all a
> game) disturbing about Traveller's background and the way it
> has developed.

> Does anyone else on the list find that the political philosophy
> as expressed in Traveller is anti-democratic?


I might get flamed for this, but my response to  Phil's  question
is "so what?"  Surely a  'good'  society  is  one  in  which  its
citizens are able to explore their potential as human beings  (or
whatever) ... in whatever field of endevour that may be.

For player characters (at least) in the Third  Imperium  this  is
certainly true: the PCs can be traders  or  merchant  princes,  a
mercenary unit, a "Magnificent Seven" group righting wrongs, they
can leave the Third Imperium  and  carve  out  their  own  pocket
empire and run it according  to  the  values  and  ideals  _they_
believe in ... What can't they do?  For the vast majority of NPCs
you'd have to look at each world within the Third Imperium  on  a
case-by-case basis.

Democracy is a _tool_ to build good societies.  It is unimportant
_in itself_, but it is important for what it _can_ do.  There are
many examples of bad democracies, why is it so  hard  to  believe
there can be good non-democracies.

I suspect that, like many things in  life,  democracy  isn't  the
"best" but the "least worst".

I've heard it said that democracy guarantees that people get what
they deserve.  This is based on a false premis that the people in
a democracy are fairly homogeneous.  Who here believes  that  the
German Jews got what they deserved when the  majority  of  German
citizens voted in Adolf Hitler before WW2?  Not me.

Democracies seem to degenerate into 'mobocracies'  where  mildly-
corrupt leaders maintain their power by pandering to  the  lowest
common  denominators.  Laws  tend  to  become  counter-productive
quick-fix solutions that are petty and intollerant, and sometimes
contradict a society's founding principles.

To summarise:
- - Do I think Traveller has anti-decratic trends?
- - Yup

- - Do I find this disturbing?
- - No.  Refreshing.



Regards PLST (becoming more cynical every day)

"Rome wasn't burned in a day"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 07:55:02 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

You don't put it on the existing powerplant...you just install a X megawatt
auxillary PP and tie it into the ship's power grid. I'd expect that milspec
ship powerplants are in reality multiple independent units anyway, better
combat survivability that way.

Also, look at the GURPS system , QSDS and SSDS...all of them presuppose you're
building a 'powerplant' out of premade modules of a certain size...you need
425 Megawatts? you install 2 200, a 20 and a 5 MW reactors.The key is, so long
as they're all controllable as a unit (which they are made to be) it doesn't
matter how many of them there are (to a commonsense limit...someone made a 100
MW ship out of 100 1MW PP's once back in the thrashing-out days of QSDS) and
that makes for much more flexible design, using standardized components.

Anthony Jackson wrote:
> 
> Fred and Evelyn Wolke writes:
> 
> > As for swapping out weapons, on paper at least it makes it easier, because
> > you can swap out the weapon and the power it needs at the same time.
> 
> However, in the shipyard it makes it harder, because most likely a pre-existing
> power plant isn't _designed_ to suddenly have an X megawatt chunk added to it,
> which means that if you put in a new weapon system you put in a new engine...

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 08:09:01 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves

Arrrrgggghhh! we just FINISHED the annual deckplan facing war!!! NOT AGAIN!!!

Ahem. Sorry 'bout that!

Actually, the engines are in the rear because like Khan only thinking in 2
dimensions, we terrans only think in terms of moving through a resistive
environment such as water or air in a gravity field. With such designs the
thrust agencies are best put in the front or rear of a long skinny hull form
with deck facings perpendicular to the direction of thrust. They're almost
_always_ at the very front or rear because a) that frees up more contiguous
volume inside the hull for everything else, and b) there's much less loss of
power due to a longer transmission train.

The design carries over to Traveller ships because a) humans are creatures of
habit and b) many of these vessels _are_ designed to operate in air and water
(in the presence of gravity fields) themselves. Finally, most illustrations od
Traveller starships also show some sort of 'stuff' coming out the back...canon
says there's a blue glow to thruster plates when they're working. This lends
credence to the 'They're tossing out neutrinos' crown of how 'reactionless'
thrusters work, and you don't want to have bathe half of your ship and cargo
in an insanely high flux of neutrinos at any given time.

N. Eric Phillips wrote:
> 
> According to G:T, when performing space movement you can be faced in any
> direction and be moving in a different direction. Such as- with the "nose"
> of the ship in the opposite direction of acceleration.
> 
> I have been looking at the deckplans for several Traveller ships. If
> direction makes no difference then why do the ships have those big engines
> to the rear?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:26:07 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Physics - Help!

>> Can anyone tell me what phonons and ronons are (*not*
>> photons and ronin..I know what those are)?

>I'd guess, that 'ronons' stem from rotational motion as 'phonons' come
>from the vibrational. But I do not know.

Ronons are phonons who's liege-lord has been killed, and are forced to
wander as itinerant ocillations through space/time making a living as
mercenaries in subatomic armies. They are most often found amidst legions
of meson particles as auxiliaries.

<diving for cover>

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:41:26 -0700
From: Kenneth Bearden <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Does anybody like this idea?

Eris Reddoch wrote:

> >What wrong with it?
>
> Don't remember.  Yeah I know it's only a couple of days, but I
> don't.  ;-) All I can say is when I read it, it didn't grab me.  I
> liked the SW-ish idea better.

THAT was the SW-ish idea!  Instead of throwing 2D+7 (for a skill 2, Dex-7
character), we take the stat off the target number and just throw the dice.

It's a little easier to play that way.  We're subtracting stat from the
target number rather than adding stat to the throw.

It's the same idea, though.  You must not have read it completely.


> I know you are, and so you should use d6's.  I'm not now, nor have I
> ever, been totally committed to a d6 only solution.  ;-> So, I
> may...or may not...use d6's in my task system.

Which, of course, is your choice.  I can respect that.

> As for as Marc and that damn half die is concerned,

I like how you said that.

> forget about it.

Yep, I'm afraid you're right there.

> He's committed to it and to the *finished* draft of the task system
> that he's got.  It's not going to do any good to argue with him
> about it.

Again, agreed.

> BTW, the T5 draft I've seen for combat resolution *really* turned me
> off.  He's got a screwy +d-d+xd6 thing going and a number of
> different kinds of damage done by different classes of weapon all
> with different effects on Attributes.  I'm afraid it's going to be
> table driven, and as I said it turned me off.  I'm not going to
> argue with him about that either.

Yes, I've seen a few things about T5 that have really turned me off.  As a
result, I haven't played Traveller in over a year.  We've started this SW
campaign (as you know), and I don't think we're going back...

...not unless T5 can compare with the quality in products and game
mechanics that WEG puts out.  My gaming buck is just better spent there,
and when I buy a SW supplement, I feel good about it, as opposed to being
disappointed, like I have been with too many Traveller items.

I love the Traveller universe, but it seems the rest of the game--the
mechanics and such, which are very important to me--does not compare to
other game company's output.


> I don't think I'm going to like T5, but whether I do or not, I'll
> mine it for ideas.

Yes, see the difference between you and me is that I'll go with another
game--buy their products instead of suffering through "mining" this and
"adapting" that.

It's just too much work.  I don't have time for it anymore.


>  So, Ken, how's the movie going?

Exceptionally well.  I've just started the third draft, which I should have
completed by the end of December.  We go into full gear raising funds in
January.  Shortly after that, we'll go into preproduction, gathering a
crew, assembling actors, etc.  Then we'll shoot.  This will take us about 3
weeks.  Next is post, and we'll be done.

We're looking to get into Sundance.  This thing has really grown in the
year that I've been working on it.  I believe it's going to pay off.

I started off with the idea that we'd do this guerilla style, with me
holding the camera and such.  But, it's grown into a full-bore production.
I'll be hiring a DOP (director or photography), a sound man, and other crew
members.  We're still not talking a multi-million dollar epic, but my
budget has grown from five digits to six.

One it started rolling, and people could see that I was really doing it,
support started to flood in.  With what I've got lined up, I don't think
raising money is going to be that hard, or take that much time--which is
unusual for a low budget independent flick.

I'll keep you guys posted.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:48:06 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Weber & history

At 02:44 AM 10/14/98 -0800, you wrote:

>> It went something like this...A historian of old Earth meets with
>> Steadholder Harrington.  He takes care to examine her hands, and is visibly
>> relieved not to find her wearing one sequined glove...
>
>Frankly, I'd like to shoot *all* the cover artists... Not only does
>Honor not look like her descriptions, but the ships don't either. 

Yeah, but the model the artist used is rather attractive none the less.  At
Gen Con in 1984, I met the model they used for the female cleric in the
DragonLance series.  The artwork never did the lady justice.


Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #946
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 14 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 947



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Piracy
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Re: Physics - Help!
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: Archival materials
Re: Reactionless Thrusters
Re: Reactionless Thrusters
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: Archival materials
Re: Drop Tanks
Re: Discovery of a machine race
Re: Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:46:04 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Charles Prevatte writes:

>Not so much pirates as comerse raiders.  A diversion on a distant border
>(Vargr) to pull ships away from say... the Zhodani border?

The average subsector has one Imperial fleet with an average of 62.5 capital
ships (cruisers and battleships) and an unspecified number of auxiliary
vessels[*], a subsector fleet of roughly comparable size (exact size will
depend on the actual size and TL of the subsector population), and an
unspecified number of local defense forces. What sort of commerce raiding do
you suppose will nessecitate drawing forces from the neighboring interior
subsectors? What sort will nessecitate drawing forces from other borders?

[*] And it seems likely to me that frontier fleets will be above average in
    size. 

>>If you go to a system with no defenses you can catch anything that turns
>>up with empty tanks, yes. How many ships will arrive in a couple of weeks
>>such a world? How much is a random cargo worth? Can you take the ship with
>>you and how much is the ship worth to a 'ship fence'? The two lines above
>>contains a huge number of assumptions, very few of which are agreed upon by
>>everybody in the discussion.
>
>Why would you need a fence?  Take it back across the border and sell it
>openly.  It is a different 'nation' without extradition.

The Imperium has a history of dealing harshly with foreign governments caught
supporting pirates (a canonical example is Tarkine in District 268). The
Zhodani are big enough to provide sanctuary; the Sword Worlds may be (but I
doubt it); no one else is.

>>How many 4000 T ships visit worlds with no system defense boats at all? Very
>>few, IMO. How many of them would be carrying a high-value load? Even fewer.
>
>In a years time a High pop. planet WILL get a few high $ cargos.  How many
>truck loads of Pentium II are shiped in the US today?

A High Population world will have large system defense forces.

>>>Part of being a sucessfull pirate is intel on the goods. Spies in ships
>>>departments etc.  Vargr are known for this.
>>
>>OK. Let's say you have a spy in Akerut's shipping department on Aramanx and
>>are waiting for a good tip. Where are your ship in the meantime? What does
>>it do? You then get the tip that Akerut is gount to send a particularily
>>valuable shipment to Towers in six days. How do you capture that particular
>>ship?
>
>
>Not 6 days, 6 months.

So now you add running expenses for your pirate organisation for six months.

>If a company has an order for say 2 mason guns to be delivered on x day to
>y planet then they will have a ship scheduled way in advance that could
>carry that load.  Most routine cargo would travel through scheduled shipping
>routes or chartered ships.  A company with production contracts will have a
>contracted shipping firm to make their deliveries on time.

You can have your perfect information and you can have it six months in
advance. That's not what I was talking about. How do you intercept the
specific ship? If it is scheduled to deliver before Day 187 then it will
have to aim for arriving on day 186 in order to account for possible jump
delay. That means you have to be there on day 185 (just in case your target
jumps early). That means you have to aim for Day 184 and risks arriving on
Day 183. Say you do arrive on Day 184 (the most likely outcome) and the
ship arrives on Day 186 (again the most likely outcome). What did you do
in those 48 hours and what did the local system defenses think of that?

Next, do you play with jumps being controllable to arriving at a specific
point at the 100 diameter limit or do you believe ships arrive at a random
point on the 100-diameter shell? In either case how do you arrange to be
at the same spot as the arriving ship but without some pesky SDB being
there too?

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:58:45 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

In a message dated 10/12/98 6:21:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ajackson@iii.com
writes:

Charles Prevatte also wrote:

>>>In a years time a High pop. planet WILL get a few high $ cargos.  How many
>>>truck loads of Pentium II are shiped in the US today?
>>
>>
>>The point, however, is that hi pop worlds will be able to buy a good SDB
>>defense, since hi pop worlds tend to have lots of credits to throw around.
>>And a good SDB defense kills piracy dead, dead, dead -- dead as freakin'
>>stone. ;-)
>
>You jump them BEFORE they get to the high pop. world.  The jump route is
>what you get from your industrial spy.

That might work. If the company dosen't have the smarts to let the captain
chose his own route, of course. And if the captain is unable to avoid
systems with no defense forces, which would be rare also.

>And just how many SDBs does it take to take on two Vargr pirate cruisers
>(plus support ships) each armed with meson gun spinal mounts?

How much does it cost to build two cruisers? A single load of computer
chips will not make much of a dent in that figure.

>AKA the traveller adventure?

The Kforuzeng was going to pay MCr500 for those two meson guns. And they
failed to get them, btw.

>Piracy probably can pay with good information and good fences. Perhaps not
>as a full time job, except maybe for comerce raiders, but as a once in a
>while bonus it could be done.  It could improve your bottom line by quite
>a bit.

The hardware and operational parameters for a legitimate merchant and a
pirate is miles apart. A pirate might be able to masquerade as a merchant
(depends on the transponder issue, of course ;-), but IMO there's no way
he can make a living as one.


Walter Smith writes:

>John MacPherson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>	But a High pop world will have more than enough SDBs to make 
>piracy an extremely hazardous if not impossible proposition.  Worlds with 
>enough trade to be worth pirating are worth defending.  Worlds not worth 
>defending have little trade worth pirating.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>You will have temporary disparities between SDB levels and amount of
>trade. 

It could happen, yes, but how often? Often enough to allow piracy as a
career?

>Of course, the moment the brand new SDB's show up, the pirates will make
>themselves scarce. It won't be long before the taxpayers start wondering
>why a MCr200+ each fleet is doing search & rescue. "Pirates? There aren't
>any pirates around here!" - and thus the cycle will begin again, the SDB
>flotilla suffering cutbacks until it can't do it's real job of piracy
>suppression anymore.

The SDB is propably bought with a bank loan. That means that the cost of
operating it is less than the bank payments and the savings from putting
it in ordinary a lot less. Especially if it means buying a less capable
ship to perform customs inspection and search&rescue. Also (but this is
just IMTU) the Imperium requires its individual worlds to assume some of
the burden of defense.

>A couple nice 400tn Patrol Cruisers (like the one from CT, or the
>famous Gazelle-class CE) could solve this problem for a rack of
>worlds that can't each effectively field an SDB force.

I include such ships in what I mean when I say system defenses.

>Circulate the patrol through the group of worlds on anti-piracy duty, their
>possible presence may be enough to discourage pirate activity. 

Well, that's what I believe some the subsector fleet's auxiliary vessels
do for a living. 

>I suppose you could buy a couple of tenders and ship SDB's to these
>frontier worlds if you wanted to instead.

For covering worlds unable to support ships of their own, jump-capable ships
are propably a better bet than boats.


Fred and/or Evelyn Wolke writes: 

>>The pirates-are-not-economically-viable crowd, of which I am a member,
>>believe that pure piracy is not, well, you guessed it, economically
>>viable. Now, you can come up with lots of examples from the Real World of
>>activities that are not economically viable and are still attempted by a
>>lot of people (prospecting for gold in the Old West is a good example).
>>But I can't come up with a single such activity that requires a multi-
>>million dollar investment.
>
>It's not a multimillion dollar investment if you kill your captain and run
>off, or spend a few thousand on tickets and take over the ship.

No, and the next pirate I use in my campaign is going to be a mutiny ship.
But how often does that happen? And why should they turn to piracy? Don't 
tell me, it's a rethorical question; we went over that the last time piracy
was debated: You can't sell illegally acquired ships. But if you assume
that, then you also assume that the pirate can't sell captured ships. And
if they can't sell captured ships, they have to contend themselves with
random cargoes. And random cargoes does not appear to be valuable enough
to support a pirate ship.

>>But if we are right, then someone must be footing the bill and they must
>>be after something other than money as a return. That's where we get to
>>the subsidized raiders. But whoever is subsidizing them must be getting
>>something in return that is worth millions of credits. It's not enough to
>>say: "Well, pirates are possible if someone subsidized them. You must also
>>come up with a plausible reason for them to plunk down the money. 
>
>Privateering is the usual answer... the supporters are trying to do damage
>to the enemy infrastructure.

Privateers aren't state supported. They have to meet the bottom line. And
besides, they only work in wartime.


>I don't think that most pirates engage in piracy all of the time.  I'd say
>the most likely eventuality is the way the Vikings used to do it... when
>they were in hostile territory, they were merchants... buying and selling
>like everyone else.  When they thought they could get away with it, they'd
>sail in, smash and grab, and take the loot home.  If they were ruthless
>enough, they needn't give away their identities, at least not for some time.

The Vikings didn't need to present their ship's papers to the port captain
every time they arrived at a new port. We've been through all these facile
explanations before and they all suffer from the same thing: They each
contain some unspoken assumptions that dosen't hold up upon examination.
The last time (and the time before) this discussion came up, I asked a
pirate proponent to present me with a detailed description of a successful
pirate foray, complete with the underlying economics and odds of finding
and capturing suitable prey. So far no one has done so.

DustyLV769@aol.com writes:

>I think a good cost-effective way of dealing w/ the SDB force is to take them
>out FIRST.

If you can, yes. It's not as easy as you claim. Nor is it the kind of piracy
portrayed in CT sources.

>SDB's will rarely, if ever, operate in squadron size to take out one
>pirate... 

Why not? They'd use what they have.

>...and no star system, no matter how rich it is, will spend more money for
>defense than it feels it has too. 

And how much is that? IMO the Imperium requires its planets to spend a
certain percentage of its production on its military.

>So at worst, you may have 2 SDBs responding to a typical distress call

For a typical 400 T corsair that's one too many.

>Granted that this requires a fair amount of starting capital... but it should
>be a reasonably self-sustaining affair once it gets going.

Should? What do you mean by that? Show me the figures. 

>However, this would not be a once a week type of thing; it would require
>intelligence on the target, the system, the system defenses, and a nearby 
>staging base (maybe in-system, around a GG moon?) One hit a month or so,
>if the haul is big enough (according to CT Trade Tables, 200 tons of
>Radioactives sell for 1MCr BASE...never mind the brokers skill at selling
>it!)  That will pay for a fair amount of upkeep and supplies...BCr 2.4 per
>year, at the above assumptions. This will take a lot of the small-fry out
>of the game, but that seems realistic to me.

But the pirates portrayed in the CT sources are the small-fry kind. They
lurk around in backwater systems and try to capture Free Traders.


From: DustyLV769@aol.com

"...it doesn't necessarily take the total destruction of all system defenses
>to make it easier to cut out a juicy target... these could also take the
>shape of harrasing attacks; do it 2 or 3 times and then the defenses will
>concentrate together...just don't be where they are then!

Pirates have to be where their prey is, which happens to be where the
system defenses are too. 

>Besides, replacing system defenses, for a lot of systems, will
>take time and money...which may not always be available.

Every time a pirate has a brush with a military vessel, he risks getting hit
and take damage that will cost megacredits to repair. In a war of attrition
a planetary population is apt to have deeper pocket than a pirate.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:07:28 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

Peter L.S. Trevor posted:
>
>I might get flamed for this, but my response to  Phil's  question
>is "so what?"  Surely a  'good'  society  is  one  in  which  its
>citizens are able to explore their potential as human beings  (or
>whatever) ... in whatever field of endevour that may be.
<snip>
>Democracy is a _tool_ to build good societies.  It is unimportant
>_in itself_, but it is important for what it _can_ do.  There are
>many examples of bad democracies, why is it so  hard  to  believe
>there can be good non-democracies.
>
>I suspect that, like many things in  life,  democracy  isn't  the
>"best" but the "least worst".

Bravo, Peter!  BRAVO!

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:12:25 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: Re: Physics - Help!

Joseph R. Dietrich punned:
>
>>> Can anyone tell me what phonons and ronons are (*not*
>>> photons and ronin..I know what those are)?
>
>>I'd guess, that 'ronons' stem from rotational motion as 'phonons' come
>>from the vibrational. But I do not know.
>
>Ronons are phonons who's liege-lord has been killed, and are forced to
>wander as itinerant ocillations through space/time making a living as
>mercenaries in subatomic armies. They are most often found amidst legions
>of meson particles as auxiliaries.
>
><diving for cover>


ARRRGH!! (launches c+ asteroid)

:)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:34:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

Bruce Johnson writes:
> You don't put it on the existing powerplant...you just install a X megawatt
> auxillary PP and tie it into the ship's power grid. I'd expect that milspec
> ship powerplants are in reality multiple independent units anyway, better
> combat survivability that way.
Actually, a GURPS fusion power plant has a startup mass of 1 ton (+1 ton per 10
megawatts) so it makes a significant difference in weight and cost to have a
separate power plant rather than tieing it in to the existing power plant.

If this weren't true, I'd agree that you could just install an aux power plant.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:42:59 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Archival materials

Leonard Erickson wrote:
> 

> The problem is that gold is too flimsy. You can't use gold foil, you
> have to use plates. Which makes things bulkier.
>

Yeah, but the thieves who break into your archives, steal the plates and
melt them down for bullion don't seem to mind the bulk...

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:45:45 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

>>>>
and hence once they're moving fast enough t-plate ships will
always break conservation of energy no matter how high you set the
power
requirement
>>>>
Of course Traveller (all versions) have always been billed as science
FICTION.  I just emphasise the fiction element as far as Jump and
t-plates go.  I realize there are no current physics explanations for
how they work, let alone the amount of power they use, so I don't
worry quite so much about it and just have fun with the universe as
described.  I like gear-heading, and have had some fun making 
spacecraft that are "realistic," but I am willing to take the t-plates
as cannon when running in the CT/MT/T4 milieu.
- - Joseph

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:41:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Reactionless Thrusters

Leonard Erickson writes:
> > Heh.  If you do this (a) performance should drop rapidly with distance
> > (like  contragravity),
> 
> Why? It doesn't *have* to be inverse square based. It could be the
> equivalent of a well collimated beam.

Well..true I guess.
> 
> > (b) any changes in acceleration should be subject to a delay
> > equal to no less than the time required for light to travel from you to
> > your anchor mass and back again,
> 
> Nope! If you check, you will find that gravity and electrostatic forces
> do *not* act that way. Really! Virtual particles do things real
> particles can't.

Actually, they do.  _Changes_ in fields propagate at lightspeed -- it appears
instant because the field is already present.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:47:22 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

SD Mooney wrote:

>>I always hated reading more than about a half dozen pages of text
>>electronically. If it's longer, I prefer paper.
>
>And you can take paper books to the toilet...

Laptops?

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:11:45 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Re: Archival materials

>>>>
Could you name these cultures?........You can't use gold foil....
>>>>
I'll see if I can find the references.
If you can't use gold foil, I know a lot of executives are going to
be upset!  <g>
- - Joseph

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:21:08 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Drop Tanks

Ian or Katts wrote:
> 

> This is true, however if the drop tank services are new, they may not know
> about the increases in misjump chances.
> 

Reread those TNS articles...they clearly state that the drop tank
service is new to the Spinward Marches, not new. Remember the Marches
are the low tech backwater of the Imperium...

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:31:37 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Discovery of a machine race

>IIRC, there has been 1 machine race...the Sabmiqys (sp?) in the Antares
>sector. Now they are planetbound, being rather space-phobic (for historical
>reasons).
>
>The Sabmiqys are currently interdicted red-zone by the IISS, because of the
>high TL (17) and some contact problems. There was a write up about them, in
>Challenge, I think.


Oh, reeaally... very interesting.

Does anyone else have any information on these Sabmiqys? Hex location in
Antares, Challenge issue #, or anything else?

For those of you familiar with GURPS, how do you think the 3I would react
to a GURPS Reign of Steel-type world. I'm thinking red zone and orbital
saturation bombing ...

This is actually a setting I was thinking about running. A TNE-style Long
Night setting after the 3I's Hard Times collapse (no Virus, as written).
However, there is this *one* world where AIs take over (a la GURPS Reign of
Steel). Perhaps the PCs are misjumped explorers for an emerging pocket
empire. Or if I'm feeling cruel, perhaps they are natives of the world...

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:06:51 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 05:46 PM 10/14/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte writes:
>
>>Not so much pirates as comerse raiders.  A diversion on a distant border
>>(Vargr) to pull ships away from say... the Zhodani border?
>
>The average subsector has one Imperial fleet with an average of 62.5 capital
>ships (cruisers and battleships) and an unspecified number of auxiliary
>vessels[*], a subsector fleet of roughly comparable size (exact size will
>depend on the actual size and TL of the subsector population), and an
>unspecified number of local defense forces. What sort of commerce raiding do
>you suppose will nessecitate drawing forces from the neighboring interior
>subsectors? What sort will nessecitate drawing forces from other borders?
>
>[*] And it seems likely to me that frontier fleets will be above average in
>    size. 
>

62.5?  Where did you get that number?  And were is the economy to pay for
the support for that level of militerisation?  Good lord!  That's a capital
ship and change per habital system on the average!  Do you mean secter?
That would be a little more reasonable.  The ratio of capital to non capital
ships should be around 4 to one or more.  That's 248 jump capable destroyers
or whatever.  Or ruffly 1000 capital ships and 4000 destroyers in the
Spinward marches sector alone!  It also does not sound reasonable based on
the TNS reports of the frontier wars.  No where near that number of ships
were discussed.  Where and when are these figures derived from?

>>>If you go to a system with no defenses you can catch anything that turns
>>>up with empty tanks, yes. How many ships will arrive in a couple of weeks
>>>such a world? How much is a random cargo worth? Can you take the ship with
>>>you and how much is the ship worth to a 'ship fence'? The two lines above
>>>contains a huge number of assumptions, very few of which are agreed upon by
>>>everybody in the discussion.
>>
>>Why would you need a fence?  Take it back across the border and sell it
>>openly.  It is a different 'nation' without extradition.
>
>The Imperium has a history of dealing harshly with foreign governments caught
>supporting pirates (a canonical example is Tarkine in District 268). The
>Zhodani are big enough to provide sanctuary; the Sword Worlds may be (but I
>doubt it); no one else is.
>

Hivers?  Solomani?  Varga?  Centars?  and who said 'support'?  All they have
to do is defend their borders against Empirial aggression.  (Grin)

>>>How many 4000 T ships visit worlds with no system defense boats at all? Very
>>>few, IMO. How many of them would be carrying a high-value load? Even fewer.
>>
>>In a years time a High pop. planet WILL get a few high $ cargos.  How many
>>truck loads of Pentium II are shiped in the US today?
>
>A High Population world will have large system defense forces.
>

OH?  So every High Pop. world has the same level of militerizm?  There are
no doves?  There are no high Pop. pour worlds?  There are no High Pop.
worlds with budget problems?

>>>>Part of being a sucessfull pirate is intel on the goods. Spies in ships
>>>>departments etc.  Vargr are known for this.
>>>
>>>OK. Let's say you have a spy in Akerut's shipping department on Aramanx and
>>>are waiting for a good tip. Where are your ship in the meantime? What does
>>>it do? You then get the tip that Akerut is gount to send a particularily
>>>valuable shipment to Towers in six days. How do you capture that particular
>>>ship?
>>
>>
>>Not 6 days, 6 months.
>
>So now you add running expenses for your pirate organisation for six months.
>

You have many informants and move form job to job as opertunity knocks.

>>If a company has an order for say 2 mason guns to be delivered on x day to
>>y planet then they will have a ship scheduled way in advance that could
>>carry that load.  Most routine cargo would travel through scheduled shipping
>>routes or chartered ships.  A company with production contracts will have a
>>contracted shipping firm to make their deliveries on time.
>
>You can have your perfect information and you can have it six months in
>advance. That's not what I was talking about. How do you intercept the
>specific ship? If it is scheduled to deliver before Day 187 then it will
>have to aim for arriving on day 186 in order to account for possible jump
>delay. That means you have to be there on day 185 (just in case your target
>jumps early). That means you have to aim for Day 184 and risks arriving on
>Day 183. Say you do arrive on Day 184 (the most likely outcome) and the
>ship arrives on Day 186 (again the most likely outcome). What did you do
>in those 48 hours and what did the local system defenses think of that?
>
>Next, do you play with jumps being controllable to arriving at a specific
>point at the 100 diameter limit or do you believe ships arrive at a random
>point on the 100-diameter shell? In either case how do you arrange to be
>at the same spot as the arriving ship but without some pesky SDB being
>there too?
>

If you have the flight plan you know where to wait for them.  As for the
SDBs, you jump in behind some terrain feature like the star and move to your
attack position.  With comerse raiding chewing up the local defences is a
plus.  If you want to keep them near to home launch a spread of missiles at
the population centers of the planet.  They will be far to busy saying their
employers you worry about you.

>>AKA the traveller adventure?
>
>The Kforuzeng was going to pay MCr500 for those two meson guns. And they
>failed to get them, btw.
>

If the PC stop them tha is...

>>Piracy probably can pay with good information and good fences. Perhaps not
>>as a full time job, except maybe for comerce raiders, but as a once in a
>>while bonus it could be done.  It could improve your bottom line by quite
>>a bit.
>
>The hardware and operational parameters for a legitimate merchant and a
>pirate is miles apart. A pirate might be able to masquerade as a merchant
>(depends on the transponder issue, of course ;-), but IMO there's no way
>he can make a living as one.
>

How is that?  They both require large amounts of cargo space.  As for paying
remember that the cargo in a ship must be valuable enough to be able to
absorb the cost of shiping which is 2000cr per ton per parsec.  That cargo
must be worth some money to be able to absorb that kind of overhead.


>It could happen, yes, but how often? Often enough to allow piracy as a
>career?
>

Again, not all planet will arm themselves alike.

>>Of course, the moment the brand new SDB's show up, the pirates will make
>>themselves scarce. It won't be long before the taxpayers start wondering
>>why a MCr200+ each fleet is doing search & rescue. "Pirates? There aren't
>>any pirates around here!" - and thus the cycle will begin again, the SDB
>>flotilla suffering cutbacks until it can't do it's real job of piracy
>>suppression anymore.
>
>The SDB is propably bought with a bank loan. That means that the cost of
>operating it is less than the bank payments and the savings from putting
>it in ordinary a lot less. Especially if it means buying a less capable
>ship to perform customs inspection and search&rescue. Also (but this is
>just IMTU) the Imperium requires its individual worlds to assume some of
>the burden of defense.
>

The cost is pure cost as a SDB produces no income.  How could a SDB produce
income?  Military ships are pure expence>  You only return is a measure of
security.  As for a 'less capable ship', a large armored cargo ship that is
heavily armed would be a better deal for any system with more than one
habital planet or with asteroid mines.  The patrol craft could earn it's
keep as a bulk in-system cargo transport while patroling.

>For covering worlds unable to support ships of their own, jump-capable ships
>are propably a better bet than boats.

And their movement provide holes that pirates could exploit.

>No, and the next pirate I use in my campaign is going to be a mutiny ship.
>But how often does that happen? And why should they turn to piracy? Don't 
>tell me, it's a rethorical question; we went over that the last time piracy
>was debated: You can't sell illegally acquired ships. But if you assume
>that, then you also assume that the pirate can't sell captured ships. And
>if they can't sell captured ships, they have to contend themselves with
>random cargoes. And random cargoes does not appear to be valuable enough
>to support a pirate ship.
>

Cargos have to be worth a curtain treshold amout to be worth transporting.

>>>But if we are right, then someone must be footing the bill and they must
>>>be after something other than money as a return. That's where we get to
>>>the subsidized raiders. But whoever is subsidizing them must be getting
>>>something in return that is worth millions of credits. It's not enough to
>>>say: "Well, pirates are possible if someone subsidized them. You must also
>>>come up with a plausible reason for them to plunk down the money. 
>>
>>Privateering is the usual answer... the supporters are trying to do damage
>>to the enemy infrastructure.
>
>Privateers aren't state supported. They have to meet the bottom line. And
>besides, they only work in wartime.
>

What about a subsidized pirate?

>But the pirates portrayed in the CT sources are the small-fry kind. They
>lurk around in backwater systems and try to capture Free Traders.
>

Not according to the traveller adventure.

>Pirates have to be where their prey is, which happens to be where the
>system defenses are too. 
>

Again, not all systems will pay the price for SDBs.  

>>Besides, replacing system defenses, for a lot of systems, will
>>take time and money...which may not always be available.
>
>Every time a pirate has a brush with a military vessel, he risks getting hit
>and take damage that will cost megacredits to repair. In a war of attrition
>a planetary population is apt to have deeper pocket than a pirate.
>
>

That depends graetly on the planet and the pirates.  If they are war time
comerse raider that may not be true and the SDBs will have to stay close to
the planet to defend against misile attacks on planetary targets.

Again my senerio was a war time one.

Charles L.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #947
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 14 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 948



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Piracy
Re: Star Wars Democracy
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy
Margesi/Rhylanor
Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #944
Re: Piracy
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Margesi/Rhylanor
G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves
Canon and beyond Known Space
RE: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Discovery of a machine race
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #945
Re: Margesi/Rhylanor
Re: Canon and beyond Known Space
Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #937
Re: "Rift-Jumper"
Re: Limits to tech advancement
Re: Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:15:52 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>A far mor lucrative way of stealing cargoes, btw, is to do it the way Gotti
>did...don't rob the ship, rob the warehouses, particularly the _customs_
>warehouses.

Yes, or as has been mentioned before, rob the trucks on the way to the
starport. At least you don't put your own ship at risk of destruction in
the theft attempt (although getting the hijacked cargo to your own ship is
another fine thing).

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:30:12 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy

...
>That's the *theory* ... but it *actually* does a whole hell of a lot more ...
>all, in reality, to keep itself in control and with absolute (if not always
>obviously used) power.

  I'll bite - doesn't the Emperor have to work through a bureaucracy and/
or several levels of feudatories, any or all of whom (to put it mildly)
just might have their own agendas?

  OTOH, perhaps if each Emperor started his reign by distributing clones
of himself in vital offices throughout the Imperium :>

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:30:17 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
>Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement
...
>What I'm thinking of is the fact that inspirations of a given "level"
>seem to be proportional to size of the "intellectual population". Thus
>the larger the "community" of scientists/engineers/innovators who are
>able to exchange idea, the more likely you are to get an advance. 

  Are you suggesting then, based on the recent analysis proving that
democratic forms of government were steadily increasing in number
throughout the era of the Third Imperium, that the concomitant rise
in the number of lawyers is what eventually stifled TL increases?

        :)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:30:21 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>Thats not exactly what I meant...it doesn't necessarily take the total
>destruction of all system defenses to make it easier to cut out a juicy
>target...these could also take the shape of harrasing attacks; do it 2 or 3
>times and then the defenses will concentrate together...just don't be where
>they are then!  Besides, replacing system defenses, for a lot of systems, will
>take time and money...which may not always be available.

  Keep in mind that a single 400 Dt SDB of a given TL will typically make
an uneconomical mess of a 1000 Dt para-military starship of the same TL,
at least under HG. FWIW, the SDB will have the higher speed and Agility,
so disengaging will not likely be the pirates' option, except perhaps by
Jump (and they'll need a big power surplus to enjoy trying that).

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:25:46 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/14/98 8:51:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time, rancke@diku.dk
writes:

<< A High Population world will have large system defense forces. >>

Why?

If there is not a war being fought in the vicinity, do you really think that
they would spend more money on something as parasitic as a "standing army"
than they feel they have to?  If they are getting a large number of cargos
transiting thier space, it seems possible that the "bean counters" mindset
will take over...it's cheaper to lose a few cargos here and there than spend
ungodly amounts of money to drive it off.  Remember, no pirates (or raiders,
or privateers; choose your own term for it) means that you have a high-cost
force doing absolutely nothing but being.  I can't see govt doing this
willingly (the old Stealth Bomber debate...lets get rid of them cuz the target
country no longer is a threat)

And on the subject of money...

It seems to me that all the financial arguements are debated based on the TCS
and IS  figures.  Now, I personally believe that TCS was perhaps the best CT
adventure put out;  but the figures are at best suspect to me.  Sure, a world
w/ 10 billion people will have 10 times the money that a world w/ 1
billion...but this reminds me of the last pirate debate:  using these
assumptions,  the United States should have a cop on every corner.  How
realistic is this?

IMTU, I take a figure of MCr100 per year for a MILITARY budget...this is
divided between the Imperial Navy (50%), the subsector/reserve Navy (30%) and
local defense (20%)  50Cr per person/year seems to give more realism for me
and mine.

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:33:34 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Margesi/Rhylanor

I play in 1107, using a hodge-podge of rules (mostly MT and T5). My players are
contemplating a jump to Margesi/Rhylanor in order to get some needed repairs
done and to hire some engineers.

Other than the UWP, I have no info on that world. Galactic 2.4 has no file
attached to it. Before I detail that system, I was wondering if anyone out there
had already done so and would be willing to share that information with me.

Here's what I've told the players about it:

Margesi/Rhylanor/Spinward Marches
Starport: A
Diameter: 5000 miles
Atmosphere: Standard density, tainted
Population: 900
Law Level: 7
Tech Level: 12
Bases: Navy, Scout
Gas Giants: None

Many thanks
Erwin

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:45:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves

 
> From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
>
> Arrrrgggghhh! we just FINISHED the annual deckplan facing war!!! NOT 
AGAIN!!! > 
> Ahem. Sorry 'bout that!
> 
> Actually, the engines are in the rear because like Khan only thinking in 2
> dimensions, we terrans only think in terms of moving through a resistive
> environment such as water or air in a gravity field.

	I have a better answer.  The engines are in the rear because the 
rear is defined as the end with the engines in it :-)

- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:39:57 +0200
From: Guillem Plasencia <guillemp@ciberia.es>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #944

> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:42:55 EDT
> From: CardSharks@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Rolnam sector (was Malorn) and where it is.
>
> In a message dated 10/11/98 10:49:26 AM Central Daylight Time,
> guillemp@ciberia.es writes:
>
> << One sector coreward Kring Noor sector, or five sectors trailing and two
>  sectors coreward of Amdukan sector, the corewardest and trailingest
>  sector of imperium charted space (as in TNE rulebook).
>   >>
>
> I carry this sector in my records at Koog (probably a K'kree name). I'll add
> Rolnam to my records as an Anglic name.
>
> Marc
>
> ------------------------------

What are your records from? I've only Galacticv2.4 program, and i don't know where are
the names that appear there taken from, but i expect that it isn't complete.

Actually, Rolnam is a name i've put to that sector, i didn't know it was already named.
Do you know anything else about it? Is it really inhabited by K'kree?

Thank you.

Guillem Plasencia
guillemp@ciberia.es

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:43:49 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>And on the subject of money...
>
>It seems to me that all the financial arguements are debated based on the TCS
>and IS  figures.  Now, I personally believe that TCS was perhaps the best CT
>adventure put out;  but the figures are at best suspect to me.  Sure, a world
>w/ 10 billion people will have 10 times the money that a world w/ 1
>billion...but this reminds me of the last pirate debate:  using these
>assumptions,  the United States should have a cop on every corner.  How
>realistic is this?
>
>IMTU, I take a figure of MCr100 per year for a MILITARY budget...this is
>divided between the Imperial Navy (50%), the subsector/reserve Navy (30%) and
>local defense (20%)  50Cr per person/year seems to give more realism for me
>and mine.


To have a common ground of argument, we need to be using the same setting. :-)

Certainly these are the figures for YTU, and they probably work very well
in your version of the 3I. However, for debate's sake we are using the only
common reference that is available to us, which happens to be the printed
"canon" (in this case, TCS and IS).

I don't think anyone here is saying "Pirates in every variation of the
Traveller game setting are stupid." Rather, the argument is that given the
printed information we are presented of the "official" 3rd Imperium, piracy
makes little sense as a career -- and definitely makes no sense at all at
the frequency implied by the random ship encounter tables.

Basically, we're arguing for fun. :-)

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:41:47 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

At 09:36 13/10/98 -0400, Walt Smith wrote:
>I know there's a New Zealander or two on the list, and wanted to direct
>a question thataway:
>
>I hear a New Line Cinema affiliate will start filming a live-action
>Lord of the Rings movie this coming May. Is this for real?

Yes. There was an interview with the Director Peter Jackson on TV the other
week. Apparently he's signed a contract for a series of three movies, one
for each of the three volumes Lord of the Rings was published in.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:52:45 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

At 13:35 13/10/98 -0500, Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:
>>I know there's a New Zealander or two on the list, and wanted to direct
>>a question thataway:
>>
>>I hear a New Line Cinema affiliate will start filming a live-action
>>Lord of the Rings movie this coming May. Is this for real?
>
>I'm not a New Zealander, but yes, it is. It going to be directed by Peter
>Jackson, the same guy that directed the _Frighteners_, _Bad Taste_, and
>_Brain Dead_. (IMHO, ick!)
>
>I hope it will be good, but I cannot help but think of those other NZ
>exports: _Hercules_ and _Xena: Warrior Princess_. Woo hoo, Kevin Sorbo as
>Aragorn! :-(

I'd just like to point out that Kevin Sorbo is _not_ a New Zealander. IIRC
he's from Minnesota.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:58:54 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Jens \"Spacejens\" Rydholm" <spacejens@h72.ryd.student.liu.se>
Subject: Re: Margesi/Rhylanor

On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Erwin Fritz wrote:

> Margesi/Rhylanor/Spinward Marches
> Starport: A
> Diameter: 5000 miles
> Atmosphere: Standard density, tainted
> Population: 900
> Law Level: 7
> Tech Level: 12
> Bases: Navy, Scout
> Gas Giants: None

First, there needs to be some kind of fuel source in the system, either as
water on the mainworld or as ice asteroids. Second, the world is probably
*very* dominated by it's shipyard, since both navy and scout bases are
present, the port is class A and the population is 900. I would say that
the atmosphere is tainted because of this heavy industry alone.

Either way, the place smells of military... why not have the navy accuse
the poor PCs of spying on the base ?

+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Jens "Spacejens" Rydholm    http://spacejens.ml.org     |
| jenry023@student.liu.se     Telephone: +46(0)13-4730961 |
| ICQ UIN: 3844745            Linköping, Sweden           |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU ?tc t4 ru ge+ 3i- jt+ a ?st ls kk++ hi+ as++ va++  |
|      ?dr so- zh ?da sy+                                 |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
|               In politics, left is right!               |
+---------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:26:14 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves

Wed, 14 Oct 1998 01:40:24 -0400,  "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>

>According to G:T, when performing space movement you can be faced in any
>direction and be moving in a different direction. Such as- with the "nose"
>of the ship in the opposite direction of acceleration.
>
>I have been looking at the deckplans for several Traveller ships. If
>direction makes no difference then why do the ships have those big engines
>to the rear?

They get in the way of windows (a lot of people like to be
able to see the direct they are going).  Some streamlined
ships are fatter in the rear, which makes for more space
for them.  A few other reasons.  You could put them in front
if you wanted to but I'm not sure why....

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 15:29:26 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Canon and beyond Known Space

>> I carry this sector in my records at Koog (probably a K'kree name). I'll add
>> Rolnam to my records as an Anglic name.
>>
>> Marc

[snip]

>Actually, Rolnam is a name i've put to that sector, i didn't know it was
>already named.
>Do you know anything else about it? Is it really inhabited by K'kree?


Hey, we just got to see a canonization!


>Thank you.
>
>Guillem Plasencia
>guillemp@ciberia.es


ObTrav: Thinking of the K'kree and other border states, what are your views
of the galaxy beyond Known Space. What lay outside the 2,000 Worlds, or the
Zhodani Consulate? How far did the Ancients explore into the beyond?

Oh, and how much are the new GT Aliens books going to trash our view of
those races covered in the old DGP books? (I look forward to these books,
really.)

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:34:05 -0700
From: "Brian Mays" <bmays@genscope.com>
Subject: RE: OT: Lord of the Rings

For the full dirt, go to:

 http://www.hollywood.com/news/topstories/08-24-98/html/1-2.html


Brian (Rona Barrett reincarnated) Mays

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:28:07 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a machine race

> From: Jens "Spacejens" Rydholm <spacejens@h72.ryd.student.liu.se>
> > Think of it this way, in the next war, ½ the navy may be made up of AI
> > controled ships...  Could lower the loss of life & increase force
> > projection...
> I doubt that the AI civilizaion would view this as a lower loss of
life...

They might not, but then again the AIs might see life as intelligence & the
loss of 1 intelligent being vs the loss of 1,000 of the same is a better
viewpoint...

> > The crew quarters are now fuel....
> Wrong... the crew quarters are now a computer ;-)

On a large ship, with a crew of say 1,000 men & women, the crew quarters
are 54,000 m^3 (from MT), so all that space can have more fuel, more
computers, bigger drives, more armor...  Making a 50K dT ship with Jump
Drive equal to a Battle Rider crewed by humans...

OTH, you do have the Berserker(sp) problem....

> | Jens "Spacejens" Rydholm    http://spacejens.ml.org     |

Legate Legion, Militant Jewish Terrorist
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

We are Microsoft of Borg.  Your distinctive capabilities will be adapted to
service us.  Resistance is futile.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 13:32:06 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #945

> From: Andy Akins <igor@ames.net>
> > Think of it this way, in the next war, ½ the navy may be made up of AI
> > controled ships...  Could lower the loss of life & increase force
> > projection...
> 
> IMTU there is a government/society that is heavily involved with
> robotics/AI...they have done just this. Most fighters, SDBs, and small
ships
> (Destroyers, Escorts) are actually Drones. Only the larger ships, which
need
> a lot more active maintenance, have sophont crew - and these have much
less
> than an Imperial vessel.

Makes sense to me...  To think in 5700 AD computers are of the level of the
1970s makes me sick...  I just run it as the full crew is for three shifts
& you can get along with a third of the needed crew...

> | Andrew Akins

Legate Legion, Militant Jewish Terrorist
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

We are Microsoft of Borg.  Your distinctive capabilities will be adapted to
service us.  Resistance is futile.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:02:07 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Margesi/Rhylanor

Jens \"Spacejens\" Rydholm wrote:

> First, there needs to be some kind of fuel source in the system, either as
> water on the mainworld or as ice asteroids. Second, the world is probably
> *very* dominated by it's shipyard, since both navy and scout bases are
> present, the port is class A and the population is 900. I would say that
> the atmosphere is tainted because of this heavy industry alone.

Y'know, this brings up an interesting point...

On a world like this, where there is probably a single point of
habitation, the 'tainted' atmosphere could well be localized to that
single point of habitation. Around the starport facilities it could be
like LA on a bad day, or worse, Mexico City on a good one ;-) but the
rest of the place might have a decent atmosphere...This could solve the
problem of 'taint of the week' when dealing with many of the UWP's in
Traveller. Few of the planets may actually have an endemic taint, but a
localized one around the centers of population.

For places with pop B or A, it might get hard finding someplace that
_isn't_ bad, but look at earth...Pop 9 but there's lots pf places with
nice clean air, and lots of places that are awful, even hazardous if
breathed. (Like our offices today...they're re-roofing the building, and
the place stinks of hydrocarbons...)

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:03:40 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Canon and beyond Known Space

In a message dated 10/14/98 3:36:29 PM Central Daylight Time,
yikes@evansville.net writes:

<< Do you know anything else about it? Is it really inhabited by K'kree? >>

Explored by; not really inhabited by.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:09:18 -0700
From: Joe Pettit <jpettit@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves

David P. Summers wrote:

> Wed, 14 Oct 1998 01:40:24 -0400,  "N. Eric Phillips" <stilleon@io.com>
>
> >According to G:T, when performing space movement you can be faced in any
> >direction and be moving in a different direction. Such as- with the "nose"
> >of the ship in the opposite direction of acceleration.
> >
> >I have been looking at the deckplans for several Traveller ships. If
> >direction makes no difference then why do the ships have those big engines
> >to the rear?
>
> They get in the way of windows (a lot of people like to be
> able to see the direct they are going).  Some streamlined
> ships are fatter in the rear, which makes for more space
> for them.  A few other reasons.  You could put them in front
> if you wanted to but I'm not sure why....

Well, some people like to experience the rush of superheated plasma and
radiation that their thrusters put out.  :-)

Seriously though, for safety reasons, any exhaust from the ship needs to be
directed away from the living quarters and preferably away from the rest of the
ship in general.  If your ship does not have an exhaust plume (be it  plasma or
neutrinos) then it doesn't really matter where the thruster is.  An example
would be some sort of maglev vessel that flies along magnetic fields.  I'm not
entirely sure that jump drives need to be in the rear, but if you've got your
maneuver drives back there, you may as well save your engineers the walk and
put the jump drives in the engineering section as well.

The next factor is keeping your vessel going in a straight line.  That means
that the thrust vector has to pass through the center mass of the vehicle.
Generally, people like to put this on the opposite side of the engines from
their exhaust nozzle.  One method of putting the engine up front is a funnel
shape.  You can put your quarters in a ring around the exhaust jet far enough
away that you don't get burned.  This just seems cost ineffective.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:27:04 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #937

At 09:20 14/10/98 GMT, Phillip McGregor wrote:

>That's the *theory* ... but it *actually* does a whole hell of a lot more ...
>all, in reality, to keep itself in control and with absolute (if not always
>obviously used) power.

IMO this would apply no matter what form of government it had. 

It just occured to me that while it has been noted that historically
democracies don't last very long nobody has commented on the 3I's unusual
longevity and stability as a feudal state or as a secular empire.

I find it curious that the 3I, which uses a form of government that I find
similar to both the bureaucratic empires of China, with some Roman and Holy
Roman Empire style nobles thrown in was so stable (two civil wars in its
1100 year existence, and no meaningful revolts after the first few hundred
years). In all these empires dynasties changed through civil war rather
more often than not. What's more the Holy Roman Empire suffered from
constant fricton between its rulers and its bureaucrats (the church) over
division of power, with the nobles taking sides for reasons mainly grounded
in expedience.

Why was the 3I so stable? As its naval strength in canon seems to be tiny
compared to what it could afford it wasn't through terrorising it's people.
IMO it was because most worlds were happy with the deal they got - safe
trade and low taxes in exchange for not being allowed to conquer other
planets or keep slaves. While civil wars on member worlds don't seem to
have been uncommon, nor do they seem to have been rife, so it would seem
that most people were also happy with their world government.

I have come to suspect that a lot of the repression and corruption seen in
various publications is only visible to Travellers (which IMTU constitute a
unique and fairly indentifible group that include Imperial nobles). IOW
only those who interact directly with the Imperium or move in Imperial
juristiction (ie deep space) had any chance of noticing the problems in the
Imperial system. Of course this group includes the PCs, just about all
their potential patrons, and anybody with any influence in the Imperium, so
while while the average citizen blindly goes about his business the Evil
Empire is busy corrupting its life blood and turning its brightest stars
into rebels. This sounds more like Dark Conspiracy than anything else...hmmm.

Just some thoughts.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:36:28 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: "Rift-Jumper"

At 04:05 14/10/98 -0800, Peter Newman wrote:

>Esi-Obe/Corridor 0638	A 542886-C	a Jump 5 from Esi-Obe go to
>Ishirdu/Corridor 0338	X 776301-0	a Jump 3 from Ishirdu go to
>
>According to DPG library data Ishirdu is Red zoned because its native
>sentients are psionic.  It seems like quite a bit of effort to maintanin
>a Red Zone in the middle of the rift.  Only the planet is interdicted so
>you can refuel at the gas giant. (Early Adventures, Library Data, DGP)

I always thought this was just an excuse to both stop other people using
the route, and to get funding for a permanent in-rift presence. It wouldn't
surprise me to find that the natives weren't psionic at all. Mind you it
wouldn't surprise me to find that they were and were being used for secret
Navy experiments either.


- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:51:15 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Limits to tech advancement

At 16:01 14/10/98 +0200, Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:
>Leonard Erickson writes:
>>But the farther you go, the larger the required community is *or* the
>>more slowly the advances come. Thus there ought to be a TL at which the
>>odds of a single planet being able to make to jump to the next level
>>become too low for it to be a likely occurence. 
> 
>Well, isn't that one of the two options I mentioned to begin with?
>"Around TL 10 you hit some sort of 'wall' that slows down technological
>developement considerably". With your explanation a society will reach
>a wall once its technological developement reach a bit further than we
>have on Earth today (Earth has a population level of 9; individual planets
>don't get much higher than that, and many of the planets in Milieu 0 had
>population level 10. So the technological developement in Charted Space
>--  not just the Imperium, but all of Charted Space  --  of the last 1100
>years is presumably representative of the "natural" rate of advance. Old
>Darrian is still a freak, but it will be that anyway. 

IMO this will only work if it's related to TL+1 or TL+2, because according
to Bruce Johnson's post the total population of the 3I is 5.55E13, giving a
cap of TL13 or TL14. It also doesn't explain why the Solomani and Zhodani
seem to be limited to TL14. The Solomani might be explainable by them
having just gone through a war, but the 3I reached Tl15 during the war, and
it was also tired after this war but still managed to disseminate the new
technology (or have more planets raise their TL). Maybe the Zho's were
limited by their stable form of government, but then how come the 3I, also
very stable, managed to get ahead? If stability comes at the expense of
advancement (as it did for the Vilani) surely the Solomani, who have the
least settled history (joining and unjoining from the Imperium, and having
a very competitive set of member states) should have come out ahead?

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:09:58 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 17:46 14/10/98 +0200, Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:

>The Imperium has a history of dealing harshly with foreign governments caught
>supporting pirates (a canonical example is Tarkine in District 268). The
>Zhodani are big enough to provide sanctuary; the Sword Worlds may be (but I
>doubt it); no one else is.

The Solomani could too, but I don't think they'd gain much from it, as
they're the only nation on that border.

>Next, do you play with jumps being controllable to arriving at a specific
>point at the 100 diameter limit or do you believe ships arrive at a random
>point on the 100-diameter shell? In either case how do you arrange to be
>at the same spot as the arriving ship but without some pesky SDB being
>there too?

It's worse than that - if you use MT, TNE or T4 (and I think CT, as well)
the 100 diameter limit is inside detection range of the planet or ships in
orbit, and for a size A world you'll be in gunnery range of a 6G SDB in
about 3 hours if it starts in orbit. If there are 4-8 SDBs out at about 60
diameters and even spaced any ship on the 100 diameter limit would be in
gun range pretty much instantly. I personally think that if you have the
money Battle Riders make wonderful SDBs (high acceleration, good endurance,
good sensors, tough and have huge guns - what more could you want?), and
most worlds can afford at least a few.

I suppose this puts me in the
'piracy-simply-isn't-feasible-if-there-is-any-defence-at-all' group, even
though I accept it as canon, and it exists IMTU. However IMTU it's almost
always really privateers or Vargr in the CT period. In MT IMO you have a
much better chance of getting away with piracy because there'll be systems
with no defence. Mind you there's also the chance of accidentally jumping
into a system chock-full of some faction or another's latest 'surprise
attack' or 'final assault'.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #948
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 14 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 949



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #935
Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves
Re: Star Wars Democracy
Re: Piracy
Re: Physics - Help! [Whimsical]
Re: Piracy
Re: Discovery of a machine race
Barratry
Re: Discovery of a machine race
Illness in roleplaying games
Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser
Re: RE : Reactionless thrusters
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: Illness in roleplaying games
An Open Request to Marc Miller
Re: Barratry
Re : TCS (was Piracy)
Re : Limits to Tech Advancement (longish)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:34:15 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #935

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:11:01 -0400, "Leo Hale"
<lhale@panlabs.com> wrote:


>Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 18:47:17 EDT
>From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Problems with GURPS Traveller Chapter 1

> Of course if there was a computerised map available (especially
>with click and zoom in/out functions; a good idea for a CD :-) ), things
>would
>be different....

>- ------------------------------

>     There was a program put out by a company called Planet III Software,
>that was a computer generated map of sectors.  The program was called
>"Traveller Navigator" and they had put out four sectors before the collapse
>of GDW and the subsequent loss of rights.  For a time the program was still
>available as share ware through the Imperium Games web site.  I do not know
>if you can still get it, but I loved it.

You can still get it; I have it.  It was available for free, not
as "registerable" shareware.  However: It seems not fully
functional under Win95; the subsector map doesn't work properly.
I suspect that it's an issue of TravNav being a 16-bit WinApp
that wasn't quite coded in full conformance with the WinAPI spec
so that it would work in the 32-bit world of 95/NT.

Send me an e-mail address.  When/if I get my ISP problems fully
straightened out, I'll add it to the Freelance Traveller Computer
Connection as well.


- --
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:55:40 -0500
From: Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves

Anders Backman wrote:
 
> Those are not engines, they're cooling vents. The eject superheated
> hydrogen to cool off the ship (this is the blue glow seen in Star Wars and
> other documentary starship films). If they were mounted on the front the
> delicate sensor surfaces of ship sensors would be plated with superheated
> hydrogen when the ship accelerates. Bruces notes about reducing your IR sig
> to a certain enemy simply means pointing your rear away from him.

> All this with my tongue only slightly pressing against the inner side of my
> cheek.

You know Anders, that's not a bad idea. It explains where all that
hydrogen fuel goes...that the GURPS people say our fusion engines
shouldn't be using..we don't burn it, we vent it as coolant. And it does
make sense that the main venting ports would along the ship's stern. 
Knock out a ship's coolant vents or hole it's coolant supply and it has
to cut power or fry.  

In comedy viritas! <-- my latin stinks ;-)

Eris,
	tongue also *slightly* against my cheek

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:08:07 EDT
From: TDRandall@aol.com
Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy

In a message dated 10/12/98 7:05:47 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au writes:

> >I'll have to assume the episode where Leia is elected princess is going to 
> be in the
>  >prequel.
>  
>  Nope, but its made plain that the Empire was founded on the bones of the
Old
>  Republic. There's no reason why you can't have an elective monarchy,
anyway.
>  Look at the Holy Roman Empire and its system (no, its not even close to a
>  perfect example, with nobles electing another noble, but the principle is
>  there)

I realize I'm not too StarWars literate, but I just assumed Princess Leia was
the princess of one particular planet, and each planet sent a representative
to the Old Republic.  Perhaps she was the representative (the original movie
could be interpreted that way, if she was on the way home from a meeting with
the other remnants of the republic).

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:26:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest wrote:

> From: DustyLV769@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Piracy

> 
> << A High Population world will have large system defense forces. >>
> 
> Why?
> 
> If there is not a war being fought in the vicinity, do you really think that
> they would spend more money on something as parasitic as a "standing army"
> than they feel they have to?  If they are getting a large number of cargos
> transiting thier space, it seems possible that the "bean counters" mindset
> will take over...it's cheaper to lose a few cargos here and there than spend
> ungodly amounts of money to drive it off.

Sure. If you have a big daddy (the Imperium) to protect you, not to
mention all that money on the sector navy, why bother with all those SDB
wings? Example: Canada, with about 1.3% GDP to the military compared to
4% in the US. Moreover, you'll see priorities based  partly on planetary
prestige. Example: Canada (for a long time) dedicated the majority of its
military budget to support of NATO forces in Germany and to ASW to
protect the atlantic convoys to reinforce them, not to SDB equivelents
like coastal defense submarines or continental air defense squadrons.
The Trav equivelent of this is a small power deciding to put its budget
into some CruRons and Housecarl or spacelift capable planetary army units
that can go fight the Zhodani on their home turf, or at least, be part of
the colonial/subsector forces and involved in "forward defense." This
is the big prestige, big ticket item for a general's career perspective.
Moreover, it also makes some political sense. Sure, people might want
"troops at home" but it gives you more say in where that fleet will be,
and it also means you can hopefully stop that Zho or Vargr fleet on the
border instead of waiting for it to arrive in your system....

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:20:49 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Physics - Help! [Whimsical]

Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:
> 
> >> Can anyone tell me what phonons and ronons are (*not*
> >> photons and ronin..I know what those are)?
> 
> >I'd guess, that 'ronons' stem from rotational motion as 'phonons' come
> >from the vibrational. But I do not know.
> 
> Ronons are phonons who's liege-lord has been killed, and are forced to
> wander as itinerant ocillations through space/time making a living as
> mercenaries in subatomic armies. They are most often found amidst legions
> of meson particles as auxiliaries.
> 
> <diving for cover>
> 
Similarly, a quantum fluid is the preferred beverage of Schroedinger's
Cat....

<looking around for cover not already in use>

> Ciao,
> 
> Joseph R. Dietrich
> yikes@evansville.net

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:23:23
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>At 05:46 PM 10/14/98 +0200, you wrote:
>>Charles Prevatte writes:
>
>62.5?  Where did you get that number?  And were is the economy to pay for
>the support for that level of militerisation?  Good lord!  That's a capital
>ship and change per habital system on the average!  Do you mean secter?
>That would be a little more reasonable.  The ratio of capital to non capital
>ships should be around 4 to one or more.  That's 248 jump capable destroyers
>or whatever.  Or ruffly 1000 capital ships and 4000 destroyers in the
>Spinward marches sector alone!  It also does not sound reasonable based on
>the TNS reports of the frontier wars.  No where near that number of ships
>were discussed.  Where and when are these figures derived from?

A third of the canon 3% of GDP in military expenditure going to the
Imperium, and the Imperium spending 70% of it's funds on the Navy, and
ships costing 10% of their build cost in maintainence per year.

Figure out what 1% of, say, Mora's tax receipts are.

It's an unfortunate fact of life, but a lot of canon got written by people
who couldnt count up tax receipts. Big fleets are a neccessary concequence
of big planetary populations - 30 billion people create a lot of tax revenue.

The other point to remember is the rich worlds are going to tend to own the
banks that own the mortgages on the Free Traders that get pirated. So even
if the piracy occours on poor iceballs, it still has ripple effects to the
important worlds.

>Hivers?  Solomani?  Varga?  Centars?  and who said 'support'?  All they have
>to do is defend their borders against Empirial aggression.  (Grin)

The Zho's are the only people near the Marches. The Vargr arent a state per
se ... you may also want to get a history book and look up the War of
Jenkins' Ear to see what a minor incident can do to spark a shooting war
when tension already exists.

>OH?  So every High Pop. world has the same level of militerizm?  There are
>no doves?  There are no high Pop. pour worlds?  There are no High Pop.
>worlds with budget problems?

A Hi Pop world, by definition, has a billion people. Two credits each, per
annum, in SDB taxes turns into more SDBs than I want to count. Even if they
are shiny new imported SDBs that need 20% their sticker cost in imported
spare parts per year, it's still more SDBs than I want to count.

>You have many informants and move form job to job as opertunity knocks.

Give us some numbers on how much an informant costs, and how often they
come up with information. From my memories of Chopper Read's books,
informants got 10% of the take from an armed robbery in Sydney in the 80s.

You also have the time lags in getting the messages from the informants to
the secret pirate base (or Gvorrdun Commonality, or whatever).

By the way, earlier in the Piracy debate, I proposed bits of the Imperial
Intelligence structure arrange for the news that so and so might be able to
be got at, just to see which dogs bark in response.

>If you have the flight plan you know where to wait for them.  As for the
>SDBs, you jump in behind some terrain feature like the star and move to your
>attack position.  With comerse raiding chewing up the local defences is a
>plus.  If you want to keep them near to home launch a spread of missiles at
>the population centers of the planet.  They will be far to busy saying their
>employers you worry about you.

OK. So you are cruising from the star to the mainworld (check how long this
takes on average). You are conducting atrocity warfare against an Imperial
planet.  You are fighting an attrition war with an entire planet (temporary
taxes to deal with the Pirate Menace, then a quick call to InstellArms,
anyone ?). And you expect to make money ?

From memory, Vargr pulled that stunt once. It was called the Rape of
Antares, if memory serves me, and triggered centuries of bad feeling
between human and vargr in the Julian Protectorate area. Can someone add
more detail ?

>How is that?  They both require large amounts of cargo space.  As for paying
>remember that the cargo in a ship must be valuable enough to be able to
>absorb the cost of shiping which is 2000cr per ton per parsec.  That cargo
>must be worth some money to be able to absorb that kind of overhead.
>

Pirates require at least 3 gees of acceleration. More if they want to play
with competantly-built SDBs. 3 gees of acceleration pushes your power plant
size up, as does the additional weaponary.

The spinal mount particle accelerator (to stop those annoying sand clouds
giving the target time to compute the jump solution) or other highly
upgraded weaponary is often a giveaway as well. Except if Famile Spofulam
makes it to megacorporation size (we modified Andrew Vallance's RoM 200
dton Far Trader to include a spinal meson gun. Admittadly it wasnt a big
one, but it was a spinal meson gun ...).

Note that if piracy is rampant (for example, due to a collapse of central
authority and/or an abscence of fleet), it will be harder to identify
pirates, because every ship will be either armed, or escorted by an armed
ship.

IMO if you want piracy, then go to a true frontier period (the Spinward
Marches circa 1100 isnt really a frontier ... it's more a militarised
border area IMO) or to one of the Civil Wars. An abscence of piracy is one
of the things that makes a stable Imperium prosperous.

>The cost is pure cost as a SDB produces no income.  How could a SDB produce
>income?  Military ships are pure expence>  You only return is a measure of
>security.  As for a 'less capable ship', a large armored cargo ship that is
>heavily armed would be a better deal for any system with more than one
>habital planet or with asteroid mines.  The patrol craft could earn it's
>keep as a bulk in-system cargo transport while patroling.

Nahh. Having low maneuver kills in space combat. Go for a custom warship,
and a custom freighter.

>
>>For covering worlds unable to support ships of their own, jump-capable ships
>>are propably a better bet than boats.
>
>And their movement provide holes that pirates could exploit.
>

But how do the informants get the news to the pirates before the frigate
captain decides to change the plan ?

It would be really really mean for the anti-pirate agencies ('Hortalez et
Cie Special Section') to get at an informant and arrange a surprise.

>Cargos have to be worth a curtain treshold amout to be worth transporting.

How much ? I dont disagree with you, but I want to see some numbers.

>
>>Pirates have to be where their prey is, which happens to be where the
>>system defenses are too. 
>>
>
>Again, not all systems will pay the price for SDBs.  

In which case insurance rates for trading at that system will rise,
reducing trade and inducing those that come along to get Combat Rated for
insurance purposes.

>That depends graetly on the planet and the pirates.  If they are war time
>comerse raider that may not be true and the SDBs will have to stay close to
>the planet to defend against misile attacks on planetary targets.

Atrocity warfare is not a habit of any of the Interstellar states in Known
Space. Except for the K'kree, and during the Second Civil War.

>
>Again my senerio was a war time one.
>

In which case you are going to have orginised merchant convoys. Fifteen Far
Traders, each with a missile rack, a sandcaster and a laser, one escort
carrier with 6 15 dton Navy fighters and an Elisabeth class riding shotgun
are going to be a problem for most pirates, especially if they want bits to
collect afterwards.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:36:47 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a machine race

Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:

>>IIRC, there has been 1 machine race...the Sabmiqys (sp?) in the
Antares
>>sector. Now they are planetbound, being rather space-phobic (for
historical
>>reasons).
>>
>>The Sabmiqys are currently interdicted red-zone by the IISS, because
of the
>>high TL (17) and some contact problems. There was a write up about
them, in
>>Challenge, I think.
>
>
>Oh, reeaally... very interesting.
>
>Does anyone else have any information on these Sabmiqys? Hex location
in
>Antares, Challenge issue #, or anything else?

Antares 2117
Challenge #28 pg 31

Charles

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:35:18
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Barratry

My personal position on piracy is the best way to do it is keep all the
piracy infrastructure except the actual pirate ships, and use large wads of
cash on starship crews to steal the ships intact instead.

It's cheaper, and more effective IMO.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:52:42 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: Re: Discovery of a machine race

On Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:07:19 -0400, yikes@evansville.net (Joseph
R. Dietrich) wrote:

>>IIRC, there has been 1 machine race...the Sabmiqys (sp?) in the Antares
>>sector. Now they are planetbound, being rather space-phobic (for historical
>>reasons).

>>The Sabmiqys are currently interdicted red-zone by the IISS, because of the
>>high TL (17) and some contact problems. There was a write up about them, in
>>Challenge, I think.

>Oh, reeaally... very interesting.

>Does anyone else have any information on these Sabmiqys? Hex location in
>Antares, Challenge issue #, or anything else?

Antares 2117, Challenge 28.  Also in Galactic 2.4, based on the
Challenge material.

- --
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:03:34
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Illness in roleplaying games

>Makes good for an adventure once. I thought about letting my group catch a
>virus on downport, becoming active when they're half through jump space.
>The disease is not yet deadly, but the ill ones get soon disabled to work.
>Now the problems they've got are:
> 
>What to do with panicking passengers?
>What about the quarantine?
>Who will be the next one to become ill?
>Who will land the ship, if the pilot gets ill? 
>and is a doctor aboard, to find a medicine?
>
>Anyone played such an adventure before?

I'm not real keen on disabling adventurers early on, but if the PC's were
passengers on a ship, when the crew became disabled, that would be somewhat
more interesting.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:23:39
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [GT] Azhanti High Lightning cruiser

At 07:55 AM 10/14/98 -0700, Bruce Johnson wrote:
>You don't put it on the existing powerplant...you just install a X megawatt
>auxillary PP and tie it into the ship's power grid. I'd expect that milspec
>ship powerplants are in reality multiple independent units anyway, better
>combat survivability that way.

Not in the GURPS: Traveller system as it has been published.

>Also, look at the GURPS system , QSDS and SSDS...all of them presuppose
you're
>building a 'powerplant' out of premade modules of a certain size...you need
>425 Megawatts? you install 2 200, a 20 and a 5 MW reactors.

Actually, in GURPS Vehicles, you can build a reactor of whatever size you
want (at least with the rules as they are presented).  I imagine that with
TL-12 manufacturing techniques, you can order a power plant with whatever
output you want.

>The key is, so long
>as they're all controllable as a unit (which they are made to be) it doesn't
>matter how many of them there are (to a commonsense limit...someone made a
100
>MW ship out of 100 1MW PP's once back in the thrashing-out days of QSDS) and
>that makes for much more flexible design, using standardized components.

Actually, In GURPS vehicles, having one power plant is usually a little
more efficient in terms of weight and space than having multiple plants,
because of the lack of redundancy of such things as control systems.

>Anthony Jackson wrote:
>> 
>> Fred and Evelyn Wolke writes:
>> 
>> > As for swapping out weapons, on paper at least it makes it easier,
because
>> > you can swap out the weapon and the power it needs at the same time.
>> 
>> However, in the shipyard it makes it harder, because most likely a
pre-existing
>> power plant isn't _designed_ to suddenly have an X megawatt chunk added
to it,
>> which means that if you put in a new weapon system you put in a new
engine...
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:13:39
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: RE : Reactionless thrusters

At 10:28 PM 10/14/98 +1000, you wrote:
>Fred and Evelyn Wolke wrote :-
>
>> What???
>>
>> Let's take a frame in which the planet is at rest.  Here's the sequence of
>> events:
>>
>> The ship grabs up some hudrogen, fuses it into helium, and releases a
>> little bit of that matter into energy.  Some of that energy goes to the
>> ship's engines, which pushes the ship and the planet apart.  The ship gains
>> momentum, the planet gains momentum, and the fuel tank loses a little fuel.
>>
>> What is the problem with this?
>>
>Initially :-
>Planet is at rest. Momentum = kinetic energy = 0
>Ship has some arbitrary momentum, p = mv
>and energy (kinetic + gravitational potential :
>(0.5 X m X v^2) + mgh).
>
>Ship uses thrusters :-
>Let thrust energy = E.
>Planet gains momentum, p1 and kinetic energy k1
>Ship gains momentum and kinetic energy.
>Momentum = (m - dm) X (v+dv), dm mass of fuel consumed,
>dv velocity change.
>Kinetic energy = [0.5 X (m-dm) X (v+dv)^2] + (m-dm)g(h+dh),
>dh change in altitude or distance from planet.
>
>Test : Is momentum or energy conserved?
>
>momentum : mv not equal to [(m-dm)X(v+dv)] - p1 ?
>
>energy : does (0.5 X m X v^2) + mgh + E equal
>[0.5 X (m-dm) X (v+dv)^2] + (m-dm)g(h+dh) + k1 ?

You have changed the argument from qualitative to quantitative. 

 I agree that in a quantitative environment energy is not conserved.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 19:02:59 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com> writes:
>And you can take paper books to the toilet...

True. Imagine using an online Sears catalogue in the outhouse  :-)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:58:42 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

I'd much rather do that then be the _second_ person to do so...;-P

Rob Prior wrote:
> 
> SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com> writes:
> >And you can take paper books to the toilet...
> 
> True. Imagine using an online Sears catalogue in the outhouse  :-)

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 19:27:26 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Illness in roleplaying games

Fred and Evelyn Wolke wrote:
> 
> >Makes good for an adventure once. I thought about letting my group catch a
> >virus on downport, becoming active when they're half through jump space.
> >The disease is not yet deadly, but the ill ones get soon disabled to work.
> >Now the problems they've got are:
> >
> >What to do with panicking passengers?
> >What about the quarantine?
> >Who will be the next one to become ill?
> >Who will land the ship, if the pilot gets ill?
> >and is a doctor aboard, to find a medicine?
> >
> >Anyone played such an adventure before?
> 
> I'm not real keen on disabling adventurers early on, but if the PC's were
> passengers on a ship, when the crew became disabled, that would be somewhat
> more interesting.

Agreed.  So, you ensure that the early symptoms of [f-i-t-b Plague] are
similar to the symptoms of [f-i-t-b nuisance illness], just as the early
symptoms of pneumonia are very similar to those of any number of minor
illnesses (fever, cough, general discomfort).

*Which disease do the PCs have?*

(If one is playing G:T, that opens up another possibility:  How does
f-i-t-b Plague interact with Space Sickness?)

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:41:00 EDT
From: Diespamer@aol.com
Subject: An Open Request to Marc Miller

Marc:

Haven't had a chance to see GURPS: Traveller, but it sounds like Loren has
done a bang-up job.

Here's a thought...how about some Marc Miller authored G:T material?

And, when T5 finally hits the stands, how about making it a standard for both
of having a page or so in the back of the supplements, adventures, etc.,
allowing for easy conversion from one system to the other (i.e., have all the
stats repeated)...

Just a thought that might help increase the overall audience plus keep your
writing juices flowing as well!

Fred Kiesche
(Traveller Since 1977)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:39:27
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Barratry

At 08:35 AM 10/15/98, you wrote:
>
>My personal position on piracy is the best way to do it is keep all the
>piracy infrastructure except the actual pirate ships, and use large wads of
>cash on starship crews to steal the ships intact instead.
>
>It's cheaper, and more effective IMO.

More effective?  How?  If large wads of cash could buy a starship this way
for less than you could buy one at the shipyard, why doesn't the crew just
fly off with the thing and forget you altogether?

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:14:01 +1000
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Re : TCS (was Piracy)

Dusty wrote :-

> It seems to me that all the financial arguements are debated based on the TCS
> and IS  figures.  Now, I personally believe that TCS was perhaps the best CT
> adventure put out;  but the figures are at best suspect to me.  Sure, a world
> w/ 10 billion people will have 10 times the money that a world w/ 1
> billion...but this reminds me of the last pirate debate:  using these
> assumptions,  the United States should have a cop on every corner.  How
> realistic is this?
>
At law 9+, there WILL be a cop (secret or uniformed), soldier, or
surveillance system (?warbots?) on every corner, or a well-developed
system of informing on 'disloyal' citizens.

IMTU, law and order spending is a separate item equal to
(law level) percent of the budget to partly simulate this.

> IMTU, I take a figure of MCr100 per year for a MILITARY budget...this is
> divided between the Imperial Navy (50%), the subsector/reserve Navy (30%) and
> local defense (20%)  50Cr per person/year seems to give more realism for me
> and mine.
>
Umm... (embarrassed grin) :-
I have to confess I don't have a copy of TCS or IS.
Would someone be able to send the relevant data to me?

On military spending :-
RW ranges from 0.3% GNP (Brazil, Mexico) to 26.8% (Iraq) for 1987.
The US spent 6.4%.
(ref : The Economist Book of Vital World Statistics, 1990).

I think 50 local Cr/person/year is a very reasonable average figure ; it
corresponds to 1% of gross system product.

Overly militaristic systems may be very interesting places to adventure
in (heh heh heh).


Robert O'Connor
Medico, Gearhead, Gaming Enthusiast

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:14:48 +1000
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Re : Limits to Tech Advancement (longish)

Rupert Boleyn wrote :-

> It also doesn't explain why the Solomani and Zhodani
> seem to be limited to TL14. The Solomani might be explainable by them
> having just gone through a war, but the 3I reached Tl15 during the war, and
> it was also tired after this war but still managed to disseminate the new
> technology (or have more planets raise their TL). Maybe the Zho's were
> limited by their stable form of government, but then how come the 3I, also
> very stable, managed to get ahead? If stability comes at the expense of
> advancement (as it did for the Vilani) surely the Solomani, who have the
> least settled history (joining and unjoining from the Imperium, and having
> a very competitive set of member states) should have come out ahead?
>
Limiting factors :-
population, size of state, communications networks, amount of spending
in R&D, other cultural factors.

The 3I has more people(?), better communication networks, and spend a
lot on R&D (for all the Research Stations we have heard about, what
about the really black ones? Or the megacorporate equivalents?).

The Solomani lack the internal cohesion of the 3I, despite the Party, so
information exchange is not optimal.
Also, multiple smaller states implies duplication of research, and
smaller population bases to draw talent from.
[However, it is widely described that the Solomani are the
masters of biomedical technology in Charted Space (TL 16?) -
must attribute to other cultural factors e.g. a head start in the
Interstellar Wars period].

The Zho probably have a "psionic TL" of 16 (in the absence of a formal
scale). Most other items in their culture are controlled by psionic
'flicking' : computers, vehicles, medical tech, weapons ("Trigger? What
trigger?").
The stratification of society into Nobles, Intendants and Proles,
and lifelong psionic screening and training, leads to a
significant diversion of effort away from other research areas.

In sum :- stability is a double-edged sword. Too much or too little
stifles advancement.

I assume the underlying 'Tech Level vs time' curve is sigmoid (a
rectangular hyperbola).

The aggressive, 'stability-optimised' interstellar state with
average TL 17+ hasn't yet been encountered.
[??The initiators of the Empress Wave??]

Footnote :-
Once the average TL (across areas eg. computing, energy production,
etc.) rises beyond a critical value, Singularity
a la Vernor Vinge's 'Marooned in Realtime' is inevitable.
Grandfather in his pocket universe springs to mind.

Robert O'Connor
Medico, Gearhead, Gaming Enthusiast

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #949
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Thursday, October 15 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 950



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Hardcovers
Re: More Cool Traveller stuff
Re: Physics - Help!
Re: Piracy
Re: Barratry
Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller
Re: Piracy
Re: Sabmiqys (was re: Discovery of a Machine...)
Re: Piracy
Piracy! [bwa-ha-ha! (was re: Transponders)]
Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #949
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #949
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: MT Hand to Hand
Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Piracy
My wish list for T5 combat
Re: Piracy
Re: Discovery of a machine race
Re: Piracy
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:21:20 -0400
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
Subject: Re: Hardcovers

At 02:48 AM 10/14/98 -0500, Paul wrote:

>>           "We ordered only 2,000 each of the GURPS Basic Set and GURPS
>> Traveller hardcovers.
>>            Apparently the printers gave us some extra. A good thing, too,
>> because we came
>
>Does this mean that the G:T Hardcover pre-orders are now shipping?Please
say yes
>as the wait is driving me mad!!!!!
>

I picked up my copy of the G:T hardcover at my FLGS in the Washington DC
area this evening...  



Bill Rutherford
worj@topgun.cinecom.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:47:10 -0700
From: Sanders <timmon@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: More Cool Traveller stuff

Not to worry - I've got a catalog ready to mail to you in the morning - you
should have it within two-week by the latest.

L8r,
Paul Sanders

At 04:36 PM 10/14/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Does anybody know if the deadline for ordering Sanders Gamelords stuff is
over?
>I lost his e-mail in a mutiple harddrive crasch (how likely is it that
>three drives gets hardware errors on the same day in two of my machines,
>one at work and one at home - synchronocity or Murphy?)
>
>BTW Letters of Marque was excellent, everything aok except perhaps the
>deckplans.
>
>
>/Anders Backman
>Aniware AB
>anders.backman@aniware.se
> 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 19:24:15 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Physics - Help!

>From: @triumf.ca
...
>>Subject: Re: Physics - Help!
>>>> Can anyone tell me what phonons and ronons are (*not*
>>>> photons and ronin..I know what those are)?
>
>I think the word he was looking for are 'rotons'.
>
>>>I'd guess, that 'ronons' stem from rotational motion as 'phonons' come
>>>from the vibrational. But I do not know.
>>
>Err, not quite.
>
>>Ronons are phonons who's liege-lord has been killed, and are forced to
>>wander as itinerant oscillations through space/time making a living as
>>mercenaries in subatomic armies. They are most often found amidst legions
>>of meson particles as auxiliaries.
>>
>><diving for cover>
>
>Sounds more like muons to me.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 19:24:11 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>The hardware and operational parameters for a legitimate merchant and a
>pirate is miles apart. A pirate might be able to masquerade as a merchant
>(depends on the transponder issue, of course ;-), but IMO there's no way
>he can make a living as one.

  The reverse is true too, sadly.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:34:38
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Barratry

>From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
>Subject: Re: Barratry
>
>More effective?  How?  If large wads of cash could buy a starship this way
>for less than you could buy one at the shipyard, why doesn't the crew just
>fly off with the thing and forget you altogether?

Because they dont have access to the resources to get themselves new
identities, fence the ship etc that result in not getting caught by the
ship's owner and/or the authorities. Being on the run with no support
network is not fun.

Ian

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:52:34 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller

I would like to add a suggestion that Marc adopts Bruce'e DSR.
Colin

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:32:46 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>> Why?
>>
>> If there is not a war being fought in the vicinity, do you really think
that
>> they would spend more money on something as parasitic as a "standing
army"
>> than they feel they have to?  If they are getting a large number of
cargos
>> transiting thier space, it seems possible that the "bean counters"
mindset
>> will take over...it's cheaper to lose a few cargos here and there than
spend
>> ungodly amounts of money to drive it off.
>
>Sure. If you have a big daddy (the Imperium) to protect you, not to
>mention all that money on the sector navy, why bother with all those SDB
>wings?

Waitaminute.

I thought that worlds could make war on each other freely under the 3I, as
long as they did not violate the Imperial Rules of War. If that was the
case, I could easily see why a planet would want some system defenses as a
deterrant (especially considering that orbital surpremacy really ruins a
planet's day).

Say population A planet X decides "SDBs, we don' need no stinkin' SDBs. So
we loose a few cargos to pirates -- so what?" Then population 8 or 9 planet
Z (ruled by the ruthless charismatic dictator who believes in a sound
military budget) decides, "hey, let's invade planet X." The lack of system
defense forces for planet X would be a liability in this case.

Anyway, if big daddy *does* protect you, then pirates have a hard time
existing (cause the Imperial navy is pretty awesome).

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 22:33:29 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Sabmiqys (was re: Discovery of a Machine...)

On 10/14/98 at 10:04 AM,  Walter Smith <SmithW@hartwick.edu> said:

>The Sabmiqys are currently interdicted red-zone by the IISS, because
>of the high TL (17) and some contact problems. There was a write up
>about them, in Challenge, I think.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>IIRC, the "contact problems" involve the Sabmiqys' habit of
>dissecting first contact crews. 

And keeping captured crewmen as breeding stock for their biological
experiments.  The Robots were trying to find a cure for the disease
that killed all of their creators.  Eventually, they managed to find
the cure and cloned a number of the original biologicals.
Unfortunately, they "forgot" that they weren't the bosses and
continued to use the biologicals as stock for continuing
experiments.  A few humans and sabmiqy bios have escaped to the wild
countryside where they hide from the "reign of steel."

>They also blew up curious scout ships with meson guns when first
>discovered, right?

Well, there *was* that.  ;-> The robots didn't want more "infected"
ships bringing diseases to kill their already dead "masters."

I don't remember the issue number, but I reread the article a couple
of weeks ago.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:50:07 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>IMTU, I take a figure of MCr100 per year for a MILITARY budget...this is
>divided between the Imperial Navy (50%), the subsector/reserve Navy (30%) and
>local defense (20%)  50Cr per person/year seems to give more realism for me
>and mine.

  What population is the MCr100 budget for?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:50:42 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Piracy! [bwa-ha-ha! (was re: Transponders)]

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: re: Transponders
...
>They would fight.  Pirates do not want to meet a patrol ship except maybe yo
>ambush it.  Also what happen when a 400 ton patrol ship meet a 4000 ton
>pirate?  Whos target drone then?

  What would you estimate the initial market capitalization of a band of 
gentleman adventurers buying a 4000 ton para-military starship to be? How
would the prospectus read, and on what bourse would you recommend floating it?

...
>Doing it's nornal business.  The pirate meet the legal ship at prearrange
>deep space points as discribed in the traveller adventure.  No anomolies.
>The legal ship makes deep space jumps regularly and sometimes it meet the
>pirate.

  The legal ship may have problems if it's cargo manifests are suspicious,
especially with all those low-profit (?) deep space runs. Presumably the
IN uses forensic accounting to its' own advantage.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:57:38 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller

In a message dated 10/14/98 10:44:14 PM Central Daylight Time,
chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au writes:

<< adopts Bruce'e DSR. >>

Tell me what this is?

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:09:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #949

On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest wrote:

> From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
> Subject: Re: Piracy
> 
> >From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
> >Subject: Re: Piracy
> >
> ships costing 10% of their build cost in maintainence per year.
> 
> Figure out what 1% of, say, Mora's tax receipts are.
> 
> It's an unfortunate fact of life, but a lot of canon got written by people
> who couldnt count up tax receipts. Big fleets are a neccessary concequence
> of big planetary populations - 30 billion people create a lot of tax revenue.
> 
> The other point to remember is the rich worlds are going to tend to own the
> banks that own the mortgages on the Free Traders that get pirated. So even
> if the piracy occours on poor iceballs, it still has ripple effects to the
> important worlds.
> 
> annum, in SDB taxes turns into more SDBs than I want to count. Even if they
> are shiny new imported SDBs that need 20% their sticker cost in imported
> spare parts per year, it's still more SDBs than I want to count.

I wonder how much a naval crew would really cost, though? Salaries are one
thing, but what about training? Figure maybe MCr 3-5 for each of the
senior officers, and MCr 0.5-1.5 for many of the juniors in positions like
gunnery, sensors, piloting... SDB crews may actually need MORE training
considering the wide range of enviroments they operate in. Look at the
cost of subarmine crew, now add training in gas giant, submarine, space
and air tactics.

Then there are maintaining the naval bases, the pensions you are paying
out to everyone who retired, day care for kids...

Furthermore, how much of the Navy budget goes to research and
development? Sure, we know the imperium is "TL15 for the next x centuries"
but would the navy feel like that? In any case, new ships are coming and
they must be tested, new missiles developed... also, though this is rarely
reflected in game terms, it is likely that electronic warfare gear is
regularly software/hardware module upgraded every 5-10 years just because
the other guy is doing the same thing...

So what I'm saying is, can you reasonably say that this much of the navy
share of GDP goes into construction and maintainance of fleet units?

Out of curosity, how many capital ships (cruisers, carriers) does the US
Navy muster at present? If you multiply that by 10 for the difference
between the US and a 2-billion high-pop world, and then, perhaps, double
it (because the Imperial Navy doesn't have the Air Force eating its share
of the budget..) then I'd say you'd have a fare idea how many ships a
world spending about 4% of GDP could pump into the sector navy *and
support with the necessary bases, training and personnel and
infrastructure" which are quite possibly largerly independent of TL7 to
TL15 differences.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:09:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #949

On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest wrote:

> From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
> Subject: Re: Piracy
> 
> >From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
> >Subject: Re: Piracy
> >
> ships costing 10% of their build cost in maintainence per year.
> 
> Figure out what 1% of, say, Mora's tax receipts are.
> 
> It's an unfortunate fact of life, but a lot of canon got written by people
> who couldnt count up tax receipts. Big fleets are a neccessary concequence
> of big planetary populations - 30 billion people create a lot of tax revenue.
> 
> The other point to remember is the rich worlds are going to tend to own the
> banks that own the mortgages on the Free Traders that get pirated. So even
> if the piracy occours on poor iceballs, it still has ripple effects to the
> important worlds.
> 
> annum, in SDB taxes turns into more SDBs than I want to count. Even if they
> are shiny new imported SDBs that need 20% their sticker cost in imported
> spare parts per year, it's still more SDBs than I want to count.

I wonder how much a naval crew would really cost, though? Salaries are one
thing, but what about training? Figure maybe MCr 3-5 for each of the
senior officers, and MCr 0.5-1.5 for many of the juniors in positions like
gunnery, sensors, piloting... SDB crews may actually need MORE training
considering the wide range of enviroments they operate in. Look at the
cost of subarmine crew, now add training in gas giant, submarine, space
and air tactics.

Then there are maintaining the naval bases, the pensions you are paying
out to everyone who retired, day care for kids...

Furthermore, how much of the Navy budget goes to research and
development? Sure, we know the imperium is "TL15 for the next x centuries"
but would the navy feel like that? In any case, new ships are coming and
they must be tested, new missiles developed... also, though this is rarely
reflected in game terms, it is likely that electronic warfare gear is
regularly software/hardware module upgraded every 5-10 years just because
the other guy is doing the same thing...

So what I'm saying is, can you reasonably say that this much of the navy
share of GDP goes into construction and maintainance of fleet units?

Out of curosity, how many capital ships (cruisers, carriers) does the US
Navy muster at present? If you multiply that by 10 for the difference
between the US and a 2-billion high-pop world, and then, perhaps, double
it (because the Imperial Navy doesn't have the Air Force eating its share
of the budget..) then I'd say you'd have a fare idea how many ships a
world spending about 4% of GDP could pump into the sector navy *and
support with the necessary bases, training and personnel and
infrastructure" which are quite possibly largerly independent of TL7 to
TL15 differences.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:06:18 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

>>I hope it will be good, but I cannot help but think of those other NZ
>>exports: _Hercules_ and _Xena: Warrior Princess_. Woo hoo, Kevin Sorbo as
>>Aragorn! :-(
>
>I'd just like to point out that Kevin Sorbo is _not_ a New Zealander. IIRC
>he's from Minnesota.


And blessed is New Zealand for that! :-)

I was speaking tongue in cheek, so I hope no offense was taken. However,
seeing the quality of the recent spate of film adaptations of the fantasy
genre -- Hercules, Xena, Conan, Sinbad (the series), Dragonheart, Kull, and
so on -- I cringe to think of a LotR motion picture.

ObTrav: Kevin Sorbo as Strephon.

No really ... fantasy in the Traveller universe. Has anyone done a TNE-era
setting using a classic pseudo-fantasy background, where high-tech takes the
place of magic? I did a space opera/science fantasy setting once using the
Rebellion as a background, and that was really fun. But I am imagining
something more like Fred Saberhagen's _Empire of the East_, with
Virus-haunted machines rather than nuclear demons (FYI, magic existed in
Saberhagen's setting, the result of what was essentially a world-wide
nuclear damper system. When it was turned on during the war, things
*changed*, and previous inanimate forces -- like the conflaguration of a
nuclear explosion, or the energy in a city's power grid -- took on life as
spirits and demons).

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:36:16 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: MT Hand to Hand

>From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
>Subject: Re: MT Hand to Hand - not Interrupts
...
>Seriously though, this leads me to a point I've been
>wrestling with for about a month now. Has anyone considered
>modifying damage done by melee weapons based on the skill
>level of the wielder? It seems to me that a high skill level
>would not only allow the highly skilled character to make a
>higher chance of making a successful attack but could also
>allow the attack to be more effective.
>
>Any thoughts on this, anyone?

  The last Trav game I was involved in (CT/Striker, `88?) used the following:
Brawling/Martial Arts - add skill to damage with hand or foot (1D).
Weapon (cutlass, axe, etc.) - add skill to damage.

  In either case the damage added was allocated as a separate "die"; thus,
a foot strike for 1D at skill 3 (pretty good for CT/HG/etc.) would be 1D to
a random physical stat, plus 3 points to one of the other two stats.

  OTOH, if my opponents body armour is really vulnerable to punches I'd
really rather have an SMG...

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:36:45 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller

Probably the Definitive Sensor Rules.

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls 
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!
- -----Original Message-----
From: CardSharks@aol.com <CardSharks@aol.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 9:20 PM
Subject: Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller


>In a message dated 10/14/98 10:44:14 PM Central Daylight Time,
>chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au writes:
>
><< adopts Bruce'e DSR. >>
>
>Tell me what this is?
>
>Marc
>

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:39:31 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

>I was speaking tongue in cheek, so I hope no offense was taken. However,
>seeing the quality of the recent spate of film adaptations of the fantasy
>genre -- Hercules, Xena, Conan, Sinbad (the series), Dragonheart, Kull, and
>so on -- I cringe to think of a LotR motion picture.

Couldn't be worse than the last one...  :(

>
>ObTrav: Kevin Sorbo as Strephon.
>


hmmm...how about as Dulinor?  With Mike Myers as Lucan?

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:40:24 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/14/98 8:51:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time, rancke@diku.dk
writes:

<< >I think a good cost-effective way of dealing w/ the SDB force is to take
them
 >out FIRST.
 
 If you can, yes. It's not as easy as you claim. Nor is it the kind of piracy
 portrayed in CT sources. >>

>>But the pirates portrayed in the CT sources are the small-fry kind. They
lurk around in backwater systems and try to capture Free Traders.>>

I was not attempting to duplicate any "canonical" system...I was simply
presenting a possible means of making piracy possible.

>...and no star system, no matter how rich it is, will spend more money for
>defense than it feels it has too. 

>>And how much is that? IMO the Imperium requires its planets to spend a
certain percentage of its production on its military.

Requires...or allows?  I have a hard time believing the Imperium (or any
authoritative govt) would actively encourage a world to build it's forces up
to the point of being an inconvenience.  And before I am buried under a flood
of posts pointing out that no single system can withstand the might of the
Imperium...remember the Interstellar Wars?  A real local force can cause a
significant headache to a far larger govt...you can look to both Vietnam and
Somalia as examples of this, as well as the Solomani Autonomous Sphere, which
IIRC was set up to defuse this exact situation.

>>>SDB's will rarely, if ever, operate in squadron size to take out one
>pirate... 
>So at worst, you may have 2 SDBs responding to a typical distress call

>>Why not? They'd use what they have.
 
So by this reckoning...if a system has 2500 SDB's, they would all show up for
one pirate?  Or for that matter, every police unit would respond to a
convenience-store hold up?   They would only use what they PERCIEVE as a
necessary level of response...and if they are overconfidant, they will likely
make mistakes; "Oh our system defenses are too strong, no pirate would dare
operate here here, the Japanese Fleet can't attack us here...-)
.
>So at worst, you may have 2 SDBs responding to a typical distress call

>>For a typical 400 T corsair that's one too many.

Why is everyone so quick to push the 400-ton corsair button??  While I have
not sat down and done a design (under MT) for a corsair, I would not start at
less than 1000 tons; canonically, a Leviathan-class Merchant (1800 tons) is
being used for piracy.

To use another idea from Trav canon (admitedly this will stretch the arguement
a bit, but that doesn't invalidate it) is the sale of military-surplus
warships (remember Oberlindes?)  True, these starships are disarmed if
operating w/in the Imperium (which IMTU, only applies to heavy ordinance:
lasers and sand turrets are usually left intact.  Even without the PAW, a
Lightning-class cruiser is a significant reason to "stand and deliver!"

And just what makes an SDB so tough, anyway?  They are armed with nothing more
than you are...and they will NOT have nukes ( it is QUITE clear that only the
Imperial Navy has the right of possesion and use of nukes;  it is also clear
that local defenses are just that, LOCAL.  The use of nukes is an edge that
the Imperium will not relinquish under any circumstances.  The ramifications
of this on starship combat is obvious)  

Just remember the old saying:  Outlaw nukes and only outlaws will have them!
:-)

Pirates have to be where their prey is, which happens to be where the
system defenses are too. 

>Besides, replacing system defenses, for a lot of systems, will
>take time and money...which may not always be available.

So you have all your SDBs at the jump point?  Ok...which one?  Do you escort
the merchants in?  Do you assign all your SDBs to escort them, or just one?
Enquiring minds want to know...<G>

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:41:21 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: My wish list for T5 combat

Since Marc seems to be open to polite comments on T5 and the subject of the 
combat system has come up I'd like to offer my humble $NZ0.039 (at todays 
exchange rates).

What I'd like to see in the T5 combat system. Well I'd like to see _Two_ 
combat systems.

The first should a simple (one page max, a sidebar would be ideal) system 
based on T4 for those (like me) who are satisfied when being hit by a gun 
makes you fall over.
Basically take penetration subtract armour and that the number of dice you roll 
for damage. Add a couple of special cases (shotguns, blowthrough rule) etc. 
Make the to hit role a difficult (?) task at effective range getting easier closer 
and harder further (add in a couple of special rules for hasty fire and called 
shots). As long as its fundimentally realistic (you get shot you fall over) I don't 
care if its fairly corse.

The second should be an expansion of the simple system for those who like to 
go into greater detail. This system should have rules for recoil, variable damage 
(the +d -d thing), differing types of damage etc (basically the T5 system).

Basically what I want is a fast play combat system and a gearhead combat 
system. The fast play should be a simplified version of the gearhead one.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:49:53 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/14/98 11:27:31 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca writes:

<<   Keep in mind that a single 400 Dt SDB of a given TL will typically make
 an uneconomical mess of a 1000 Dt para-military starship of the same TL,
 at least under HG. FWIW, the SDB will have the higher speed and Agility,
 so disengaging will not likely be the pirates' option, except perhaps by
 Jump (and they'll need a big power surplus to enjoy trying that).
 
         Steven Hudson >>

Would they?  In a previous post I mentioned the fact that local defenses would
NOT have access to nuclear missiles...only Imperial forces do (this is the
great equalizer for the Navy)  So a 1000dt purpose-built raider/privateer or
mil-surplus warship (canonical examples exist) would have a large advantage
over a 400-ton SDB, depending on the TL of the SDB (a TL 11 SDB, in spite of
Agility advantage, which is by no means guarenteed, likely, but not certain,
can be met on better than even terms by a raider w/ a Model 9 comp)  And since
the pirates are criminals anyway...they aren't squeamish about having and
using nukes (look at the North Hollywood bank robbery last year in LA).

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:58:37 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a machine race

> From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
> IMC, the Third Imperium has as much or more of a prejudice against
> robot-controlled weaponry as they do against psionics... witness the lack
> of internal guidance on G:T missiles.

But that is in GURPs not GDW or Imperium Traveller...  You have got to
think there is a canon example of self guided weapons in GDW Traveller, the
Tac Missile...

Legate Legion, Militant Jewish Terrorist
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

We are Microsoft of Borg.  Your distinctive capabilities will be adapted to
service us.  Resistance is futile.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:57:35 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/14/98 12:50:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
yikes@evansville.net writes:

<< To have a common ground of argument, we need to be using the same setting.
:-)
  >>

I understand this is all in fun, but I can't accept using an arguement that is
so obviously flawed (IMHO, of course).  It's just the way I am...<G>

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:02:26 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

From:           	"Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Date sent:      	Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:39:31 -0700

>Couldn't be worse than the last one...  :(

Those are famous last words if ever I heard them :*>

>>ObTrav: Kevin Sorbo as Strephon.

>hmmm...how about as Dulinor?  With Mike Myers as Lucan?

How about Kevin Smith (plays Ares) as Lucan :*>

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #950
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Thursday, October 15 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 951



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy
Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller
Re: Piracy
Re: Tech advancement
SDB's (was Re: Piracy)
Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system
Re GT Ship Design
Re: Physics - Help!
Re: Margesi/Rhylanor
Re: Piracy
Re: Grayson 
Re: Piracy
Re: Tech advancement
Re: Illness in roleplaying games
Sabmiqys [was: Re: Discovery of a machine race]
Re: various piracy bits
Re: Discovery of a machine race
Re: Re : Limits to Tech Advancement (longish)
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Inspirations from literature (was Re: OT: Lord of the Rings)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 01:10:38 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/14/98 20:54:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca writes:

<< ..
 >IMTU, I take a figure of MCr100 per year for a MILITARY budget...this is
 >divided between the Imperial Navy (50%), the subsector/reserve Navy (30%)
and
 >local defense (20%)  50Cr per person/year seems to give more realism for me
 >and mine.
 
   What population is the MCr100 budget for? >>

For each individual world...a world w/ 10000 citizens would have KCr 20,000
per year for local defense...not very much, yes?  However, TCS allows an
initial outlay of 10 years worth of money for your starting fleet...MCr 2.
Most likely no space-based defenses other than defense sats; so aerospace
fighters for close orbit maybe.

Now a world w/ 10,000,000 citizens would have MCr 20 per year, times 10 gives
MCr200.  Still not a lot, but some armed fighters or small craft can be
gotten.

At 1,000,000,000 pop, you now get MCr20,000 per year...this will allow a major
system defense presence.  But remember, your Army and COACC forces come out
ofthis budget, too.

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 01:12:42 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/14/98 20:55:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
yikes@evansville.net writes:

<< Say population A planet X decides "SDBs, we don' need no stinkin' SDBs. So
 we loose a few cargos to pirates -- so what?" Then population 8 or 9 planet
 Z (ruled by the ruthless charismatic dictator who believes in a sound
 military budget) decides, "hey, let's invade planet X." The lack of system
 defense forces for planet X would be a liability in this case. >>

No, the Imperial Rules of War allow a certain amount of friction between
worlds as a safety valve...outright interference and invasion of a worl by
another is generally discouraged (usually by a visit from an Imperial
Squadron)

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 13:12:05 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller

Bruce Alan Macintosh's Definitive sensor rules.  They can be used at simple
intermediate or advanced levels.  They are very good, simple to use, and
are based on real world science.  They are available on the web.
http://www.missouri.edu/~ccjoe/traveller/
Colin

>In a message dated 10/14/98 10:44:14 PM Central Daylight Time,
>chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au writes:
>
><< adopts Bruce'e DSR. >>
>
>Tell me what this is?
>
>Marc
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:45:51 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>And just what makes an SDB so tough, anyway?

The same thing that makes a battle rider tough -- no jump drive and (more
importantly) no need for all that tankage for fuel. All that extra space can
be used for manuever drives, weapons, and armor. So a SDB is, ton-for-ton,
badder than a jump-capable pirate.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:39:46 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Tech advancement
...
>coralary is also correct.  There is the complication of a non limear aproach
>to such problems.  Midevil fortifications could not be breached directly but
>were easily defeated by blockade and sapping.  Tactic beating Technology.
>The Majinoe Line (or however it's spelled) of the french was bypassed and
>left to 'wither on the vine'.  The same was true for the Japanese fortress
>islands.  We took what we needed and starved the others out.

  Medieval castles were almost impossible to starve out by blockade, and sapping
was definitely a non-trivial undertaking (failure could turn the situation into
a starvation siege, which would have been the attackers first choice if it were
in their best interests).

  The Maginot Line would have worked perfectly well if it had been completed -
budgetary problems in the `30's resulted in its' northern flank being left open.

  Japanese strategy was pretty impressively challenged in many respects - if 
not they'd hardly have attacked the US.

...
>The entire battle of Iron Bottom Sound was an act of desperation and was won
>by another desperate act.  What sane person would send destroyers into
>direct short range combat against battle ships and cruisers?  But it WORKED.
>The escort carriers got away (except two) and the Japanese lost all there
>capital ships that night except one and that one was sunk the next morning.
>Tatics defeats firepower and surprise that night but the cost was brutal.
>Desperate men in desperate time doing what HAD to be done.  Never
>underestimate the power of desperate men.  They can and have done the
>'imposible' many times.

  Luckily the Japs didn't have FC radar :>  There's actually an article in
last years fall issue of the Journal of Military History that goes into a
great deal about the deployments of the US battleships in the year after
Pearl (it's also something of an attack on a rather bad book titled: Sacred
Vessels, but I digress...).

  The bottom line appears to be that a greater use of battleships in the
area was against USN policy at the time, and that the only alternative to
attritting through lighter surface units was withdrawal.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:34:54 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: SDB's (was Re: Piracy)

>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>And just what makes an SDB so tough, anyway?  They are armed with nothing more
>than you are...and they will NOT have nukes ( it is QUITE clear that only the
>Imperial Navy has the right of possesion and use of nukes;  it is also clear
>that local defenses are just that, LOCAL.  The use of nukes is an edge that
>the Imperium will not relinquish under any circumstances.  The ramifications
>of this on starship combat is obvious)  

  SDB's will have good computers and high Agility (important, under HG), heavy
armour, and military grade weapons. I'm not sure that planetary SDB's wouldn't
be allowed access to nukes, as they must stockpile them for wartime use.

  You might try the following boat against a supposed pirate vessel in a
stand up fight - a 4000 tonner can probably do it at TL 12-13, but I doubt
that you'll have any luck worth mentioning with TL 12 designs that could
actually pass itself off as a profitable freighter.

                SB-A1068F2-C50000-60002-0       MCr 1433        1000 tons
        batteries bearing   1     1   3                            TL=12
                batteries   1     1   3                          Crew=20 
        Cargo=160*. Fuel=80. EP=80. Agility=6.

  * - there's nothing left to spend the tonnage on under HG; armour, agility,
comp/sensors are all maxxed. Upgrading to more energy weapons seems needless
at 3% per factor. Add troops, ships' boats, fighters, magazines; maybe a pool
hall - a pigboat doesn't have to be dull...

  The crew works out to be around 20 under both Book 2 (the engineer per 35 tons
of drives does not work worth a damn for HG designs - the drives here are over
three times the combined tonnage of the 6-rating X-drives on p.22) and HG (where
the ship has _nine_ command staff, and isn't even Jump-capable).

  The remaining tonnage could easily be more fuel and even a J-1 unit, but that
gets into a world of strategic paperwork that FFW/TCS tried to avoid...

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 03:35:16 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Another modification for the T4/5 task system

Morgan wrote:

> steve daniels wrote:
> >
> > The Its-Harder-Than-I-Thought-But-I-Think-I-Know-A-Trick Rule.
> > ;-)
>
>   Don't you mean the McGuyver rule?

ROFL!  Good one.  But this wouldnt' fly with Trademark concerns.
Perhaps the "Jury-rig" corrolary of the "Skill Experience" rules.

IMO, I-H-T-I-T is awfully close to H-I-T-I-T (Hit it).  Get it?  :-P

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:49:38 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re GT Ship Design

>
>Note that the whole theory behind including the power plants in the guns is
>somewhat fishy, since it means that a chunk of fusion reactor is in the turret
>(which seems unlikely) and that you need to upgrade your power plant to add
>weaponry (which means people can't swap out weapons very well).  This is why I
>wrote up modules which separate out the power plant.
<RANT!>
The WHOLE BLOODY POINT was to eliminate the need for fiddling with Power.

Based upon the Simple Ship Design Sequence (a paraphrase)

A module includes the power systems to make the items in the module work.
While the stuff in the module is installed as a unit FOR THE PURPOSES OF
THE DESIGN SYSTEM, it actually is installed as part of the various areas,
NOT MODULE BY MODULE. So, all the "Pieces of Powerplant" actually create
ONE power plant, and the actual volume in the turret is just the weapons
and access space, with that space being shared from the staterooms for the
crewmen, etc. Heck, the module could even include the remote fire control
station for the bridge.

Adding unpowered modules DEFEATS THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE SIMPLIFIED SYSTEM!!!
</RANT!>

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 03:45:14 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Physics - Help!

Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:

> Ronons are phonons who's liege-lord has been killed, and are forced to
> wander as itinerant ocillations through space/time making a living as
> mercenaries in subatomic armies. They are most often found amidst legions
> of meson particles as auxiliaries.
>
> <diving for cover>

ROFLMAO!

Stop it!  I'm in pain.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 03:53:39 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Margesi/Rhylanor

Erwin Fritz wrote:

> I play in 1107, using a hodge-podge of rules (mostly MT and T5). My players are
> contemplating a jump to Margesi/Rhylanor in order to get some needed repairs
> done and to hire some engineers.
>
> Other than the UWP, I have no info on that world. Galactic 2.4 has no file
> attached to it. Before I detail that system, I was wondering if anyone out there
> had already done so and would be willing to share that information with me.

I looked at the beta of G:T Behind The Claw, but its a very thin description.

I think you should take a whack at it and share what you come up with.
That population will probably limit what development there is.
How many people would be employed at the navy base, the scout base, and
the class A starport?  Out of 900.  I'm guessing it would be the great
bulk of that population.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 01:01:21 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
><<   Keep in mind that a single 400 Dt SDB of a given TL will typically make
> an uneconomical mess of a 1000 Dt para-military starship of the same TL,
> at least under HG. FWIW, the SDB will have the higher speed and Agility,
> so disengaging will not likely be the pirates' option, except perhaps by
> Jump (and they'll need a big power surplus to enjoy trying that).
...
>Would they?  In a previous post I mentioned the fact that local defenses would
>NOT have access to nuclear missiles...only Imperial forces do (this is the

  Your opinion may be untenable given both original intent and the later
revisions to spaceship weaponry rules (i.e., det-nukes).

>great equalizer for the Navy)  So a 1000dt purpose-built raider/privateer or
>mil-surplus warship (canonical examples exist) would have a large advantage

  Gee, you'd better not try and register that puppy. Who paid for it?

>over a 400-ton SDB, depending on the TL of the SDB (a TL 11 SDB, in spite of
>Agility advantage, which is by no means guarenteed, likely, but not certain,
>can be met on better than even terms by a raider w/ a Model 9 comp)  And since

  TL 15, with 140-200 MCr in computer/sensor array alone? Again, you'd best
be an enemy warship to explain this one.

>the pirates are criminals anyway...they aren't squeamish about having and
>using nukes (look at the North Hollywood bank robbery last year in LA).

  Weren't you pointing out that the Imperium gets _very_ upset about the
inappropriate use of nukes?

  BTW, they ended up shot up, didn't they?

  I have to agree that a TL 15 1000 ton Jump warship could beat the snot
out of a TL 11 SDB, especially a poorly designed one (Agility <6). 

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 03:49:09 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Grayson 

> >> As one currently living in the midst of it, I always assumed that Grayson
> >> was the "Mormon Empire" writ large. Many of the cultural, social,
> >> historical, and (to a lesser degree) religious aspects are certainly
> >> similar, which is not a suprise, considering *where* the Graysons are
> >> supposed to have migrated from in the first place - Idaho and the
> >> surrounding western American states.
> 
> >The impression I got from the books is, the state religion, the
> >Church of Man Unchained, was more of a 'holy roller'-style
> >Pentacostal movement.  Mormons aren't Pentacostals.  I can almost see
> >Austin himself chitchatting with Oral Roberts and Billy Graham and
> >holding his own.
> 
> Yep, the feel is Fundimentalist, not Mormon...at least to me.  The
> "country music opera" was a dead give away. ;->

I know *lots* of good Mormons who LOVE country & western.  My dad's one of 
them.  I think it was the polygamy aspect of Grayson culture that makes 
everybody think of Mormons.

> >FWIW, I see a bit of a parallel with Grayson as Japan before Perry. 
> >You have various and sundry 'warlords' (Steadholders) keeping on top
> >of an almost figurehead Emperor (Protector).  In their steadings, the
> >Steadholder gets an almost *fanatical* devotion from his subjects and
> >of course his own personal army.
> 
> Interesting take, and I can see it too.  Then there is that Grayson
> dueling style that, although not detailed, sure sounded very
> Kendo-ish.

I think Clinkscales mentioned that the entire dueling style was developed from
studying the movie 'Seven Samauri' in 'Flag in Exile'.

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 01:13:58 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>It's worse than that - if you use MT, TNE or T4 (and I think CT, as well)
>the 100 diameter limit is inside detection range of the planet or ships in
>orbit, and for a size A world you'll be in gunnery range of a 6G SDB in
>about 3 hours if it starts in orbit. If there are 4-8 SDBs out at about 60
...

  FWIW, if you match course with a freighter to transfer cargo (or boarders)
then what happens to the gunboats firing solutions?

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:07:25 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Tech advancement

>
>  The Maginot Line would have worked perfectly well if it had been
completed -
>budgetary problems in the `30's resulted in its' northern flank being left
open.
>
For interests sake...
Indeed this is true, although the Maginot line was never originally
intended to cover the northern flank.  It was simply a Bulwark to protect
the projection of Alsace-Lorraine.  With the co-operation of Belgium (not
actually forthcoming as it turned out) the Northern flank was well secure.
The Gemans never penetrated the line proper (not that it was a 'line'), and
the demonstration attacks carried out to see if this were possible on a
large scale were abkject failures. (This is not to say that there were some
technical failings)  Goerinmg is alledged to ahve wept with range at the
lack of damage done by his vaunted bombers.  [The giant Mortars KARL, and
the super guns, Dora, could, if they had been built in time and survived
emplacement, and counter battery fire, have had a serious impact upon
them.]  The interconnected fortified zones even provided a considerable
obstacle to the Allies when defended by small German forces, and with most
of their embrasures pointinmg in the wrong direction.  Two excellent books
in english on this subject are:
Vivian Rowe 'The Great Wall of France'- 
Kemp's 'The maginot line'
In French:
Bruge, Roger.  Histoire de la ligne Maginot 
  

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:41:49 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Lars Adler <adler@hartree.pc.Uni-Koeln.DE>
Subject: Re: Illness in roleplaying games

On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Fred and Evelyn Wolke wrote:

> I'm not real keen on disabling adventurers early on, but if the PC's were
> passengers on a ship, when the crew became disabled, that would be somewhat
> more interesting.

This is sort of the thing I had in mind. Basically, one of my group is the
pilot, the rest are the passengers. But if the group has no ship of their
own and has to travel by agency, this would be the sort of adventure, I am
most up to ... and the disabling would not be complete.

Early symptoms are loss of motorical, plus loss of sight. Now
consider the pilot explaining the controls to a passenger, who perhaps
only led a ship's boat once ... (scenes taken from 'flights in peril'-
movies will fit in best here.) This works best if someone in panic
crippled the ship's computer emergency program.

L.A.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:48:51 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: Sabmiqys [was: Re: Discovery of a machine race]

Someone commented:
>>The Sabmiqys are currently interdicted red-zone by the IISS, because of
the
>>high TL (17) and some contact problems. There was a write up about them,
in
>>Challenge, I think.


To which Joseph R. Dietrich replied:
>Oh, reeaally... very interesting.

>Does anyone else have any information on these Sabmiqys? Hex location in
>Antares, Challenge issue #, or anything else?


An entry from the Bibliography of Traveller magazine articles I've
submitted to BITS for publication reads as follows:

The Sabmiqys: Contact
By Joe Fugate.  Challenge 28, 1987, pp.31-34
3 pages, large format.  Tab., ill.
A xenophobic race from Sabmiqys (Antares 2117) who are actually
pseudo-biological robots guarding their world with meson guns.


HTH

tc

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:22:54
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: various piracy bits

>From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>Waitaminute.
>
>I thought that worlds could make war on each other freely under the 3I, as
>long as they did not violate the Imperial Rules of War. If that was the
>case, I could easily see why a planet would want some system defenses as a
>deterrant (especially considering that orbital surpremacy really ruins a
>planet's day).
>

Sort of. One of the rules is 'No-one makes war in space but us'. This may
be bent with corporate warfare, commerce raiding and so on, but I wouldnt
go actually breaking it, if I had a healthy respect fot the IN.

>From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
>Subject: Piracy! [bwa-ha-ha! (was re: Transponders)]
>
>  What would you estimate the initial market capitalization of a band of 
>gentleman adventurers buying a 4000 ton para-military starship to be? How
>would the prospectus read, and on what bourse would you recommend floating
it?
>

Where *is* Famile Spofulam's head office sited, anyway ?

>From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
>Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #949
>
>I wonder how much a naval crew would really cost, though? Salaries are one
>thing, but what about training? Figure maybe MCr 3-5 for each of the
>senior officers, and MCr 0.5-1.5 for many of the juniors in positions like
>gunnery, sensors, piloting... SDB crews may actually need MORE training
>considering the wide range of enviroments they operate in. Look at the
>cost of subarmine crew, now add training in gas giant, submarine, space
>and air tactics.
>

Military ships tend to cost about a megacredit per dton. The crew training
costs will be lower than this.

>Then there are maintaining the naval bases, the pensions you are paying
>out to everyone who retired, day care for kids...
>

This is part of what chews up the 10% of sticker cost per annum, as opposed
to the 0.1% for civilians.

>Furthermore, how much of the Navy budget goes to research and
>development? Sure, we know the imperium is "TL15 for the next x centuries"
>but would the navy feel like that? In any case, new ships are coming and
>they must be tested, new missiles developed... also, though this is rarely
>reflected in game terms, it is likely that electronic warfare gear is
>regularly software/hardware module upgraded every 5-10 years just because
>the other guy is doing the same thing...

I cant imagine planetary navies doing a lot of this. Kenya might buy some
third line fighter-bombers, but it doesnt kick into the research into the F22.

>
>So what I'm saying is, can you reasonably say that this much of the navy
>share of GDP goes into construction and maintainance of fleet units?
>

10% of initial construction cost per annum.

>Out of curosity, how many capital ships (cruisers, carriers) does the US
>Navy muster at present? 

If you are using the modern world as an example, you'd have to include all
those nuclear attack and ballistic missile subs as 'capital' units as well.

>
>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:09:07 -0400 (EDT)
>From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
>Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #949
>
>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>So by this reckoning...if a system has 2500 SDB's, they would all show up for
>one pirate?  Or for that matter, every police unit would respond to a
>convenience-store hold up?   They would only use what they PERCIEVE as a
>necessary level of response...and if they are overconfidant, they will likely
>make mistakes; "Oh our system defenses are too strong, no pirate would dare
>operate here here, the Japanese Fleet can't attack us here...-)
>.

In Australia, if people start shooting at police, then large amounts of
heat comes down on them fast. It comes down on other parties who are
innocent of this particular offense, even if guilty of other things that
are at this point not proven.

>Why is everyone so quick to push the 400-ton corsair button??  While I have
>not sat down and done a design (under MT) for a corsair, I would not start at
>less than 1000 tons; canonically, a Leviathan-class Merchant (1800 tons) is
>being used for piracy.
>

Where does our hypothetical pirate get that sort of money ?

Also, the bigger the pirate, the more money you need to keep it running,
and the more likely it is some subsector Admiral will want to make his
career on you.

>And just what makes an SDB so tough, anyway?  They are armed with nothing
more
>than you are...and they will NOT have nukes ( it is QUITE clear that only the
>Imperial Navy has the right of possesion and use of nukes;  it is also clear
>that local defenses are just that, LOCAL.  The use of nukes is an edge that
>the Imperium will not relinquish under any circumstances.  The ramifications
>of this on starship combat is obvious)  

SDBs have armour, agility, secure bases, no need for jump fuel and no need
for spare crew or cargo space. Under HG they also have the best available
computers, if I am anywhere near the design bureau building them.

Sending up enough nukes to get through a single damper is an expensive
business. Use of nukes also tends to trigger Imperial attention.

>So you have all your SDBs at the jump point?  Ok...which one?  Do you escort
>the merchants in?  Do you assign all your SDBs to escort them, or just one?
>Enquiring minds want to know...<G>
>

We have the SDBs at the jump point that we advertised for this month in the
Subsector Commercial Shipping News. If, as a pirate, you *want* to play,
then you will play on the grounds of our choosing.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 05:37:26
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a machine race

At 09:58 PM 10/14/98 -0700, you wrote:
>> From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
>> IMC, the Third Imperium has as much or more of a prejudice against
>> robot-controlled weaponry as they do against psionics... witness the lack
>> of internal guidance on G:T missiles.
>
>But that is in GURPs not GDW or Imperium Traveller...  You have got to
>think there is a canon example of self guided weapons in GDW Traveller, the
>Tac Missile...

There you go.  As always, YMMV.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:45:05 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Re : Limits to Tech Advancement (longish)

At 11:14 15/10/98 +1000, Robert O'Connor wrote:

>Limiting factors :-
>population, size of state, communications networks, amount of spending
>in R&D, other cultural factors.
>
>The 3I has more people(?), better communication networks, and spend a
>lot on R&D (for all the Research Stations we have heard about, what
>about the really black ones? Or the megacorporate equivalents?).
>
>The Solomani lack the internal cohesion of the 3I, despite the Party, so
>information exchange is not optimal.
>Also, multiple smaller states implies duplication of research, and
>smaller population bases to draw talent from.
>[However, it is widely described that the Solomani are the
>masters of biomedical technology in Charted Space (TL 16?) -
>must attribute to other cultural factors e.g. a head start in the
>Interstellar Wars period].

Well the 3I's sheer size, the Megacorps, the Navy vs other arms, etc, etc
all mean the same for the 3I.

>The Zho probably have a "psionic TL" of 16 (in the absence of a formal
>scale). Most other items in their culture are controlled by psionic
>'flicking' : computers, vehicles, medical tech, weapons ("Trigger? What
>trigger?").
>The stratification of society into Nobles, Intendants and Proles,
>and lifelong psionic screening and training, leads to a
>significant diversion of effort away from other research areas.

How about the stratification of society into nobles and non-nobles leads to
everyone attempting to climb the ladder instead of advancing technology (in
the 3I)?

IMO most arguments explaining the 3I's superior TL also work back the other
way. The only one that does it for me is "Just because". IMO the 3I has a
higher TL because once upon a time they were the good guys, and therefore
just a bit better than everyone else.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:49:22 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

At 23:06 14/10/98 -0500, Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:

>I was speaking tongue in cheek, so I hope no offense was taken. However,
>seeing the quality of the recent spate of film adaptations of the fantasy
>genre -- Hercules, Xena, Conan, Sinbad (the series), Dragonheart, Kull, and
>so on -- I cringe to think of a LotR motion picture.

None taken by me. I actually quite like Xena, and Hercules a little. One of
the elements that I like is the light-hearted treatment of Greek myth, etc.
I mean it's not like the Greek didn't rewrite the stuff whenever they felt
it useful or more entertaining, so why shouldn't we?

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 05:44:02 -0600
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com>
Subject: Inspirations from literature (was Re: OT: Lord of the Rings)

>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:06:18 -0500
>From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
>Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
>
>No really ... fantasy in the Traveller universe. Has anyone done a TNE-era
>setting using a classic pseudo-fantasy background, where high-tech takes the
>place of magic?
>

I tend to use Swashbuckler literature when I'm in need of inspiration.  I
cribbed an entire space opera campaign from _Treasure_Island_, right down
to a one-legged villain named "Argent".  At the end of the campaign, I
handed the players a list of "credits":  "Based on Treasure Island, by R.
L. Stevenson, starring ----- as Jim Hawkins," etc.  You should have seen
their faces.

_The_Three_Musketeers_ is a great source, as is _Captain_Blood_.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #951
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Thursday, October 15 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 952



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Margesi/Rhylanor
Re: Piracy
Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
Re: Piracy
re: Barratry
Re: Piracy
Fortresses (was re: Tech Advancement)
Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
re: various piracy bits
Re: Physics - Help!
Re: Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 13:59:33 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Jens \"Spacejens\" Rydholm" <spacejens@h72.ryd.student.liu.se>
Subject: Re: Margesi/Rhylanor

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, steve daniels wrote:

> How many people would be employed at the navy base, the scout base, and
> the class A starport?  Out of 900.  I'm guessing it would be the great
> bulk of that population.

I would say that the few that are not directly employed at the two bases
or the starport are indirectly involved, ie as gym owners, restaurant
cooks, and hot dog vendors. This habitation probably wouldn't exist if it
weren't for this main industry.

With such a small population, the world probably cannot maintain a mining
facility of it's own, so it must be dependent on outside deliveries of raw
materials for ship construction, maintenance and repair.

Agriculture might exist, but far away from the main habitated area, since
the tainted atmosphere there would ruin all crops quickly. I assume the
farmers spend the week at the fields, to shift works with someone the next
week. Or perhaps a few oddballs among the population spend most of their
time far away from the City.

+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Jens "Spacejens" Rydholm    http://spacejens.ml.org     |
| jenry023@student.liu.se     Telephone: +46(0)13-4730961 |
| ICQ UIN: 3844745            Linköping, Sweden           |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU ?tc t4 ru ge+ 3i- jt+ a ?st ls kk++ hi+ as++ va++  |
|      ?dr so- zh ?da sy+                                 |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
|               In politics, left is right!               |
+---------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:47:05 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

David L. Pulver writes:

>>From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>

>>Even if they are shiny new imported SDBs that need 20% their sticker cost
>>in imported spare parts per year, it's still more SDBs than I want to count.
> 
>I wonder how much a naval crew would really cost, though?

I can't tell you that, as Real World figures for space navies are difficult
to get hold on. And as someone else pointed out, if a number of different
people are to work on the same shared world and not mess it up, you need
some guidelines. The best guidelines we have are those of TCS and _Striker_.
Obviously TCS presents a very simplified picture, what with ignoring
logistics completely. I'd have no quarrel with rules attempting to refine
the blanket "annual support is 10% of original cost". But any such refined
figures ought to be in the same ballpark as the 10%. Incidentally, the 10%
figure is very likely to be much higher than anything you can come up with
by going into details, except possibly if you want to support actions a 
_long_ way from the base.

As for Imperial spending, the average spending of an Imperial world is 3%
of GWP with 30% of that going to the Imperium and 60% of the remainder
going to the planetary navy. [Striker]

>Salaries are one thing, but what about training? Figure maybe MCr 3-5 for
>each of the senior officers, and MCr 0.5-1.5 for many of the juniors in
>positions like gunnery, sensors, piloting... SDB crews may actually need
>MORE training considering the wide range of enviroments they operate in.
>Look at the cost of subarmine crew, now add training in gas giant,
>submarine, space and air tactics.

The 10% figure is said to include everything except replacement of combat
losses. (By implication even natural replacements are covered).

>Then there are maintaining the naval bases, the pensions you are paying
>out to everyone who retired, day care for kids...

All included.
 
>Furthermore, how much of the Navy budget goes to research and development?

If you work out the cost of the navy described in _Rebellion_ you'll find
that it comes to about 34% of the figure you get if you work out the budget
according to the _Striker_ rules. Believe me, there's money left over for
R&D.

And DustyLV769@aol.com writes:

>In a message dated 10/14/98 8:51:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time, rancke@diku.dk
>writes:
> 
>>>But the pirates portrayed in the CT sources are the small-fry kind. They
>lurk around in backwater systems and try to capture Free Traders.>>
> 
>I was not attempting to duplicate any "canonical" system...I was simply
>presenting a possible means of making piracy possible.

And I'm discussing whether pirates _as portrayed in the Traveller canon_
makes sense.
 
>>>And how much is that? IMO the Imperium requires its planets to spend a
>certain percentage of its production on its military.
> 
>Requires...or allows?  I have a hard time believing the Imperium (or any
>authoritative govt) would actively encourage a world to build it's forces up
>to the point of being an inconvenience.

Matbe you have, but the canonical information has it that the Imperium gets
a percentage of each individual world's military budget. It also says that
the average military spending in the Imperium is 3% (with a 1% minimum and
a 15% maximum). This is less than the TCS figures, but I interpret that to
be because TCS describes small pocket empires. 

>>>>SDB's will rarely, if ever, operate in squadron size to take out one
>>pirate... 
>>So at worst, you may have 2 SDBs responding to a typical distress call
> 
> >>Why not? They'd use what they have.
>  
>So by this reckoning...if a system has 2500 SDB's, they would all show up for
>one pirate?

Nah, they'd propably only send a couple of squadrons. What they wouldn't do
unless they had absolutely no choice would be to make it a fair fight.

>>So at worst, you may have 2 SDBs responding to a typical distress call
> 
>>>For a typical 400 T corsair that's one too many.
> 
>Why is everyone so quick to push the 400-ton corsair button??

Because that's the one the canon says is a common pirate vessel.

>While I have not sat down and done a design (under MT) for a corsair, I
>would not start at less than 1000 tons; canonically, a Leviathan-class
>Merchant (1800 tons) is being used for piracy.

A 1000 T pirate vessel will need to capture 2.5 times as many ships as a
400 T one to keep in the black. This is a good example of what I talked
about when I accused most pro-pirate solutions of ignoring their underlying
assumptions. As for using a surplus cruiser...

>And just what makes an SDB so tough, anyway?  They are armed with nothing more
>than you are...

Even if it is a fair fight, the pirates are at a disadvantage. The SDB is paid
to fight and if it takes damage, it has a planetary tax base to pay for its
repairs. If a pirate is hit, it has to pay for repairs out of the booty. A
few million-credit repai bills can really ruin a pirate's deal.

>So you have all your SDBs at the jump point?  Ok...which one? 

I don't need more than one.

>Do you escort the merchants in?

Why should I? The only place where a pirate has any chance of "sneaking up"
on a ship is outside the 100-diameter limit, because he can jump in (that
does mean that he can't time his arrival to intercept any particular ship,
but things are tough anyway). So if I guard the place where ships arrive
and assign different approach vectors to different ships, I can intercept
any sneaky pirate masquarading as a merchant inside the limit (the moment
it deviates from its assigned fligt path to intercept another ship, I go
after it).


>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
> 
>In a message dated 10/14/98 11:27:31 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca writes:
> 
><<   Keep in mind that a single 400 Dt SDB of a given TL will typically make
>an uneconomical mess of a 1000 Dt para-military starship of the same TL,
>at least under HG. FWIW, the SDB will have the higher speed and Agility,
>so disengaging will not likely be the pirates' option, except perhaps by
>Jump (and they'll need a big power surplus to enjoy trying that).
>  
>          Steven Hudson >>
> 
>Would they?  In a previous post I mentioned the fact that local defenses would
>NOT have access to nuclear missiles...only Imperial forces do (this is the
>great equalizer for the Navy)  So a 1000dt purpose-built raider/privateer or
>mil-surplus warship (canonical examples exist) would have a large advantage
>over a 400-ton SDB, depending on the TL of the SDB (a TL 11 SDB, in spite of
>Agility advantage, which is by no means guarenteed, likely, but not certain,
>can be met on better than even terms by a raider w/ a Model 9 comp) And since
>the pirates are criminals anyway...they aren't squeamish about having and
>using nukes (look at the North Hollywood bank robbery last year in LA).

Steven was talking of para-military ships. A military-grade 1000 T ship will
naturally be at an advantage against a military-grade 400 T ship. It will
also be a lot more expensive than a para-military ship. A Factor 9 computer
adds about MCr200 to the cost to start with.

>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
> 
>In a message dated 10/14/98 12:50:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>yikes@evansville.net writes:
> 
><< To have a common ground of argument, we need to be using the same setting.
>:-)
>>>
> 
>I understand this is all in fun, but I can't accept using an arguement that is
>so obviously flawed (IMHO, of course).  It's just the way I am...<G>

I've lost you here. Are you saying that the argument that we need to use the
same setting if our discussion is to have any meaning, or are you referring
to a canonical fact that you consider obviously flawed?
 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 13:06:32 GMT
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au (Phillip McGregor)
Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs

On Wed, 14 Oct 1998 14:07:19 -0400, you wrote:

>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 11:07:28 -0500
>From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
>Subject: Re: Disturbing Anti-Democratic Trends in Traveller and SFRPGs
>
>Peter L.S. Trevor posted:

>>I suspect that, like many things in  life,  democracy  isn't  the
>>"best" but the "least worst".
>
>Bravo, Peter!  BRAVO!

Was it Churchill who said something along the lines that "Democracy is an awful
system of government ... until you consider the alternatives ... "

If you *like* a corporate state, or a corrupt feudal system, well, great good
luck to you ... and I hope that your PCs get exactly that, to the nth degree!

Phil
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au | www.fandom.net/~PGD/index.htm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! StaRPlay:Armageddon and Dark Star are now available from www.hyperbooks.com
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Co-designer, Space Opera (FGU); Author, Rigger Black Book (FASA)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:05:59 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

DustyLV769@aol.com writes:

>For each individual world...a world w/ 10000 citizens would have KCr 20,000
>per year for local defense...not very much, yes?

How much trade will such a world have?


>However, TCS allows an initial outlay of 10 years worth of money for your
>starting fleet...MCr 2. Most likely no space-based defenses other than
>defense sats; so aerospace fighters for close orbit maybe.
> 
>Now a world w/ 10,000,000 citizens would have MCr 20 per year, times 10 gives
>MCr200.  Still not a lot, but some armed fighters or small craft can be
>gotten.
> 
>At 1,000,000,000 pop, you now get MCr20,000 per year...this will allow a major
>system defense presence.  But remember, your Army and COACC forces come out
>ofthis budget, too.

Canonical figures are 3% of GWP. In _Striker_ GWP can range up to about
Cr30,000 per citizen for rich, industrialized, high-tech worlds, but I prefer
to use the _PE_ version where average income is Cr10,000 (the credits of
highly productive worlds are worth more). That would give you a military
budget of MCr3 for your 10,000 people. Of that 70% would be retained for
system defenses and of that 60% would go to the planetary navy. So you'd
have a naval budget of MCr1.26 which would allow you hardware for MCr12.6.
Not enough for even a single SDB. But a world with 100,000 people could have
one and one with a million could have 10. A high-population world could have
10,000, but a lot of that would be in bigger ships, of course. 

Joseph R. Dietrich writes:

>>And just what makes an SDB so tough, anyway?
> 
>The same thing that makes a battle rider tough -- no jump drive and (more
>importantly) no need for all that tankage for fuel. All that extra space can
>be used for manuever drives, weapons, and armor. So a SDB is, ton-for-ton,
>badder than a jump-capable pirate.

But, to be fair, the relevant comparison is not ton-for-ton but cr-for-cr.
And there the SDB dosen't have quite the same advantage. Though the cost of
the jump drive does handicap the jump ship somewhat.
 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:09:00 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Barratry

Fred and evelyn Volke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>My personal position on piracy is the best way to do it is keep all the
>piracy infrastructure except the actual pirate ships, and use large wads of
>cash on starship crews to steal the ships intact instead.
>
>It's cheaper, and more effective IMO.

More effective?  How?  If large wads of cash could buy a starship this way
for less than you could buy one at the shipyard, why doesn't the crew just
fly off with the thing and forget you altogether?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
My take on this is that selling an illegally-obtained ship is complex and
dangerous, requiring contacts and skills not commonly found.
IMTU there are hijackers, but most hijacking teams will have little
choice but to turn pirate with their new ship - they'll never be able
to make their stolen ship's papers check out reliably enough to take
the ship into regular trade.
A few hijacking teams can pull this off, but they make so much money
at one go that they don't have to do it very often. ;)

This also applies to mutinous crews, though I can imagine a situation
where a trusting captain wills his ship to a less than trustworthy
crewman...there are a lot of ways to murder someone aboard an
operating starship that will look like an accident.

Note - how many PC Captain/Ship Owners have a last will and testament?
The Captain gets eaten by a Bug-Blatter Beast, the starship you've been
orienting the campaign around gets sent back to the bank...

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:17:34 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

David L. Pulver writes:

>Sure. If you have a big daddy (the Imperium) to protect you, not to
>mention all that money on the sector navy, why bother with all those SDB
>wings? Example: Canada, with about 1.3% GDP to the military compared to
>4% in the US.

Even 1% of GWP comes to a huge Imperial navy. And the canonical figure is
3%.

Of course, that dosen't mean that we can't fiddle a bit with those figures.
But I don't like to deviate by even an order of magnitude from the ground
rules unless I have a specific situation with a specific explanation. If
one author goes one way and another, independently, goes the other way, you
suddenly have a HUGE discrepancy.

>The Trav equivelent of this is a small power deciding to put its budget
>into some CruRons and Housecarle or spacelift capable planetary army units
>that can go fight the Zhodani on their home turf, or at least, be part of
>the colonial/subsector forces and involved in "forward defense." This
>is the big prestige, big ticket item for a general's career perspective.
>Moreover, it also makes some political sense. Sure, people might want
>"troops at home" but it gives you more say in where that fleet will be,
>and it also means you can hopefully stop that Zho or Vargr fleet on the
>border instead of waiting for it to arrive in your system....

According to _Striker_ the average planet with breathable atmosphere spends
40% of its military budget on ground forces. One without an atmosphere
spends 8% or thereabouts (I forget). The rest goes to system defenses.
How much of that goes to jump-capable ships is not defined. Certainly the
character generation system suggests that planetary navies have some jump-
capable ships. But cr-for-cr the difference between SDBs and jump ships is
not that great. I don't have exact figures, but a world would have almost as
many jump ships as it would SDBs. 75-80% I'd guess.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:27:38 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Fortresses (was re: Tech Advancement)

Steven Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  The Maginot Line would have worked perfectly well if it had been completed -
budgetary problems in the `30's resulted in its' northern flank being left open.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Perhaps not "perfectly". There were some fortresses along the low
country blitzkreig routes (Eban Emmanual, for example) that were
reduced in hours by paratrooper surprise assault and/or pioneer
infantry efforts. Granted, the Maginot Line was an monster compared
to these fortresses, but I have heard of some reduction of even that line
occurring.

By air or sea, I'll bet even a Mediterranean to Atlantic border fortress
could have been got around. Would the operational limitations of such
an obstacle have prevented Germany from assaulting France? Good
question.

ObTrav: Imagine the mess one TL15 armor unit could make of a TL7
fortress, even one like the Maginot Line. Do Imperial planets even bother
with locally-equipped forces, or do they buy numerically far fewer but
TL-advantaged mercenaries? Recall the situation in David Drake's
_Hammer's Slammers_ universe - if two sides wanted to fight, the one
that paupered itself hiring off-planet mercenaries would win, no question
about it. The loser is wiped out, the winner is dead broke, the
mercenaries laugh all the way to the bank.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:37:16 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)

Charles Prevatte writes:

>62.5?  Where did you get that number?

_Rebellion_.

>And were is the economy to pay for the support for that level of
>militarisation?

Actually, if you estimate the cost of the Imperial Navy based on various
(IMO) reasonable extrapolations of the information in _Rebellion_, you find
that it comes to 34% of what it would be if you calculate the budget from
3% of total GWP for the Imperium. _ONE_ percent of GWP will pay for those
62.5 ships, an equal number of escorts, a lot of auxiliary vessels PLUS
the same number of subsector fleet ships PLUS 1.5 times the equivalent in
system defenses PLUS about the same amount money's worth of ground forces.

>Good lord!  That's a capital ship and change per habital system on the
>average!

At about 30 worlds to a subsector makes two regular, two subsector and
three planetary navy capital ships per world. Now do you see why I
believe a pirate would have problem making a living in the OTU?

Ian has already answered most of the rest of your post.

>>The Imperium has a history of dealing harshly with foreign governments caught
>>supporting pirates (a canonical example is Tarkine in District 268). The
>>Zhodani are big enough to provide sanctuary; the Sword Worlds may be (but I
>>doubt it); no one else is.
> 
>Hivers?  Solomani?  Vargr?  Centaurs?

Sorry. I tend to focus on the Spinward Marches.

>and who said 'support'?

Not me. I said 'provide sanctuary'.

>All they have to do is defend their borders against Impirial aggression.

Yep. And in the Spinward Marches area only the Zhodani (and _possibly_ the
Sword Worlds) can do that.
 
>If you have the flight plan you know where to wait for them.  As for the
>SDBs, you jump in behind some terrain feature like the star and move to your
>attack position.

That's one of the pirate's biggest problems. In space there is no place to
hide. If the pirate is in a position to intercept a ship that jumps into
the system (if he is so lucky that it actually arrives within range of him,
which the odds do not favor) then any system defenses can see him.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:46:47 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: various piracy bits

Ian Whitchurch wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We have the SDBs at the jump point that we advertised for this month in the
Subsector Commercial Shipping News. If, as a pirate, you *want* to play,
then you will play on the grounds of our choosing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Cap'n, according to this Shinriang system will have most of it's SDB
flotilla at jump point Zed this month. Do you think we can slip around
them if we use that other jump point? I'd rather not have our cargo
looked at too closely before we rendezvous with those belters."

or

"Hmmm, jump point Zed. Let's see, that'll add four hours to our
outbound vector to get the right jump translation, and we'll be
almost two extra days away from their agricultural colony. I want
to beat the _Shantilly Dawn_ there, or that scoundrel captain of
hers will clean out their export Busava Melon crop and we'll be stuck
hauling grain again. Let's use jump point Yuma instead."

Furthermore, if either of these captains get attacked by a lurking
corsair, the local authorities will probably almost ignore it - having these
assumed smugglers and risk-takers get attacked by a pirate makes
a good object lesson for others.

Pirates probably get nowhere trying to prey on ships that stick to
well-patrolled traffic zones or highly controlled systems, just like
muggers don't hit many victims on well-lit streets with a cop in
view. And how much crime today is inflicted against people who
are doing crimes themselves? The trick who gets his pocket
picked by his paid companion for the evening, the drug smuggler
who gets murdered by rivals, etc.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:59:53 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: Re: Physics - Help!

Thanks to one and all who replied to my request.
I really appreciate your helping out.

BTW, "ronon" was a miskey in the article I read. It
should have been "roton" (I see all the light bulbs
turning on out there!). This was discovered thanks to
Dr. Kinsler of the University of Leeds in the U.K. who
said a roton is "...a quasi-particle carrying angular
momentum."

(I *love* the Web!)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:27:37 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 08:23 AM 10/15/98, you wrote:
>
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Piracy
>>
>>At 05:46 PM 10/14/98 +0200, you wrote:
>>>Charles Prevatte writes:
>>
>>62.5?  Where did you get that number?  And were is the economy to pay for
>>the support for that level of militerisation?  Good lord!  That's a capital
>>ship and change per habital system on the average!  Do you mean secter?
>>That would be a little more reasonable.  The ratio of capital to non capital
>>ships should be around 4 to one or more.  That's 248 jump capable destroyers
>>or whatever.  Or ruffly 1000 capital ships and 4000 destroyers in the
>>Spinward marches sector alone!  It also does not sound reasonable based on
>>the TNS reports of the frontier wars.  No where near that number of ships
>>were discussed.  Where and when are these figures derived from?
>
>A third of the canon 3% of GDP in military expenditure going to the
>Imperium, and the Imperium spending 70% of it's funds on the Navy, and
>ships costing 10% of their build cost in maintainence per year.
>
>Figure out what 1% of, say, Mora's tax receipts are.
>
>It's an unfortunate fact of life, but a lot of canon got written by people
>who couldnt count up tax receipts. Big fleets are a neccessary concequence
>of big planetary populations - 30 billion people create a lot of tax revenue.
>
>The other point to remember is the rich worlds are going to tend to own the
>banks that own the mortgages on the Free Traders that get pirated. So even
>if the piracy occours on poor iceballs, it still has ripple effects to the
>important worlds.
>

Sorry but that does not jive with the real world.  There are some very rich
contries with little or no military.  The same can go for planets.  Take a
high pop. planet with a high poverty rate and unemployment rate.  A large
chunk of their credits will go to supporting the dole rats.  If the
government started to spend credits on the military all heck would break
loose.  Look at the reduced US military today.  The Empire will have similar
problems and non military expences.   

Also the upkeep of 10% per year may be a bit low.  Check the cost of crew
for the ASH and the Kenunier in their adventure books.  Neither of these
ship are battle ships.  There is also the cocane effect.  If you build 10
battle ships with a service cost of 10% per ship per year then the upkeep is
fully the equal of building a battleship per year.  (See this month Popular
Mechanics on what the US navy has to deal with when talking about its'
carriers.  I think the average is hight than 10%.)  Also do not forget the
cost of fighters and fighter upgrades.  The same holds true for all the
support for these ships.  The space dock must be maitained.  The supply
ships.  The bases.  The couriers.  R&D.  Administrative offices and staff.
and thousands of other support structures that have to be payed for and
maintained.

>>Hivers?  Solomani?  Varga?  Centars?  and who said 'support'?  All they have
>>to do is defend their borders against Empirial aggression.  (Grin)
>
>The Zho's are the only people near the Marches. The Vargr arent a state per
>se ... you may also want to get a history book and look up the War of
>Jenkins' Ear to see what a minor incident can do to spark a shooting war
>when tension already exists.
>
>>OH?  So every High Pop. world has the same level of militerizm?  There are
>>no doves?  There are no high Pop. pour worlds?  There are no High Pop.
>>worlds with budget problems?
>
>A Hi Pop world, by definition, has a billion people. Two credits each, per
>annum, in SDB taxes turns into more SDBs than I want to count. Even if they
>are shiny new imported SDBs that need 20% their sticker cost in imported
>spare parts per year, it's still more SDBs than I want to count.
>

That's 2000MC, if you can get the people to not spend it on new raods and
better health care.  That is enough to maitain at 10% per year a military of
20000MC.  That is the maintanence cost of 10 Nimitz class carrier.  That's
it.  No fighters. No escorts.  No nothing else.  Not even crew saleries.
OOOOppppsss.

Lets see what a planet would need for self defence.  Sorry but I'm at work
and do not have my books handy so you'll have to figure the prices.

1 ground base (min)

1 Army (about .1% of pop. as a Min. plus equipment)

1 wet navy (If there is water.  .1% Pop. plus ships)

1 air force.  (.1% pop. plus planes)

1 SDB squad  (Say 10 SDBs in rotation for matainence and training)

1 Space base for the SDBs and sensor maintainence.

1 sensor web (100 satalite scatter arround the system.)

1 very busy service craft for the satalite network.  Two would be better.

1 pentagon (admin.)

lets see .3% of population that's 3 per thousand or 300,000 people for the
ground bases military (not counting admin. staff or maintaince crews.) at
say 10K per year each...3000MC in saleries!


>>You have many informants and move form job to job as opertunity knocks.
>
>Give us some numbers on how much an informant costs, and how often they
>come up with information. From my memories of Chopper Read's books,
>informants got 10% of the take from an armed robbery in Sydney in the 80s.
>

I'd like to see your calculations for the 1000 battleship & 4000 destroyer
per secter navy!  The maintainence cost alone would take the entire
planetary output of 100 worlds!  That's 100% tax for those worlds!

>You also have the time lags in getting the messages from the informants to
>the secret pirate base (or Gvorrdun Commonality, or whatever).
>

That cuts both ways as well.

>By the way, earlier in the Piracy debate, I proposed bits of the Imperial
>Intelligence structure arrange for the news that so and so might be able to
>be got at, just to see which dogs bark in response.
>

A sting.  Good idea but that too can work both ways.

>>If you have the flight plan you know where to wait for them.  As for the
>>SDBs, you jump in behind some terrain feature like the star and move to your
>>attack position.  With comerse raiding chewing up the local defences is a
>>plus.  If you want to keep them near to home launch a spread of missiles at
>>the population centers of the planet.  They will be far to busy saying their
>>employers you worry about you.
>
>OK. So you are cruising from the star to the mainworld (check how long this
>takes on average). You are conducting atrocity warfare against an Imperial
>planet.  You are fighting an attrition war with an entire planet (temporary
>taxes to deal with the Pirate Menace, then a quick call to InstellArms,
>anyone ?). And you expect to make money ?
>

And exactly how do you spot a 1000 meter object at 1 au?  Any pirate worth
the name will be running dark with RAM and scatter coating.  With any decent
nav program you can avoid excess star occlution.  The missles would not have
to be nukes to cause a lot of damage.  They are 1 meter long and perhaps
30cm in diameter with a sensor aspect of a pin point if properly designed.
Coming in on a balistic course they have less energy signature than a 9V
battery.  Good lucj spotting them.

>From memory, Vargr pulled that stunt once. It was called the Rape of
>Antares, if memory serves me, and triggered centuries of bad feeling
>between human and vargr in the Julian Protectorate area. Can someone add
>more detail ?
>

So use standard missles.

>>How is that?  They both require large amounts of cargo space.  As for paying
>>remember that the cargo in a ship must be valuable enough to be able to
>>absorb the cost of shiping which is 2000cr per ton per parsec.  That cargo
>>must be worth some money to be able to absorb that kind of overhead.
>>
>
>Pirates require at least 3 gees of acceleration. More if they want to play
>with competantly-built SDBs. 3 gees of acceleration pushes your power plant
>size up, as does the additional weaponary.
>

Or a good head start.  Also what if the pirate used SDBs or equivalent
carried by battle transports?

>The spinal mount particle accelerator (to stop those annoying sand clouds
>giving the target time to compute the jump solution) or other highly
>upgraded weaponary is often a giveaway as well. Except if Famile Spofulam
>makes it to megacorporation size (we modified Andrew Vallance's RoM 200
>dton Far Trader to include a spinal meson gun. Admittadly it wasnt a big
>one, but it was a spinal meson gun ...).
>
>Note that if piracy is rampant (for example, due to a collapse of central
>authority and/or an abscence of fleet), it will be harder to identify
>pirates, because every ship will be either armed, or escorted by an armed
>ship.
>
>IMO if you want piracy, then go to a true frontier period (the Spinward
>Marches circa 1100 isnt really a frontier ... it's more a militarised
>border area IMO) or to one of the Civil Wars. An abscence of piracy is one
>of the things that makes a stable Imperium prosperous.
>

A better enviromant for pirates I must say.  That was my idea to begin with.
The PC stranded in a newly formed 'pocket empire' causes by war.

>>The cost is pure cost as a SDB produces no income.  How could a SDB produce
>>income?  Military ships are pure expence>  You only return is a measure of
>>security.  As for a 'less capable ship', a large armored cargo ship that is
>>heavily armed would be a better deal for any system with more than one
>>habital planet or with asteroid mines.  The patrol craft could earn it's
>>keep as a bulk in-system cargo transport while patroling.
>
>Nahh. Having low maneuver kills in space combat. Go for a custom warship,
>and a custom freighter.
>

Good point.

>>
>>>For covering worlds unable to support ships of their own, jump-capable ships
>>>are propably a better bet than boats.
>>
>>And their movement provide holes that pirates could exploit.
>>
>
>But how do the informants get the news to the pirates before the frigate
>captain decides to change the plan ?
>
>It would be really really mean for the anti-pirate agencies ('Hortalez et
>Cie Special Section') to get at an informant and arrange a surprise.
>

That where the cloak and dagger come in doesn't it.  It's all in the game.

>>Cargos have to be worth a curtain treshold amout to be worth transporting.
>
>How much ? I dont disagree with you, but I want to see some numbers.
>

Well the cargo much absorb the cost of shiping.  I think that is 2k per ton
per jump.  The cargo must be work cost + 2k per ton.  If the cost were cheep
like dirt or rock at say 100c per ton then the final cost would be 2100c per
ton.  Much to much!  One ton of IBM PCs at 1kc per PC and 100 PC per ton the
cost of shiping 1 parsec would add 20c to the price of each unit.  Not to
much really.  I'd say that not counting emergencies the cost per ton would
need to be at least 2k per jump to ofset the cost of shipping.  That makes
shiped in good have a markup of 100% minimum to cover shiping.  Not an
unreasonable markup by todays standards for consumer goods.

>>
>>>Pirates have to be where their prey is, which happens to be where the
>>>system defenses are too. 
>>>
>>
>>Again, not all systems will pay the price for SDBs.  
>
>In which case insurance rates for trading at that system will rise,
>reducing trade and inducing those that come along to get Combat Rated for
>insurance purposes.
>

What insurence?  I've not seen any insurence companies that would cover free
trader.  Where is the information on these companies and their rates?  My
player would love to get coverage for their expensive ships.

>>That depends graetly on the planet and the pirates.  If they are war time
>>comerse raider that may not be true and the SDBs will have to stay close to
>>the planet to defend against misile attacks on planetary targets.
>
>Atrocity warfare is not a habit of any of the Interstellar states in Known
>Space. Except for the K'kree, and during the Second Civil War.
>

That's true but the missles could be duds...

>>
>>Again my senerio was a war time one.
>>
>
>In which case you are going to have orginised merchant convoys. Fifteen Far
>Traders, each with a missile rack, a sandcaster and a laser, one escort
>carrier with 6 15 dton Navy fighters and an Elisabeth class riding shotgun
>are going to be a problem for most pirates, especially if they want bits to
>collect afterwards.
>

I expect convoys to start up.  The Navy will not be present (except local
ones) as the players are cut of in a pocket.  They have to 'make do' with
what they can scratch up.  There will be a high pop. TL10 world, a med. pop.
TL13 world, and several others.  The cental core of on subsecter posible in
the Marches.  None have what it takes to build up their defences on their
own but by trading they can all get what they need.  It's a Yankee trader
type campain where the players are traped in the situation unless they want
to run the gauntlet back to Core secter.

Charles L.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #952
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Thursday, October 15 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 953



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

RE: Traveller-digest V1998 #951
[GT] Ship Design Question
Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
Fantasy in Traveller
Re: Margesi/Rhylanor
HIWG CD
Re: Grayson
Re: Re GT Ship Design
Re: Archival Materials
Re: Archival Materials
Re: Piracy
Re: Fantasy in Traveller
Re: Discovery of a Machine Race
re: Archive Materials
Re: Fortresses (was re: Tech Advancement)
re: various piracy bits
Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy
re: various piracy bits

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:38:24 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1998 #951

The exact URL for the DSR document itself is
http://www.missouri.edu/~ccjoe/traveller/house/sensor.rules.html
but the entire Missouri site is well worth sifting through. Truly
some great stuff there.

For those of you who enjoy tactical, hex-based ship-to-ship
combat, the DSR rules are *great* for relatively small actions
(no more than 3-4 ships per side _max_...IMO, of course).

They work very well for military/para-military campaigns and
can even be used as part of fleet level combat in which PCs
take an active part. Basically, use DSR for the action
affecting the PCs' ship and keep the high-level combat rules
in the T4 book (or HG) for the rest of the fleet. It really
adds alot when the PCs are fighting for their lives and pick
up other dogfights which flow in and out of their sensor
range.

Obviously, if the ship-to-ship combat is a minor part of the
adventure, stick with the high-level rules.

> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 13:12:05 +0800
> From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
> Subject: Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller
> 
> Bruce Alan Macintosh's Definitive sensor rules.  They can be 
> used at simple
> intermediate or advanced levels.  They are very good, simple 
> to use, and
> are based on real world science.  They are available on the web.
> http://www.missouri.edu/~ccjoe/traveller/
> Colin
> 
> >In a message dated 10/14/98 10:44:14 PM Central Daylight Time,
> >chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au writes:
> >
> ><< adopts Bruce'e DSR. >>
> >
> >Tell me what this is?
> >
> >Marc

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:52:00 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: [GT] Ship Design Question

Well, this might be better asked on a GURPS list, but since I don't belong
to one, I thought I'd ask it here.

I was wondering if when figuring out the mass of compartmentalization and
stealth features, do you use the mass of the hull by itself, or the mass of
the hull+armor?

Makes a big difference :)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                         |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/ - AOL IM: Iowa Akins |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/ - AOL IM: CMS AndyA  |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+    |
|       vi+ da+                                                        |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+      |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                             |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:52:38 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)

At 03:37 PM 10/15/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte writes:
>
>>62.5?  Where did you get that number?
>
>_Rebellion_.
>
>>And were is the economy to pay for the support for that level of
>>militarisation?
>
>Actually, if you estimate the cost of the Imperial Navy based on various
>(IMO) reasonable extrapolations of the information in _Rebellion_, you find
>that it comes to 34% of what it would be if you calculate the budget from
>3% of total GWP for the Imperium. _ONE_ percent of GWP will pay for those
>62.5 ships, an equal number of escorts, a lot of auxiliary vessels PLUS
>the same number of subsector fleet ships PLUS 1.5 times the equivalent in
>system defenses PLUS about the same amount money's worth of ground forces.
>
>>Good lord!  That's a capital ship and change per habital system on the
>>average!
>
>At about 30 worlds to a subsector makes two regular, two subsector and
>three planetary navy capital ships per world. Now do you see why I
>believe a pirate would have problem making a living in the OTU?
>
>Ian has already answered most of the rest of your post.
>

The cocane effect will not allow this level of military build up.  You have
to deduct the cost of maintainence of the current ships from the budget
before you figure what you can build.  10% of the cost of the ships would
pay for maintainence and maybe crew saleries but I dought that.  What about
ammo, bases, training, pentions, supply ships, ect.  10% just does not cover
it based on current military spending on the wet navy.

>That's one of the pirate's biggest problems. In space there is no place to
>hide. If the pirate is in a position to intercept a ship that jumps into
>the system (if he is so lucky that it actually arrives within range of him,
>which the odds do not favor) then any system defenses can see him.
>
>

Actually you have everywhere to hide.  Space is a big place.  Searching even
a 1 AU distance circle for a 1000 meter spherical ship with lidar would take
millinia.  If an object is not a signal emitter it's tough to find in all
that blackness.  Stelth has it's uses.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:43:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: William Prankard <cmdrx@magicnet.net>
Subject: Fantasy in Traveller

"Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net> doth quoted:

>>No really ... fantasy in the Traveller universe. Has anyone done a
TNE-era
setting using a classic pseudo-fantasy background, where high-tech takes
the
place of magic? <<

As a matter of fact, yes.  But is could have been used with any Trav
Setting.

It was at a convention, I misjumped the PC's to a world where "magic"
exists.
They even had strange minor human races called "orks" and "elves" and
things.

Come to find out that "magic" was realy psionics and magic items such as
"fireball staff" was realy an ancient  FGMP-21.
It was one of those "fireball staves" the PC's had to retreive from an
evil "wizard" sgo that the good "wizard" would tell them where to find
"magic crystals" to fix their Jump Drive.  It was the classic
"Romp-through-the-evil-wizards-tower/dungeon"  we all know and love.

The adventure was known as "Clarke's Law" ;->

\\  // Commander X
 \\//  CEO X-TEK Industries of Deneb, LIC
T E K  Military & Civilan Starship Contractor
 //\\  High Energy Weapons Research
//  \\ http://www.magicnet.net/~cmdrx/xtek/xtek.htm

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:04:29 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: Margesi/Rhylanor

steve daniels wrote:

> Erwin Fritz wrote:
>
> > I play in 1107, using a hodge-podge of rules (mostly MT and T5). My players are
> > contemplating a jump to Margesi/Rhylanor in order to get some needed repairs
> > done and to hire some engineers.
> I think you should take a whack at it and share what you come up with.
> That population will probably limit what development there is.
> How many people would be employed at the navy base, the scout base, and
> the class A starport?  Out of 900.  I'm guessing it would be the great
> bulk of that population.
>

I'm leaning toward the military-base-with-supporting-civilians idea. One interesting
twist, though, is that the government is a feudal technocracy. Ah, yes, that
so-hard-to-define type we all love. I will take a stab at it and post the results to
the list.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:20:56 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: HIWG CD

     I would like to order one of these CD's everyone speaks of.
Specifically the one that containes the "Traveller Navigator" software.
Would someons send to my personal e-mail on how to accomplish this?
     Send to : LHALE@PANLABS.COM

Thanks

Leo

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:26:36 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Grayson

     The sword fighting style is explained.  The pulled it whole cloth from
a cinematic feature called, 'The Seven Ronin' as explained in the 5th book.

Leo


- ------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 00:37:11 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Grayson

On 10/13/98 at 03:22 AM,  "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
said:

>> At 11:10 AM 10/12/98 +0000, you wrote:
>> >You've got Haven = France; Manticore - United Kingdom; Silesia =
Prussia;
>> >Solarian League = America (a very much out of time America).

That was my take on it, too.  Of course, Weber isn't creating exact
duplicates of the Napoleanian era nations.

>> >Has anyone figured out what Grayson is the equivalent of, historically
>> speaking?

>> >I haven't ... maybe there *isn't* a parallel?

I don't think thre is *one* nation that parallels Grayson.

>> As one currently living in the midst of it, I always assumed that
Grayson
>> was the "Mormon Empire" writ large. Many of the cultural, social,
>> historical, and (to a lesser degree) religious aspects are certainly
>> similar, which is not a suprise, considering *where* the Graysons are
>> supposed to have migrated from in the first place - Idaho and the
>> surrounding western American states.

>The impression I got from the books is, the state religion, the
>Church of Man Unchained, was more of a 'holy roller'-style
>Pentacostal movement.  Mormons aren't Pentacostals.  I can almost see
>Austin himself chitchatting with Oral Roberts and Billy Graham and
>holding his own.

Yep, the feel is Fundimentalist, not Mormon...at least to me.  The
"country music opera" was a dead give away. ;->

>FWIW, I see a bit of a parallel with Grayson as Japan before Perry.
>You have various and sundry 'warlords' (Steadholders) keeping on top
>of an almost figurehead Emperor (Protector).  In their steadings, the
>Steadholder gets an almost *fanatical* devotion from his subjects and
>of course his own personal army.

Interesting take, and I can see it too.  Then there is that Grayson
dueling style that, although not detailed, sure sounded very
Kendo-ish.

Eris
- - --
- - -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- - -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Re GT Ship Design

William F. Hostman writes:

> The WHOLE BLOODY POINT was to eliminate the need for fiddling with Power.

Actually, that was only one of the points.  Note that I only include unpowered
versions for components which actually have substantial power use, and where it
is reasonably likely that the system will be turned off part of the time.

> Adding unpowered modules DEFEATS THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE SIMPLIFIED
> SYSTEM!!! </RANT!>

No, it just defeats one of the purposes.  Adding power requirements to a level
of resolution comparable with the CT high guard isn't crippling, and it remains
quite simple (as, to be honest, the major complexity of Vehicles is with
incidental systems, not power consumption).

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:52:39 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Archival Materials

     Read a great book series, and in that series the main character is
kind of like Indiana Jones.  He loves to find things no one elsa has.  In
the second book he finds the remains of a civilization that had been dead
for over 50,000 years.  He discovers a library.  Huge racks that hold
computer books, open the cover the screen lights up and shows you the
contents.  These books had no power when he finds them, but he is able to
rig up a recharger, and then finds out about the ancient race from there
writtings.  What would stop us from using the same type of system?  Build
little books with PROM type chips and a power system.  If they run out of
power recharge them.

Leo

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:51:47 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Archival Materials

Leo Hale wrote:
> What would stop us from using the same type of system?  Build
> little books with PROM type chips and a power system.  If they run out of
> power recharge them.

Cosmic rays and background radiation. Over a 50,000 year span, anything
built of IC's will be dead as a doornail, scrambled beyond recognition.

The problem is that as your data gets denser, it becomes more
susceptible to events like a cosmic ray strike.

Also, all sorts of weird things happen in crystals that sit for 50,000
years when they depend on specific contaminants to work...you get stuf
diffusing over the junctions, metals dissolving into the silicon, etc.
This doesn't happen on our time scale, but on near geological ones like
50kyr, it will.

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:02:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest wrote:
> Subject: Re: Piracy

Probably all ready considered, but... if a system can afford 2500 SDBs,
there is a good chance that the civilian merchant sector is just as well
capitalized, and the system is crawling with some 25 *thousand* small
craft from pinnaces to ore transporters, thousands of orbital habitats
and space platforms, and thousands of seekers in its asteroid belts and
jovian moons, and god knows what else. Don't forget that pirates should
be able to prey on a lot more than just the traffic too and from jump
point.

To avoid complete information overload, it wouldn't suprise me if
everyone's funky super-cool transponders are only required for
interstellar craft ... the small craft just build and proliferate too
fast. If you have an asteroid settlement (and most high pop high tech
worlds probably do) you'll get teenagers slamming a few engines onto a
frame and going joyriding, for that matter... Maybe the best option for
pirates is a surplus interstellar ore carrier with a big cargo bay and a
couple of surplus TL12 SDBs from a world that has upgraded to TL13-14, 
for preying on those TL8-11 systems... disguise the SDBs with some
cosmetic work to make 'em look like in-system cargo haulers.

> To use another idea from Trav canon (admitedly this will stretch the arguement
> a bit, but that doesn't invalidate it) is the sale of military-surplus
> warships (remember Oberlindes?)  True, these starships are disarmed if
> operating w/in the Imperium (which IMTU, only applies to heavy ordinance:
> lasers and sand turrets are usually left intact.  Even without the PAW, a
> Lightning-class cruiser is a significant reason to "stand and deliver!"

Exactly. I want an SDB for piracy! Get a few 200-400 ton SDBs, take a
Levianthan class 1800 merchant cruiser, rip out much of the guts, and use
it a carrier. Stay out near the edge of the system, or vanish and come
back later. Even if you don't play the transponder game as above, if you
buy TL12 SDBs and hunt in TL9-11 systems you can probably out run the
local defenses. If necessary do some minor remodelling to give you
10-20 tons cargo. Use a pair of SDBs, and if necessary fit them with
grapples so you can tow away your target (and blow the tow line if the
enemy fleet comes by) if you hit something that is interesting but won't
fit in the cargo bay... 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:58:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roberto Camino <swordworlder@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fantasy in Traveller

- ---William Prankard <cmdrx@magicnet.net> wrote:
>
> "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net> doth quoted:
> 
> >>No really ... fantasy in the Traveller universe. Has anyone done a
TNE-era setting using a classic pseudo-fantasy background, where
high-tech takes the
place of magic? <<
> 
> As a matter of fact, yes.  But is could have been used with any Trav
Setting.

AD&D had a module that had the characters exploring a crashed
spaceship.  I used that module as a basis for a CT adventure (I used
their vessel instead of the one in the module).  I explained the
switch from technology to magic using Zelazny's Amber idea,
dimentional travel, but caused by ionizing ration in the atmosphere
(lame, I know, but we were young an foolish).  The characters found
their way back to their ship (they crashed their ship's boat) by
amassing wealth and power, then using teleportation spells when the
ship orbited close enough.  Their technology was useless on Greyhawk
(gunpower, too) and their magic items and spells were useless back on
their ship.  The gold and jewels that they amassed were real, though. 
To convert stats I just used 1.5x and for hit points I started them
out as 3rd or fourth level AD&D as rolled.  I assigned their types
(mage, fighter, thief, etc.) based on their backgrounds.
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:10:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a Machine Race

Don't read too much into the fact that GURPS Traveller space combat
missiles are remotely piloted vehicles rather than robots.

They are RPVs not because of any third imperium limitation in or distrust
for robots, but because it proved difficult to pack sufficient passive or
active sensors into a small, cheap missile to resolve sensor-masked
targets at typical missile engagement ranges (i.e., 200,000 miles or so).
Installing sensors capable at point blank ranges (circa 20,000 miles)
was considered in the first draft, but as they essentially doubled the
cost of the missile, it was considered more economical to remove them.

In GT, the Imperium makes reasonably extensive use of smart drone missiles
on the planetary level, but not so much in space. This is strictly because
in space, you do not usually have line of sight considerations (exceptions
being looping a missile round a planet -- even then, it is more affordable
to send two missiles and relay through one of them then to mount meson
coms or big sensors on the missile).

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:07:12 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Archive Materials

Leo Hale wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
     Read a great book series, and in that series the main character is
kind of like Indiana Jones.  He loves to find things no one elsa has.  In
the second book he finds the remains of a civilization that had been dead
for over 50,000 years.  He discovers a library.  Huge racks that hold
computer books, open the cover the screen lights up and shows you the
contents.  These books had no power when he finds them, but he is able to
rig up a recharger, and then finds out about the ancient race from there
writtings.  What would stop us from using the same type of system?  Build
little books with PROM type chips and a power system.  If they run out of
power recharge them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Leave a metal-circuitry based power supply in a box long enough,
the circuits will weld to each other and become useless. Memory
chips will eventually degrade into static, especially if we're talking
tens of millenia here.

This of course supposes no high-tech fixes - crystal lattice memory
or something like that.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:48:37 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Fortresses (was re: Tech Advancement)

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: Fortresses (was re: Tech Advancement)
...
>Perhaps not "perfectly". There were some fortresses along the low
>country blitzkreig routes (Eban Emmanual, for example) that were
>reduced in hours by paratrooper surprise assault and/or pioneer
>infantry efforts. Granted, the Maginot Line was an monster compared
>to these fortresses, but I have heard of some reduction of even that line
>occurring.

  An assault of the type made on Eben Emael would not be relevant to an
extensive fortified zone. In any case, the line was meant to be backed
up masses of (~static) infantry divisions, and the French were developing
their own armoured divisions with effective modern doctrine. The result
would have been a static front with the attacker placed at a serious
disadvantage, possibly in political no less than military terms.

...
>ObTrav: Imagine the mess one TL15 armor unit could make of a TL7
>fortress, even one like the Maginot Line. Do Imperial planets even bother
>with locally-equipped forces, or do they buy numerically far fewer but
>TL-advantaged mercenaries?/...

  Troops raised on local resources may not be capable of defending against
high-tech foreigners - which is why the protection rackets run by various
pocket empires (e.g., the Third Imperium) are so popular. OTOH, relying on
outsiders who stay and visit will interfere in local politics and creates
a whole new mess of (potentially insoluble) internal security issues. It
might be best to follow Machiavelli on this one.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:48:42 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: re: various piracy bits

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: re: various piracy bits
...
>"Cap'n, according to this Shinriang system will have most of it's SDB
>flotilla at jump point Zed this month. Do you think we can slip around
>them if we use that other jump point? I'd rather not have our cargo
>looked at too closely before we rendezvous with those belters."

  They use SDB's for revenue cutters?

...
>"Hmmm, jump point Zed. Let's see, that'll add four hours to our
>outbound vector to get the right jump translation, and we'll be
>almost two extra days away from their agricultural colony. I want
>to beat the _Shantilly Dawn_ there, or that scoundrel captain of
>hers will clean out their export Busava Melon crop and we'll be stuck
>hauling grain again. Let's use jump point Yuma instead."

  If you're going to jump around 100 D then how can a different point on
that sphere add four hours to flight time?

  Wouldn't the agricultural colony in question be a separate traffic control/
security zone, presumably with its own security force(s)? If it's undefended
why wouldn't a pirate just land and loot?

  How tiny is this agricultural colony such that its' main export crop is
sufficient to fill one small trader? How poorly developed is its' economy
such that there's no middlemen with export contracts (and freight, rather
than speculative trade shipping arrangements made) already in place - are
the locals bringing in their harvests in horse-drawn carts?

>Furthermore, if either of these captains get attacked by a lurking
>corsair, the local authorities will probably almost ignore it - having these
>assumed smugglers and risk-takers get attacked by a pirate makes
>a good object lesson for others.

  Depends on whether the ships loss will have a negative impact on
their economy.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:57:10 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: An Open Request to Marc Miller

Marc wrote

>In a message dated 10/14/98 10:44:14 PM Central Daylight Time,
>chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au writes:
><< adopts Bruce'e DSR. >>
>Tell me what this is?
>Marc

"Bruce's DSR" are the sensor rules - called, in a fit of megalomania, the
"Definitive Sensor Rules" that go with the sensors in FFS2. They use a 
log range scale - so calculating if you see someone is just a matter of 
adding your sensitivity and his signature and seeing if they're >=0 (not
an idea original to me.) The actual numbers are based on some moderately
detailed simulations of IR and visible-light detection that I did, including
all the obvious factors (thermal background from the sensor itself depending
on what temperature you cool it to, thermal emission from zodiacal dust, 
scattered sunlight from dust, reflectance of spacecraft, emissivity of
spacecraft, arrangement and temperature of spacecraft radiators, etc), so
I believe they're very accurate (and lead to surprisingly long detection
ranges.) Modifiers for various conditions (like being in a young dusty
solar system) are also based on simulations. There are ECM rules (somewhat
rough currently) too. Overall I'm quite proud of it. Embarassingly, I've
misplaced the web page URL where someone is keeping it for me...Joe Heck's,
I think.

Bruce Macintosh
bmac@astro.ucla.edu

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:01:14 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/14/98 22:52:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
yikes@evansville.net writes:

<< So a SDB is, ton-for-ton,
 badder than a jump-capable pirate. >>
Why restrict yourself to a ton-to-ton match?  There is no such thing as a fair
fight...

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:15:20 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/15/98 0:56:38 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca writes:

<<  Your opinion may be untenable given both original intent and the later
 revisions to spaceship weaponry rules (i.e., det-nukes). >>

I am basing this on the system I am using...which is CT/MT.  Everyone seems to
insist on following "canon" in this discussion, and canonically, only the Navy
has the nukes.

   Gee, you'd better not try and register that puppy. Who paid for it?
  >>

Do crooks register thier guns?  Of course not.  As for who paid for it, there
are a number of ways:  one which immediatly springs into mind is a consortium
of pirates.

 >> TL 15, with 140-200 MCr in computer/sensor array alone? Again, you'd best
be an enemy warship to explain this one.

This is one of the things I didn't necessarily like about MTrav...a top-of-
the-line sensor suite was dirt cheap:  At most MCr 5.  The priciest items
would seem likely to be the hull, j-drives, and the afore-mentioned computer.
The whole ship doesn't have to be TL15, just certain parts of it (canonical
examples exist)

>the pirates are criminals anyway...they aren't squeamish about having and
>using nukes (look at the North Hollywood bank robbery last year in LA).

  Weren't you pointing out that the Imperium gets _very_ upset about the
inappropriate use of nukes?

  BTW, they ended up shot up, didn't they?

Well, since the pirates are already liable for a death sentence for
piracy...just how much more upset can the Navy get?  And while the bank
robbers did get waxed, they seemed to me to be staying to shoot it out w/ the
cops...I think they could have escaped if the chose to.

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:22:21 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/15/98 5:55:33 AM Pacific Daylight Time, rancke@diku.dk
writes:

<< >>>But the pirates portrayed in the CT sources are the small-fry kind. They
 >lurk around in backwater systems and try to capture Free Traders.>>
 > 
 >I was not attempting to duplicate any "canonical" system...I was simply
 >presenting a possible means of making piracy possible.
 
 And I'm discussing whether pirates _as portrayed in the Traveller canon_
 makes sense. >>

I see then...we are indeed discussing 2 different situations then.

<< To have a common ground of argument, we need to be using the same setting.
>:-)
>>>
> 
>I understand this is all in fun, but I can't accept using an arguement that
is
>so obviously flawed (IMHO, of course).  It's just the way I am...<G>

I've lost you here. Are you saying that the argument that we need to use the
same setting if our discussion is to have any meaning, or are you referring
to a canonical fact that you consider obviously flawed?

Yes...again, I am not attempting to argue this from a canonical point of view.
I feel that the canon material is at best, greviously flawed.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:50:38 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: various piracy bits

Steve Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>"Cap'n, according to this Shinriang system will have most of it's SDB
>flotilla at jump point Zed this month. Do you think we can slip around
>them if we use that other jump point? I'd rather not have our cargo
>looked at too closely before we rendezvous with those belters."

  They use SDB's for revenue cutters?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Why not? They've got the G's to intercept traffic easily (so the traffic
can stay on a good course, rather than having to vector to meet them),
they can stay on station a long time, and they have to be out there
anyway. Not all of the SDB's will be used for this - most are probably
lying doggo somewhere - but it's good for your well-patrolled system
to _look_ well patrolled, it keeps the riff-raff out.

Steve again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  If you're going to jump around 100 D then how can a different point on
that sphere add four hours to flight time?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'll bet that a Navigator would look at you funny if you said that. I'm sure
there's more to getting ready for jump than just getting past 100 D,
why couldn't fine tuning the possible jump vector by clearing some
gravity well occlusion be possible?

It's a level of detail that's more color than anything else, like the extra
task levels in DGP's Starship Operator's Manual.

Steve again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  Wouldn't the agricultural colony in question be a separate traffic control/
security zone, presumably with its own security force(s)? If it's undefended
why wouldn't a pirate just land and loot?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yup, them pirates must be hungry for Busava melons... <g>

My point was that there will be recommended shipping lanes, and
there will be ships that stray from the recommended shipping lanes.
Not all of these strayings will have criminal intent.

Steve again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  How tiny is this agricultural colony such that its' main export crop is
sufficient to fill one small trader? How poorly developed is its' economy
such that there's no middlemen with export contracts (and freight, rather
than speculative trade shipping arrangements made) already in place - are
the locals bringing in their harvests in horse-drawn carts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
(Hand-wave mode, *on*):

The agricultural colony has ironclad laws that all it's produce must
be sold directly to the main world. There is one loophole: On the first
day of harvest, the farmers are allowed to sell what they reap to anyone
with the credits - bypassing the state-appointed buyers the farmers get
rooked by every other day of the year. Until recently, this was a kind
of festival where well-off dilettantes would fly their in-system private
craft to the colony and buy the wonderful melons from the yokels for
only a few credits more than the "official" price. Then a free trader
captain heard about it, and showed up with more than pocket change
in hand and enough cargo space to haul off the lot. The farmers are
a lot happier, though the flavor of the festival has been a bit different
for the past year or so.

The "Harvest Festival" isn't well known yet, and the one or two free trader
captains who do know about it can outbid the state-controlled bids of
the local buyers easily - if they get there first. They can even outbid
the local rich people, as the farmer would rather sell his whole cargo
at once for some profit instead of haggle over each melon with some
rich twit who thinks you should give him the melon for nothing.
There isn't a lot to buy, 100tons or so (one day's harvest), but these will 
probably be the only Busava melons going outsystem without spending 
two months in a government warehouse - therefore the High-pop planet
two parsecs from here will pay astronomical prices for this delicacy.

(handwave mode, *off*)

There will be many situations where a single free trader can make
ten times (or hundreds of times) more profit at a particular port
simply by getting there first. The next trader will still find goods, but
the one cargo bay full of an incredible, once-in-a-lifetime deal will
be gone.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #953
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Thursday, October 15 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 954



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Targeting Jumps (was:re: various piracy bits
Re CinemaKiwi
High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses)
re: various piracy bits
Re: High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses)
Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #953
Re: High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses) 
e-books, was :Re: Archival Materials
Re: various piracy bits
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves
Piracy
Re: various piracy pits
Re: High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses)
Major Race Status (was: Re: High Tech troops...)
Re: Fortresses (was re: Tech Advancement)
Transponders (was Re: Piracy)
Re: Discovery of a Machine Race
Re: Targeting Jumps (was:re: various piracy bits
Re: Major Race Status (was: Re: High Tech troops...)
Re: Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 13:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brannon Boren <brannonb@animal.blarg.net>
Subject: Targeting Jumps (was:re: various piracy bits

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Walter Smith wrote:
> Steve again:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>   If you're going to jump around 100 D then how can a different point on
> that sphere add four hours to flight time?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> I'll bet that a Navigator would look at you funny if you said that. I'm sure
> there's more to getting ready for jump than just getting past 100 D,
> why couldn't fine tuning the possible jump vector by clearing some
> gravity well occlusion be possible?

And let's not forget that the planet is *moving*, so if you end up
trailing it, you will have a longer approach than if you come out of jump
"in front of" it.

Ben

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:08:27 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re CinemaKiwi

>From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
>Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
>
>At 23:06 14/10/98 -0500, Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:
>
>>I was speaking tongue in cheek, so I hope no offense was taken. However,
>>seeing the quality of the recent spate of film adaptations of the fantasy
>>genre -- Hercules, Xena, Conan, Sinbad (the series), Dragonheart, Kull, and
>>so on -- I cringe to think of a LotR motion picture.
>
>None taken by me. I actually quite like Xena, and Hercules a little. One of
>the elements that I like is the light-hearted treatment of Greek myth, etc.
>I mean it's not like the Greek didn't rewrite the stuff whenever they felt
>it useful or more entertaining, so why shouldn't we?

At least, unlike disney, Herculese, Xena, Sinbad, Kull, etc are OBVIOUSLY
NOT Historical. Disney at one point put that abomination "Pocohontus" onto
their Historical Films List (Prerelease)... The only thing they got right
was the list of names.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:16:46 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses)

Steve Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  Troops raised on local resources may not be capable of defending against
high-tech foreigners - which is why the protection rackets run by various
pocket empires (e.g., the Third Imperium) are so popular. OTOH, relying on
outsiders who stay and visit will interfere in local politics and creates
a whole new mess of (potentially insoluble) internal security issues. It
might be best to follow Machiavelli on this one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On the gripping hand, there is another option. Instead of buying
1000 TL6 tanks, go to the nearest high-tech planet and buy
10 TL12 Grav Tanks, training in their use, and maintenance
gear for them. Your 10 Grav Tanks would probably win against
his 1000 tracklayers.

Would low-tech planets in the Imperium do this kind of thing?
Buy tiny amounts of high-tech gear instead of massive amounts
of locally-produced gear? I think in most cases the answer would
have to be yes.

I don't think a man with a laser rifle is that much more effective
than a man with an assault rifle in a low-tech combat, so there
are some formations in which such an expenditure wouldn't be
prudent. Armor, air support, communication and artillery come to
mind as places where one off-world item might match 100 local
items.

Another thing to think about: Let's say you have a TL3 planet
with a unified government. There's really no point in it keeping
a TL3 army on hand, except as a police force (usually paid
for seperately from the military, btw). Your only possible enemy
will arrive by starship, wearing combat armor and riding grav
vehicles. If your combat formations can't face that kind of
enemy, there's almost no point in maintaining the army - therefore
any world with a unified government will almost have to maintain
an army equipped to "modern" standards. With every level the local
tech level drops below "modern", this army will be smaller (to reflect
the effort required to maintain grav tanks in a combustion-engine
world, for example).

Compare two pop-9 worlds, one TL12, one TL6. The TL12 world will
probably have deep-mount meson guns all over the place, grav tank
formations, combat armored troops toting laser rifles and the
occaisional plasma gun, the whole nine yards from orbit to
sea bottom. The TL6 world might have a grav tank formation (as in
one), a deep-mount meson gun (as in one), and some improved
sensor and commo gear, all clustered around the starport.
The rest of the TL6 planet will have almost no army at all, as the
entire defense budget went to these few horrendously expensive
items.

The above is probably necessary - think of what one type-S scout ship
could have done to 1930's Europe all by itself.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:38:40 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: re: various piracy bits

At 03:50 PM 10/15/98 -0400, you wrote:

>Steve again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>  How tiny is this agricultural colony such that its' main export crop is
>sufficient to fill one small trader? How poorly developed is its' economy
>such that there's no middlemen with export contracts (and freight, rather
>than speculative trade shipping arrangements made) already in place - are
>the locals bringing in their harvests in horse-drawn carts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>(Hand-wave mode, *on*):
>
>The agricultural colony has ironclad laws that all it's produce must
>be sold directly to the main world. There is one loophole: On the first
>day of harvest, the farmers are allowed to sell what they reap to anyone
>with the credits - bypassing the state-appointed buyers the farmers get
>rooked by every other day of the year. Until recently, this was a kind
>of festival where well-off dilettantes would fly their in-system private
>craft to the colony and buy the wonderful melons from the yokels for
>only a few credits more than the "official" price. Then a free trader
>captain heard about it, and showed up with more than pocket change
>in hand and enough cargo space to haul off the lot. The farmers are
>a lot happier, though the flavor of the festival has been a bit different
>for the past year or so.
>
>The "Harvest Festival" isn't well known yet, and the one or two free trader
>captains who do know about it can outbid the state-controlled bids of
>the local buyers easily - if they get there first. They can even outbid
>the local rich people, as the farmer would rather sell his whole cargo
>at once for some profit instead of haggle over each melon with some
>rich twit who thinks you should give him the melon for nothing.
>There isn't a lot to buy, 100tons or so (one day's harvest), but these will 
>probably be the only Busava melons going outsystem without spending 
>two months in a government warehouse - therefore the High-pop planet
>two parsecs from here will pay astronomical prices for this delicacy.
>
>(handwave mode, *off*)
>
>There will be many situations where a single free trader can make
>ten times (or hundreds of times) more profit at a particular port
>simply by getting there first. The next trader will still find goods, but
>the one cargo bay full of an incredible, once-in-a-lifetime deal will
>be gone.

Sounds a lot like the Norfolk's Tears setup in The Reality Dysfunction.
Except on Norfolk you had a window of oppurtunity that began within a
certain period of time, related to local conditions.  Not profitable for
the big shippers to beach a freighter for several days to weeks waiting for
the Tears to be ready.  Mostly, it was the small time free traders who made
the profit from that run.

Sadly, Norfolk is no longer with us in this world...

Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 13:37:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brannon Boren <brannonb@animal.blarg.net>
Subject: Re: High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses)

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Walter Smith wrote:
> 
> The above is probably necessary - think of what one type-S scout ship
> could have done to 1930's Europe all by itself.

Ah it wasn't so tough to take down a Scout at lower tech levels. Can you
say, Roswell?   ;)

Ben


- --
Brannon (Ben) Boren
brannonb@blarg.net
http://www.mog.net/brannonb/index.html 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 13:43:36 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)

>Actually you have everywhere to hide.  Space is a big place.  Searching even
>a 1 AU distance circle for a 1000 meter spherical ship with lidar would take
>millinia.  If an object is not a signal emitter it's tough to find in all
>that blackness.  Stelth has it's uses.

If the pirate is at 1 AU, how is it going to intercept merchant ships jumping
out at 100 diameters (800,000 miles, less than 0.01 AU)? It'll take a 1-G
merchant only a few hours to go from the surface to 100 diameters; the pirate
will never even get into weapons range.

(I can't believe I'm entering into a piracy debate...)

If the pirate *is* lurking close enough to catch merchants, a big military
sensor array will probably detect it - space is very dark, IR emissions from
warm objects are surprisingly easy to see - unless it has its power plant
completely shut down and has very good thermal masking. Take a look at my
sensor rules and FFS2...It's very unlikely even with this that one could
hide from the very large military arrays a high-pop high-TL world would have
if you were as close as 100 diameters; you still need some power for life 
support, and hence will have some IR emissions. 

My personal take is that if you *really* want piracy, you should move the
100-diameter limit out to ~10 million miles instead...

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:06:42 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #953

Bruce Johnson Wrote:

>Cosmic rays and background radiation. Over a 50,000 year span, anything
>built of IC's will be dead as a doornail, scrambled beyond recognition.

>The problem is that as your data gets denser, it becomes more
>susceptible to events like a cosmic ray strike.

>Also, all sorts of weird things happen in crystals that sit for 50,000
>years when they depend on specific contaminants to work...you get stuf
>diffusing over the junctions, metals dissolving into the silicon, etc.
>This doesn't happen on our time scale, but on near geological ones like
>50kyr, it will.

>- --
>Bruce Johnson
>University of Arizona
>College of Pharmacy
>Information Technology Group

- ------------------------------


          All depends of your technology.  At TL-17+ computer systems are
      effectivly made of solid blocks of crystal, or some other substance
      and etched to form the pathways of the computers circuits.  I believe
      that by the time TL-17+ hits they will have formed some type of
      protection against cosmic rays.  In Webbers book series 'Armagedon
      Inheritance' the older computers were made in this way, so even after
      50,000 yearsthey still worked if power was applied.  The ones that
      were newer had the memory contained of focused force fields, so when
      the power died so to did the information.  Just goes to show to
      seperate high tech looks at computer data storage.

Leo

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:18:35 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses) 

> 
> On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Walter Smith wrote:
> > 
> > The above is probably necessary - think of what one type-S scout ship
> > could have done to 1930's Europe all by itself.
> 
> Ah it wasn't so tough to take down a Scout at lower tech levels. Can you
> say, Roswell?   ;)

Funny you should mention that.  I've been grinding that idea through the back
of my head for a couple weeks now, that the Roswell UFO was really an
off-course Vilani free trader, and the wreck was in good enough shape that the
Americans developed jump drive from it.  Kind of what happened with the Aslan,
remember?

Of course the Solomanis would *kill* to keep that secret safe...

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:34:25 -0700
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: e-books, was :Re: Archival Materials

Leo Hale write:
>     Read a great book series, and in that series the main character is
>kind of like Indiana Jones.  He loves to find things no one elsa has.  In
>the second book he finds the remains of a civilization that had been dead
>for over 50,000 years.  He discovers a library.  Huge racks that hold
>computer books, open the cover the screen lights up and shows you the
>contents.  These books had no power when he finds them, but he is able to
>rig up a recharger, and then finds out about the ancient race from there
>writtings.  What would stop us from using the same type of system?  Build
>little books with PROM type chips and a power system.  If they run out of
>power recharge them.

Take look at "The Last Book"
http://www.almaden.ibm.com/journal/sj/363/jacobson.html

Just what you are suggesting.


- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com -- These opinions are mine, no one else wants `em.
Joan of Arc: the patron saint of welders http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:55:48 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: various piracy bits

Steven Hudson wrote:

>   They use SDB's for revenue cutters?

Why not?
 
>   Wouldn't the agricultural colony in question be a separate traffic control/
> security zone, presumably with its own security force(s)? If it's undefended
> why wouldn't a pirate just land and loot?

Who knows...maybe because it's not worth getting caught on the ground.
 
>   How tiny is this agricultural colony such that its' main export crop is
> sufficient to fill one small trader? How poorly developed is its' economy
> such that there's no middlemen with export contracts (and freight, rather
> than speculative trade shipping arrangements made) already in place - are
> the locals bringing in their harvests in horse-drawn carts?

No one said this is their main export, or even that they are that big.
Maybe its a five or six family co-op, they have the annual (small, labor
intensive, but profitable) Busava Melon crop in, and the Five Family's
melons are well known and coveted a system over. Boutique cropping, it's
done in the US all the time, and the total crop is way too low to
support middlemen.

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:03:20 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

>>ObTrav: Kevin Sorbo as Strephon.

>hmmm...how about as Dulinor?  With Mike Myers as Lucan?

How about Kevin Smith (plays Ares) as Lucan :*>


And Lucy Lawless as Margaret?

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:12:39 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves

Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:55:40 -0500, Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
>You know Anders, that's not a bad idea. It explains where all that
>hydrogen fuel goes...that the GURPS people say our fusion engines
>shouldn't be using..we don't burn it, we vent it as coolant. And it does
>make sense that the main venting ports would along the ship's stern.
>Knock out a ship's coolant vents or hole it's coolant supply and it has
>to cut power or fry.

Well, some people have objections to cooling (along the lines
that lHyd is not a great coolant) but that then gets into
the great "what does jump drive use all that hydrogen for"
debate.

As far as the art goes, I don't think anyone has ever labled
what the features in question are so if you want to make them
anything from heat exhaust to main engines, feel free.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:16:31 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Piracy

You will all notice that the piracy debate is back and I haven't
posted a single thing!

Nope!  No mention of how I think that piracy depends on the
assumtions you use and how "controlling" you see the Imperium
as being and that is can't be prov...

Doh!

Nevermind!

:-)

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:23:10 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re: various piracy pits

IMTU, yes, various worlds use SDB's in anti-piracy and customs enforcement.

Since SDB's are cheaper than Patrol Cutters, I use SDB's in any system
capable of building them, and Patrol Cutters in the one's which can't or
are rich enough to build PC's (A starport, TL 12+).

Why PC's in non-local production areas? Annual Maintenance is much easier
to achieve if you can get to a place for mainenance.

SDB's also sometimes appear in systems which cannot locally
build/repair/maintain, but then the system usually also purchases a jump
carrier for their standard SDB hull.

Sometimes, I'll also put Gazelle CE's into such a system as the backbone of
the system's combat/anti-piracy forces.

Almost all near-world planetary naval ships will have some capability for
customs enforcement... and which are you more likely to argue with: 3 SDB's
or 2  PCs?

another reason for jump-capable system ships is to be able to jump to
distant gas giants in-system.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:23:44 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses)

Walter Smith wrote:

> On the gripping hand, there is another option. Instead of buying
> 1000 TL6 tanks, go to the nearest high-tech planet and buy
> 10 TL12 Grav Tanks, training in their use, and maintenance
> gear for them. Your 10 Grav Tanks would probably win against
> his 1000 tracklayers.

Only if they were abysmally led and lined up to be shot...

If the other side's 1000 tanks are operating in 20 50 tank batallions
spread out all over the place the idiot who only bought 10 tanks is
going to lose it all.

It's be worse if insatead of 1000 TL-6 tanks, the guy went out and
bought 100 TL8 tanks, and 1000 TL-12 LAWS ;-)
 
> Would low-tech planets in the Imperium do this kind of thing?
> Buy tiny amounts of high-tech gear instead of massive amounts
> of locally-produced gear? I think in most cases the answer would
> have to be yes.

No, because all that those thousands of low tech troops have to do is
take the starport, depriving you of your spares, and your elite offworld
Hightech force is going to be toast.

Low Tech <> Incompetent!!
 
> I don't think a man with a laser rifle is that much more effective
> than a man with an assault rifle in a low-tech combat, so there
> are some formations in which such an expenditure wouldn't be
> prudent. Armor, air support, communication and artillery come to
> mind as places where one off-world item might match 100 local
> items.

Commo...maybe. Air, I doubt it. One F-16 is going to smoke a Mig-17
everyu time, but line 15 with competent pilots in them against it...the
F-16 is gone. Unless the 16 can stand off and take them all out with
long range missiles, it'll have to come down to their level to deal with
them, and low 'n' slow the Mig's will chew it up. Don't even _talk_
about 1-100 odds.

Arty, so long as they have decent support from air attack; definitely. A
TL-12 arty batallion is going to be _very_ deadly.
 
> Another thing to think about: Let's say you have a TL3 planet
> with a unified government. There's really no point in it keeping
> a TL3 army on hand, except as a police force (usually paid
> for seperately from the military, btw). 

If you have a TL-3 world...why are the offworlders bothering with you?
If they invade, you have no choice but to surrender. Wait 'till they get
on planet and garrisoned in..._then_ take 'em out, guerilla style.

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:27:28 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Major Race Status (was: Re: High Tech troops...)

Keven R. Pittsinger wrote:
> 
> >
> > On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Walter Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > The above is probably necessary - think of what one type-S scout ship
> > > could have done to 1930's Europe all by itself.
> >
> > Ah it wasn't so tough to take down a Scout at lower tech levels. Can you
> > say, Roswell?   ;)
> 
> Funny you should mention that.  I've been grinding that idea through the back of my head for a couple weeks now, that the Roswell UFO was really an off-course Vilani free trader, and the wreck was in good enough shape that the Americans developed jump drive from it.  Kind of what happened with the Aslan, remember?
> 
> Of course the Solomanis would *kill* to keep that secret safe...
> 
Suppose that the Roswell UFO _was_ a starship of some sort, but _wasn't_
in good enough shape to reverse-engineer?  If one stipulates that the
ship's existence would be enough of a hint that _some_ kind of FTL drive
was possible, would this taint the Solomani claim to being a Major Race?

> Keven
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                                                      Science-Fiction Adventure
>                                                      In Reavers' Deep

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:29:23 GMT
From: johnl@vnet.net (John Lansford)
Subject: Re: Fortresses (was re: Tech Advancement)

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:27:38 -0400, you wrote:

>Steven Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>  The Maginot Line would have worked perfectly well if it had been completed -
>budgetary problems in the `30's resulted in its' northern flank being left open.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Perhaps not "perfectly". There were some fortresses along the low
>country blitzkreig routes (Eban Emmanual, for example) that were
>reduced in hours by paratrooper surprise assault and/or pioneer
>infantry efforts.

Eban Emamanuel would have been paratrooper proof had the defenders
thought to put machine guns covering the top of the fortress. The
Germans couldn't get into the fortress with the weapons they carried,
although they were able to disable some of the weapons of the
fortress.

> Granted, the Maginot Line was an monster compared
>to these fortresses, but I have heard of some reduction of even that line
>occurring.

By specialized sapper troops using flamethrowers and heavy demolition
charges.

>By air or sea, I'll bet even a Mediterranean to Atlantic border fortress
>could have been got around. Would the operational limitations of such
>an obstacle have prevented Germany from assaulting France? Good
>question.

The German army was a mobile army; a coast to coast defense like the
Maginot Line would have stopped it in its tracks. France's problem was
they expected Belgium to fortify their border as well, but the smaller
country couldn't afford it. France didn't want to fortify Belgium's
border, as that would have looked like they were writing off their
smaller neighbor.

John Lansford

The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage:
http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:29:35 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Transponders (was Re: Piracy)

Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:02:02 -0400 (EDT), "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
>To avoid complete information overload, it wouldn't suprise me if
>everyone's funky super-cool transponders are only required for
>interstellar craft ... the small craft just build and proliferate too
>fast.

Well, as someone who doesnt' believe in tamperproof transponders
or that they would work for ID a ship as legel or illegal, I
think transponders would be required based on port traffic.
If the port of busy enough, _any_ ship landing needs a transponder
to avoid them running in to each other.  If you have too
many ships to keep track of, then you have too many to land
and some have to go around.  Now, since they don't have
to land at a star port, a lot of space ships will divert to
small ports just to save time.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:22:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a Machine Race

David L. Pulver writes:
> 
> Don't read too much into the fact that GURPS Traveller space combat
> missiles are remotely piloted vehicles rather than robots.
> 
> They are RPVs not because of any third imperium limitation in or distrust
> for robots, but because it proved difficult to pack sufficient passive or
> active sensors into a small, cheap missile to resolve sensor-masked
> targets at typical missile engagement ranges (i.e., 200,000 miles or so).
> Installing sensors capable at point blank ranges (circa 20,000 miles)
> was considered in the first draft, but as they essentially doubled the
> cost of the missile, it was considered more economical to remove them.

Which is, of course, an excellent argument for fixing the sensor rules ;).  To
be honest, GT severely overestimates the ease of hitting something with a
missile, particularly a blind operator-guided missile at long ranges....

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:38:40 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: Targeting Jumps (was:re: various piracy bits

>
>And let's not forget that the planet is *moving*, so if you end up
>trailing it, you will have a longer approach than if you come out of jump
>"in front of" it.
>
>Ben
>

Only if the Navigator screwed up and did not give you the correct orbital
vector.

When you appear, you should have approximately the same orbital speed as the
planet you are going to approach.  But I imagine that a standard emergence
point for a given system would be *behind* orbit of the planet, as an added
precaution.  (Piracy advocates take notice.  A 'Standard' emergence point
for a given system?)

douglas

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Major Race Status (was: Re: High Tech troops...)

Black ICE writes:

> Suppose that the Roswell UFO _was_ a starship of some sort, but _wasn't_
> in good enough shape to reverse-engineer?  If one stipulates that the
> ship's existence would be enough of a hint that _some_ kind of FTL drive
> was possible, would this taint the Solomani claim to being a Major Race?
 
Considering how many centuries after roswell it took for the solomani to hit
space, there's reasonable argument for 'yah, a trader crashed here, but it was
reduced to fine unanalysable rubble, so it didn't give us much of a boost...'

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:52:43 GMT
From: jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: Re: Piracy

On Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:16:47 -0400, Ian or Katts
<ianw@orac.net.au> wrote:

>>From memory, Vargr pulled that stunt once. It was called the Rape of
>Antares, if memory serves me, and triggered centuries of bad feeling
>between human and vargr in the Julian Protectorate area. Can someone add
>more detail ?

You're thinking of the Sack of Gashikan.  A Vargr corsair band
raided the garden planet of Gashikan (in Gashikan sector), and
used near-planetbuster nukes on it - global holocaust to the
human society there.  It sparked the Vargr Race Wars, and has had
repercussions in the area right up to the time of the Rebellion
and Collapse.  (Repercussions include widespread slavery and
attempted genocide via multiple means including tailored
biological weapons; indirectly also the fully-integrated biracial
culture on Asimikigir in the Protectorate.  See the summary
writeup in GALACTIC 2.4 [Amdukan and Gashikan sectors].)

- --
Jeff Zeitlin
jeff.zeitlin@mail.execnet.com

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #954
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Friday, October 16 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 955



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: OT: Lord of the Rings 
Re: Piracy
Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)
Re: Archival Materials
[none]
Re: Major Race Status (was: Re: High Tech troops...) 
Re: Major Race Status (was: Re: High Tech troops...) 
Re: Discovery of a machine race
Re: Piracy
Re: High Tech troops
re: Major Race Status
re: High Tech Troops
re: Major Race Status
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #954
G:T starships and equipment
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: More Cool Traveller stuff
Re: Piracy
Re: High Tech troops
Re: High Tech troops 
Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:43:44 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings 

> >>ObTrav: Kevin Sorbo as Strephon.
> 
> >hmmm...how about as Dulinor?  With Mike Myers as Lucan?
> 
> How about Kevin Smith (plays Ares) as Lucan :*>
> 
> 
> And Lucy Lawless as Margaret?

Sorbo as Dulinor.  Mike Myers as Lucan.  Sarah Jessica Parker as Margaret.  
James Gardner as Norris.

James Woods as Strephon?  Or would Costner be better?

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:50:00 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

- -----Original Message-----
From: David P. Summers <summers@alum.mit.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>


>You will all notice that the piracy debate is back and I haven't
>posted a single thing!
>
>Nope!  No mention of how I think that piracy depends on the
>assumtions you use and how "controlling" you see the Imperium
>as being and that is can't be prov...
>
>Doh!
>
>Nevermind!
>
>:-)


lol. Jump on in! The water's fine. ;-)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:05:12 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Paperless Imperium (was re: Transponders)

Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>SD Mooney wrote:
>
>>>I always hated reading more than about a half dozen pages of text
>>>electronically. If it's longer, I prefer paper.
>>
>>And you can take paper books to the toilet...
>
>Laptops?

...don't like water so are bad in the bath, and are bigger than paper, and
you've still got the OCR step...

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:51:33 -0700
From: deadlander@juno.com
Subject: Re: Archival Materials

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:52:39 -0700 "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com> writes:
>     Read a great book series, and in that series the main character 
>is>kind of like Indiana Jones.  

DON'T TEASE US!!!  What is the name of the series?

Capt. Mourn
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:37:32 -0700
From: Robert Biggar Iii <rwb@tc.fluke.com>
Subject: [none]

unsubscribe

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:42:21 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Major Race Status (was: Re: High Tech troops...) 

> Black ICE writes:
> 
> > Suppose that the Roswell UFO _was_ a starship of some sort, but _wasn't_
> > in good enough shape to reverse-engineer?  If one stipulates that the
> > ship's existence would be enough of a hint that _some_ kind of FTL drive
> > was possible, would this taint the Solomani claim to being a Major Race?
>  
> Considering how many centuries after roswell it took for the solomani to hit
> space, there's reasonable argument for 'yah, a trader crashed here, but it was
> reduced to fine unanalysable rubble, so it didn't give us much of a boost...'

OK, let's look at history.

The Roswell Incident was in 1947.  Terra was at TL6, about the middle of the 
period.  Jump-1 comes availiable at TL9.

The date given for the First Interstellar War is 2113 AD (ref: Supp 8, Library 
Data A-M).  That's 166 years after Roswell.  According to pg 6 of Supp 8, the 
first Terran jump drives were in common use in 'the late 21st Century'.  Their 
introduction was about, say, 2070.  That's only 123 years to climb *3 full 
tech levels*!!!!!

FWIW, this opens the door for the *possibility* that the Roswell Incident 
*did* make a difference in Terra's developement.  After all, of the 430-odd 
known races, only *5* discovered jump drive on their own.  (The Aslans copied 
it, which we know for *sure*.)  This suggests to me that developement of jump 
drive depends on several factors:  ready access to lanthanum, a high enough 
tech level to allow developement of jump drive *theory*, and a goodly amount 
of *pure luck*.  There have been a few Minor Races that were starfarers using 
STL 'slowboats', even carving out small pocket empires with generation ships.  
IINM, these proto-TL10 cultures *also* had a good understanding of gravitics 
theory.  Why did they *not* develope jump drive on their own?

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:50:24 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Major Race Status (was: Re: High Tech troops...) 

> Keven R. Pittsinger wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Walter Smith wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The above is probably necessary - think of what one type-S scout ship
> > > > could have done to 1930's Europe all by itself.
> > >
> > > Ah it wasn't so tough to take down a Scout at lower tech levels. Can you
> > > say, Roswell?   ;)
> > 
> > Funny you should mention that.  I've been grinding that idea through the back of my head for a couple weeks now, that the Roswell UFO was really an off-course Vilani free trader, and the wreck was in good enough shape that the Americans developed jump drive from it.  Kind of what happened with the Aslan, remember?
> > 
> > Of course the Solomanis would *kill* to keep that secret safe...
> > 
> Suppose that the Roswell UFO _was_ a starship of some sort, but _wasn't_
> in good enough shape to reverse-engineer?  If one stipulates that the
> ship's existence would be enough of a hint that _some_ kind of FTL drive
> was possible, would this taint the Solomani claim to being a Major Race?

Considering the speed that Terra went from TL6 to TL9 with FTL (under 150
years), I'd say this was highly likely.  We know that the Vilani had ventured
into the Solomani Rim sector somewhat, and their traders even made it as far as
the Dark Nebula, IIRC.  It's *definitely* in the realms of possibility.  We
know the Solomani couldn'tve recieved jump drive from the Aslan; the Aslan
recieved it from the Solomani.  I don't know what the Hivers were doing during
this period, but as of 1100, their border was within a sector or so of Terra.

Interesting speculations, eh?

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:10:09 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a machine race

> From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
> >> From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
> >> IMC, the Third Imperium has as much or more of a prejudice against
> >> robot-controlled weaponry as they do against psionics... witness the
lack
> >> of internal guidance on G:T missiles.
> >But that is in GURPs not GDW or Imperium Traveller...  You have got to
> >think there is a canon example of self guided weapons in GDW Traveller,
the
> >Tac Missile...
> There you go.  As always, YMMV.

This is true, btw, also in TNE, there is a passage about the Virus &
"Expert Systems" in missile guidance...

But, in the case of GURPs, well, I would have to say that it should be
added if not there, or else how can one do the AIM-7, AIM-9, & AIM-120?

Legate Legion, Militant Jewish Terrorist
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

We are Microsoft of Borg.  Your distinctive capabilities will be adapted to
service us.  Resistance is futile.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:13:29 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Jeff Zeitlin wrote:
>  See the summary
> writeup in GALACTIC 2.4 [Amdukan and Gashikan sectors].)

For those of us who aren't members of the Borg ^h^h^h Microsoft
Collective, are all these wonderful writeups in GLAACTIC available in
pot format?

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:19:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: High Tech troops

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest wrote:

> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:16:46 -0400
> From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>

> Would low-tech planets in the Imperium do this kind of thing?
> Buy tiny amounts of high-tech gear instead of massive amounts
> of locally-produced gear? I think in most cases the answer would
> have to be yes.

Makes it easier to put on a wargame table, anyway.

Just make sure you can maintain the stuff and get in necessary spares, or
you'll end up like Iran, all those F-14s rotting for lack of good parts
and maintainance
 
> sea bottom. The TL6 world might have a grav tank formation (as in
> one)

Probably three. One down for maintainance, one in use, with the third one 
supposed to be in use but waiting for the next TL12 spark plug to arrive
by mail order. Seriously, it's general military practice that you need one
or two spare vehicles for each one you want to maintain, continously, in
the field. Higher TL vehicles *may* be more reliable, though.

> The rest of the TL6 planet will have almost no army at all, as the
> entire defense budget went to these few horrendously expensive
> items.

Well, the one thing you have to remember is that many planets have a
counter-insurgency problem even if they are not balkanized. The
insurgents, unless aided by some off world interests, may not have access
to much high tech gear if the government can strictly control space. So an
actual low-TL force can be useful in addition to any police forces you
have.

Bruce Johnson said:

> If the other side's 1000 tanks are operating in 20 50 tank batallions
> spread out all over the place the idiot who only bought 10 tanks is
> going to lose it all.

Depends. If the native tanks are TL6 clunkers at 20 mph and you have ten
TL12 600 mph grav tanks... remember, technology enhances mobility as well
as firepower. It can also make supplies easier depending on what you use
for power and weaponry. If you yell "ready, set go" by the time his tanks
have made it 100 miles into your border territory, half your tanks have
toasted his supply convoys and the other half are hovering over your
capital toasting your goverment buildings...

> It's be worse if insatead of 1000 TL-6 tanks, the guy went out and
> bought 100 TL8 tanks, and 1000 TL-12 LAWS ;-)

Heh. Seriously, a high-low mix is probably a good idea, for the same
reason the US didn't buy all F-16s. Still, the designs I've seen from
striker and gurps vehicles both suggest that high end grav armor is really
something else. With no need to bother with long range sensors or life
support, a grav tank in atmosphere can beat an SDB the same way an SDB can
beat a  starship.
  
> Commo...maybe. Air, I doubt it. One F-16 is going to smoke a Mig-17
> everyu time, but line 15 with competent pilots in them against it...the
> F-16 is gone. Unless the 16 can stand off and take them all out with
> long range missiles, it'll have to come down to their level to deal with
> them, and low 'n' slow the Mig's will chew it up. Don't even _talk_
> about 1-100 odds.

Of course, that argument is interesting since it is based on difference of
about half a TL, or at most mid TL7 to early TL8. The better argument
would be 300 Sopwith Camels against three F-22s - or perhaps more useful, 
three A-10 Thunderbolts. Or more to the point, for TL6 vs. TL12
equivelents, three M-1 Abrams against 300 of Ziska's war-wagons.

John Keegan, in his recent book on North American battles, remarks that
the personal bodyguard (a half dozen men with M16s) of the Nato general he
was visiting with could have been decisive at Waterloo...
 
- -david

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:17:23 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Major Race Status

Black Ice wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Suppose that the Roswell UFO _was_ a starship of some sort, but _wasn't_
in good enough shape to reverse-engineer?  If one stipulates that the
ship's existence would be enough of a hint that _some_ kind of FTL drive
was possible, would this taint the Solomani claim to being a Major Race?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the Aslan have pretty well proved that "Major Race" status is
more a matter of what you tell other people, and what you have the
firepower to make them believe.

Showing up on the coyns was a neat trick, though.

Of course, it's all just a Hiver Manipulation anyway... <g>

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:38:38 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: High Tech Troops

Bruce Johnson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Only if they were abysmally led and lined up to be shot...

If the other side's 1000 tanks are operating in 20 50 tank batallions
spread out all over the place the idiot who only bought 10 tanks is
going to lose it all.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Let's see: your troops cross my border, my grav tanks fly to your
capitol, obliterate it, fly back and kill every single tank you have
that moves. Before you've penetrated more than a hundred klicks
into my country. Nothing you have can scratch any grav tank. My 
grav tanks move continental distances in the time it takes you to move
100 miles.

You can't hurt my grav tanks. We kill you at will. We see you 100km
away, or more. The only thing we have to worry about is overconfidence,
because we can obliterate your tank formations as fast as you can
(with TL-6 transport & C3I) deploy them.

Bruce again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Commo...maybe. Air, I doubt it. One F-16 is going to smoke a Mig-17
everyu time, but line 15 with competent pilots in them against it...the
F-16 is gone. Unless the 16 can stand off and take them all out with
long range missiles, it'll have to come down to their level to deal with
them, and low 'n' slow the Mig's will chew it up. Don't even _talk_
about 1-100 odds.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not talking F-16 vs Mig-17, I'm more talking F-16 vs Misubishi Zero.

TL-12 vs TL-6, the TL-6 craft will literally never see what kills them.
If they're killed with energy weapons fire, the TL12 baddie won't even
have to reload. We're not talking a one level tech difference here.

Add that, as with the tanks, nothing the TL-6 craft can carry will even
dent the TL-12 craft - unless you're deploying Genies or something.
Thunderballs change the whole equation.

Bruce again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, because all that those thousands of low tech troops have to do is
take the starport, depriving you of your spares, and your elite offworld
Hightech force is going to be toast.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
My scenario included purchase of maintenance equipment - I wouldn't
want to do this if I depended in the short term on off-world equipment.

You mess with the TL-12 grav tanks, your country won't have a long
term, btw.

Add to it than any assault against a fixed position means you have
to put your units where the grav tanks can find them - it might take
two grav tanks to kill anything that comes in sight of the starport.
Better plan on being sneaky, and be prepared to lose every city
you own in the process.

One TL-12 grav tank vs one TL-6 city would make Godzilla envious.

Bruce again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Low Tech <> Incompetent!!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not talking incompetent, I'm talking incapable. Try your ten thousand
TL-6 men against ten grav tanks. Your only choice is guerilla warfare,
because you'll never hurt them and you'll die as fast as they can fire
in an assault.

Take another look at the Zeros vs F-14's dogfight in _Final Countdown_.
That was with a two level tech difference - we're talking six here.

Bruce again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If you have a TL-3 world...why are the offworlders bothering with you?
If they invade, you have no choice but to surrender. Wait 'till they get
on planet and garrisoned in..._then_ take 'em out, guerilla style.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This might get a little old after the thirty-seventh unscrupulous Free
Trader captain holds your entire planet hostage.

Maybe he's a slaver...or wants those nice lanthanum ingots you've been
carving out of the mines...or he's just a megalomaniac.

Just one nice anti-space missile silo, just to keep the riff-raff out...

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:43:10 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Major Race Status

Kevin R. Pittsinger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  This suggests to me that developement of jump 
drive depends on several factors:  ready access to lanthanum, a high enough  tech level to allow developement of jump drive *theory*, and a 
goodly amount of *pure luck*.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I won't argue with the luck or tech level, but there is canonical evidence
of early Vargr jump drives being made with Barium instead of Lanthanum.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:02:36 -0500
From: William Barnett-Lewis <wlewis@mailbag.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #954

Of course you have to remeber that if that is the case then there's always
Grandfather's scout checking on how the brats,errr villanii, are doing circa
4014 PI...

Traveller-digest wrote:

> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:18:35 -0400
> From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
> Subject: Re: High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses)
> 
> >
> > On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Walter Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > The above is probably necessary - think of what one type-S scout ship
> > > could have done to 1930's Europe all by itself.
> >
> > Ah it wasn't so tough to take down a Scout at lower tech levels. Can you
> > say, Roswell?   ;)
> 
> Funny you should mention that.  I've been grinding that idea through the back of my head for a couple weeks now, that the Roswell UFO was really an off-course Vilani free trader, and the wreck was in good enough shape that the Americans developed jump drive from it.  Kind of what happened with the Aslan, remember?
> 
> Of course the Solomanis would *kill* to keep that secret safe...
> 
> Keven
> - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                                                      Science-Fiction Adventure
>                                                      In Reavers' Deep
>

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:22:32 CDT
From: Don McKinney <dmckinne@itds.com>
Subject: G:T starships and equipment

Can I make a recommendation to equipment and starship designers using
GURPS Traveller?

Instead of trying to convert ships over to GURPS Traveller by design, 
do it by function, building the best ship under that design system
for the purpose, instead of limiting the ship classes arbitrarily based
on their original designs.

This goes for PC ships as well as ships of the line - design around
function, and avoid "copying" old CT/MT/TNE/T4 designs.

Side note: anyone working on a Trillion Credit Squadron/Pocket Empires
book for G:T?  With the "mass combat system" in GURPS, that sort of thing
could really be done on a serious scale...  whole Frontier Wars could
be fought easily under such a system...

(Anyone silly enough to consider such?  I'll tag along as the idea guy
if someone else has the time to devote to make it real...)


DonM.
- --
==========================================================================
= Donald E. McKinney, Senior CM Specialist             dmckinne@itds.com =
= International Telecommunications Data Systems           (217) 239-8365 =
= 2109 Fox Drive, Champaign, IL                           (217) 351-8250 =
= Winter War XXVI Convention Chairman, Champaign, IL, February 5-7, 1999 =
= dmckinne@prairienet.org or winterwar@prairienet.org     (217) 469-9917 = 
==========================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:23:28 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

At 03:03 pm 10/15/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>>ObTrav: Kevin Sorbo as Strephon.
>
>>hmmm...how about as Dulinor?  With Mike Myers as Lucan?
>
>How about Kevin Smith (plays Ares) as Lucan :*>
>
>And Lucy Lawless as Margaret?

	Mmmmm ... Lucy Lawless ....
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:47:24 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: More Cool Traveller stuff

>Does anybody know if the deadline for ordering Sanders Gamelords stuff is
>over?
>I lost his e-mail in a mutiple harddrive crasch (how likely is it that
>three drives gets hardware errors on the same day in two of my machines,
>one at work and one at home - synchronocity or Murphy?)

Has it started yet?

I never got an email, and I have a copy of Letter of Marque, so I asume
that he hasn't got things ready to go yet. If this _isn't_ the case, would
some kind soul please email me and let me know the details, so that I can
send him my order.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:57:03 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Piracy

"David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net> writes:
>Example: Canada, with about 1.3% GDP to the military compared to
>4% in the US. 

During peacetime. During WWI and WWII we put a higher percentage than the
US, and I think other Commonwealth countries may have topped us.


>Moreover, you'll see priorities based  partly on planetary
>prestige. Example: Canada (for a long time) dedicated the majority of its
>military budget to support of NATO forces in Germany and to ASW to
>protect the atlantic convoys to reinforce them

Not to mention every UN peacekeeping mission. There's a reason for that
Peacekeepers Monument in Ottawa.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:03:24 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: High Tech troops

For an interesting take on this situation...might I suggest the series of
books by Jerry Pournelle "Jannisaries".  There are 3 books in the series;
Jannisaries, Clan and Crown, and Storms of Victory.  The basic premise is of a
group of CIA mercs from Earth transported to a world w/ an Iron Age mishmash
of cultures, also brought from Earth in the past (the Scots/Celts, Scythians,
Romans, and a couple of others.)  The mercs have to pacify or conquer an area
of the world in order to complete a task.  Of course, the mercs have thier
weapons (M16's, LMG's, grenades, etc.)

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:41:14 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: High Tech troops 

> 
> For an interesting take on this situation...might I suggest the series of
> books by Jerry Pournelle "Jannisaries".  There are 3 books in the series;
> Jannisaries, Clan and Crown, and Storms of Victory.  The basic premise is of a
> group of CIA mercs from Earth transported to a world w/ an Iron Age mishmash
> of cultures, also brought from Earth in the past (the Scots/Celts, Scythians,
> Romans, and a couple of others.)  The mercs have to pacify or conquer an area
> of the world in order to complete a task.  Of course, the mercs have thier
> weapons (M16's, LMG's, grenades, etc.)

And the mercs are working under the limitation of *NO* resupply.  And those 
*weren't* M16's, they were FN-FAL's.  A *MUCH* superior rifle.

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 17:18:01 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)

At 14:52 15/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:
>At 03:37 PM 10/15/98 +0200, you wrote:

>>That's one of the pirate's biggest problems. In space there is no place to
>>hide. If the pirate is in a position to intercept a ship that jumps into
>>the system (if he is so lucky that it actually arrives within range of him,
>>which the odds do not favor) then any system defenses can see him.
>>
>>
>
>Actually you have everywhere to hide.  Space is a big place.  Searching even
>a 1 AU distance circle for a 1000 meter spherical ship with lidar would take
>millinia.  If an object is not a signal emitter it's tough to find in all
>that blackness.  Stelth has it's uses.

You don't have to search a 1AU sphere, though. All you need to patrol and
search is the 100 dia limit around your homeworld (unless you are using the
stellar 100 dia. border as your jump limit), and this can be readily
covered by 4-8 vessels even if the world has a size of 'A'.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:58:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: neo@total.net
Subject: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

On the TWG list, somebody made reference to an old German-English lexicon
of Traveller-related words. This got me thinking about ways to make my
campaign seem more global and polyglot. I'd like to be able to use
languages other than English for naming things, especially starports and
corporations. 

It occurs to me that TML members speak a wide variety of languages, and
many of us might find uses for a multilingual lexicon of a few Traveller
terms. Perhaps we might ask TMLers who speak languages other than English
to provide translations for the following terms...

Spaceport
Starport
Highport
Downport
Base
Company
Corporation
   etc?

Also, words for governmental bodies, ie:

Assembly
Parliament
Legislature
Council
Bureau
Administration
   etc.

(Usage examples would be helpful, too...)

Traveller GMs could then combine these terms with proper nouns, adjectives,
whatever (easily found in dictionaries) to produce plausible names for
ports, corporations, governmental bodies, etc. Thus, we might be able to
get away from a universe full of worlds settled by English speakers, as
suggested by names like, say, "Cornwallis Downport".

Certainly, inventing names in foreign languages can be iffy, and the
results will often be technically wrong. Fortunately, the game takes place
thousands of years in the future, so one can always blame linguistic drift.
:)

Comments?

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <neo@total.net>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
    "Sex times Technology equals The Future." -- J.G. Ballard

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:38:40 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses)

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: High Tech troops (was re: Fortresses)
...
>Would low-tech planets in the Imperium do this kind of thing?
>Buy tiny amounts of high-tech gear instead of massive amounts
>of locally-produced gear? I think in most cases the answer would
>have to be yes.

  I'd have guessed yes, partly for local economic and political purposes
(hard to believe, eh? :> ), and partly because a foreign polity with such
a TL will also have that equipment in quantity.

...
>Another thing to think about: Let's say you have a TL3 planet
>with a unified government. There's really no point in it keeping
>a TL3 army on hand, except as a police force (usually paid
...

  The Imperium can provide that defense far more easily, although
it is reassuring to be told that the support and basing of vastly
higher tech formations is trivial and common - this makes SDB or
fighter basing much simpler for internal security uses.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #955
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Friday, October 16 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 956



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
Re: Piracy
Re: Fortresses (was re: Tech Advancement)
Re: Fortresses (was re: Tech Advancement)
Re: Piracy
Re: Major Race Status
Re: Lucan (was OT: Lord of the Rings)
re: Major Race Status
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: Discovery of a Machine Race
Re: Archival Materials
Re: Major Race Status
[GT] Ship Design Question
re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
re: Piracy
Piracy - historical note

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:38:56 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
...
>Actually you have everywhere to hide.  Space is a big place.  Searching even
>a 1 AU distance circle for a 1000 meter spherical ship with lidar would take
>millinia.  If an object is not a signal emitter it's tough to find in all
>that blackness.  Stelth has it's uses.

  I've been told that IR detection is vastly easier. Don't know personally.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:52:17 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>I am basing this on the system I am using...which is CT/MT.  Everyone seems to
>insist on following "canon" in this discussion, and canonically, only the Navy
>has the nukes.

  I suspect you may find that planetary funded SDB's are effectively
Imperial auxiliaries as far as the 3I is concerned; I'm still looking
through the books for explicit mention.

>   Gee, you'd better not try and register that puppy. Who paid for it?
>  >>
>
>Do crooks register thier guns?  Of course not.  As for who paid for it, there
>are a number of ways:  one which immediatly springs into mind is a consortium
>of pirates.

  I'd love to see the articles of incorporation for that concern :>  If they
have that kind of cash available I don't see why they don't simply set up
as bankers, though.

  If the ship isn't registered it can survive only very briefly in Imperial
(or Sword World, or Zho...) space. Where did they build it?

...
> >> TL 15, with 140-200 MCr in computer/sensor array alone? Again, you'd best
>be an enemy warship to explain this one.
>
>This is one of the things I didn't necessarily like about MTrav...a top-of-
>the-line sensor suite was dirt cheap:  At most MCr 5.  The priciest items
>would seem likely to be the hull, j-drives, and the afore-mentioned computer.
>The whole ship doesn't have to be TL15, just certain parts of it (canonical
>examples exist)

  I'm afraid that I'm not conversant with MT ship design; what holds for HG
may not apply there. Power was the main factor in pre-TL 15 HG warships.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:20:55 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Fortresses (was re: Tech Advancement)

>
>  An assault of the type made on Eben Emael would not be relevant to an
>extensive fortified zone. In any case, the line was meant to be backed
>up masses of (~static) infantry divisions, and the French were developing
>their own armoured divisions with effective modern doctrine. The result
>would have been a static front with the attacker placed at a serious
>disadvantage, possibly in political no less than military terms.

Not exactly masses, These were known as 'interval troops', their job was
counter penetration, and counter infiltaration (all part of the grand plan
and would have made an an attack of the Ebn Emal forts impossible, although
the fact that the forts were mutually supporting, capable of resisting
their own fire, and simply shelled each other when the enemy got close
would (and did) put paid to any attacks against them.  The manpower
equation with Germany led to the Maginot line, it was a force multiplier,
nothing more, (France's losses in  WWI ensured that during the 40s it would
have far fewer men available for ,military service then Germany.)  The
maginot line succeded brilliantly in forcing the Germans to attack
elsewhere.  That 'Sickle cut' rather than the Schlieffen plan was used (
remeber Huntziger wheeled to protect the flank of the maginot line), that
the Belgiums did not co-operate until war beagn, and a million other
reasons led to France's downfall.

That the TL 15 armoured units can make mincemeat of Tl 5 fortifications is
not half as interesting as considereing the case where the TL are the same. 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:30:36 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Fortresses (was re: Tech Advancement)

The maginot line was neither originally intended to be coast to coast,
never was coast to coast, and the only rediuction was of some isolated
forts in a weak maginot extension. Theis 'extension' was simply a
hopelessly incomplete , sparse, collection of a bit of barbed wire, a few
concrete blockhouses, (most without their steel embrasure covers in place)
and a *very* occasional mine.  German accounts of 'breaking through' the
maginot line were so much Propaganda.

>
>> Granted, the Maginot Line was an monster compared
>>to these fortresses, but I have heard of some reduction of even that line
>>occurring.
>
>By specialized sapper troops using flamethrowers and heavy demolition
>charges.
>
>>By air or sea, I'll bet even a Mediterranean to Atlantic border fortress
>>could have been got around. Would the operational limitations of such
>>an obstacle have prevented Germany from assaulting France? Good
>>question.
>
>The German army was a mobile army; a coast to coast defense like the
>Maginot Line would have stopped it in its tracks. France's problem was
>they expected Belgium to fortify their border as well, but the smaller
>country couldn't afford it. France didn't want to fortify Belgium's
>border, as that would have looked like they were writing off their
>smaller neighbor.
>
>John Lansford
>
>The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage:
>http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:26:15
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: re: various piracy bits
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>"Cap'n, according to this Shinriang system will have most of it's SDB
>flotilla at jump point Zed this month. Do you think we can slip around
>them if we use that other jump point? I'd rather not have our cargo
>looked at too closely before we rendezvous with those belters."

>Furthermore, if either of these captains get attacked by a lurking
>corsair, the local authorities will probably almost ignore it - having these
>assumed smugglers and risk-takers get attacked by a pirate makes
>a good object lesson for others.
>
>Pirates probably get nowhere trying to prey on ships that stick to
>well-patrolled traffic zones or highly controlled systems, just like
>muggers don't hit many victims on well-lit streets with a cop in
>view. And how much crime today is inflicted against people who
>are doing crimes themselves? The trick who gets his pocket
>picked by his paid companion for the evening, the drug smuggler
>who gets murdered by rivals, etc.
>

Not a problem ... piracy exists in the outsystem, and by consent.

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>Lets see what a planet would need for self defence.  Sorry but I'm at work
>and do not have my books handy so you'll have to figure the prices.
>
>1 ground base (min)
>
>1 Army (about .1% of pop. as a Min. plus equipment)
>
>1 wet navy (If there is water.  .1% Pop. plus ships)
>
>1 air force.  (.1% pop. plus planes)
>
>1 SDB squad  (Say 10 SDBs in rotation for matainence and training)
>
>1 Space base for the SDBs and sensor maintainence.
>
>1 sensor web (100 satalite scatter arround the system.)
>
>1 very busy service craft for the satalite network.  Two would be better.
>
>1 pentagon (admin.)
>
>lets see .3% of population that's 3 per thousand or 300,000 people for the
>ground bases military (not counting admin. staff or maintaince crews.) at
>say 10K per year each...3000MC in saleries!
>

Cool. So out hypothetical 1 billion taxpayers are paying 3 credits apiece
on the salary budget.

Add another 3 credits each for equipment maintainence, and a credit for
friction.

I use Australia as an example. About 20 million citizens. We have (from
memory) five working submarines, half a dozen frigates, a couple of
obsolete destroyers, seventy odd F18s, about 20 F111s plus I think a dozen
P3 Orion patrol craft.

In interstellar terms, that would turn into five SDBs, half a dozen
Escorts, a couple of obsolete Colonial Cruisers, seventy odd small
fighters, twenty big fighters and a dozen type S scouts.

This is about right for a small world - about 10 000 ton of military
shipping for about 20 million people. Call it KCr 100 a year per dton in
maintainence ... about a gigacredit a year. Maintainence could be higher
with 'bleeding edge' technology, lower for centuries-proven designs.

Fifty credits a head for twenty million citizens. Could be a bit on the
high side, but it's a pretty decent flotilla ... easily justifiable for 100
million people.

>I'd like to see your calculations for the 1000 battleship & 4000 destroyer
>per secter navy!  The maintainence cost alone would take the entire
>planetary output of 100 worlds!  That's 100% tax for those worlds!
>

The navy doesnt have to be that big to make piracy in and around mainworlds
very very unheathy. I think Hans can repost his numbers, if you'd like to
see them though.

>>You also have the time lags in getting the messages from the informants to
>>the secret pirate base (or Gvorrdun Commonality, or whatever).
>>
>
>That cuts both ways as well.

Yes, but it cuts against the pirates. The Free Traders are quite happy to
go 'Damn. We missed them by 4 days'.

>
>And exactly how do you spot a 1000 meter object at 1 au?  Any pirate worth
>the name will be running dark with RAM and scatter coating.  

You had better not ever dock at any normal starport. You'll stick out like
a coal pile in a ballroom.

>>Pirates require at least 3 gees of acceleration. More if they want to play
>>with competantly-built SDBs. 3 gees of acceleration pushes your power plant
>>size up, as does the additional weaponary.
>>
>
>Or a good head start.  Also what if the pirate used SDBs or equivalent
>carried by battle transports?

One problem is can the sub-craft trust the mothership not to bug out ?

A second problem is if you have a head start then stopping to board is an
issue.

>>How much ? I dont disagree with you, but I want to see some numbers.
>>
>
>Well the cargo much absorb the cost of shiping.  I think that is 2k per ton
>per jump.  The cargo must be work cost + 2k per ton.  If the cost were cheep
>like dirt or rock at say 100c per ton then the final cost would be 2100c per
>ton.  Much to much!  One ton of IBM PCs at 1kc per PC and 100 PC per ton the
>cost of shiping 1 parsec would add 20c to the price of each unit.  Not to
>much really.  I'd say that not counting emergencies the cost per ton would
>need to be at least 2k per jump to ofset the cost of shipping.  That makes
>shiped in good have a markup of 100% minimum to cover shiping.  Not an
>unreasonable markup by todays standards for consumer goods.
>

So cargos are in the range of KCr 10-40 per dton ? Therefore, how many does
our hypothetical pirate need to capture each year ?

>>In which case insurance rates for trading at that system will rise,
>>reducing trade and inducing those that come along to get Combat Rated for
>>insurance purposes.
>>
>
>What insurence?  I've not seen any insurence companies that would cover free
>trader.  Where is the information on these companies and their rates?  My
>player would love to get coverage for their expensive ships.
>

Check with your local insurance company on insurance costs. I think about
5% of ship value per annum sounds about right for Free Traders ... that
will turn into more than several megacredits per year.

>I expect convoys to start up.  The Navy will not be present (except local
>ones) as the players are cut of in a pocket.  They have to 'make do' with
>what they can scratch up.  There will be a high pop. TL10 world, a med. pop.
>TL13 world, and several others.  The cental core of on subsecter posible in
>the Marches.  None have what it takes to build up their defences on their
>own but by trading they can all get what they need.  It's a Yankee trader
>type campain where the players are traped in the situation unless they want
>to run the gauntlet back to Core secter.
>

Not a problem. You might try and get hold of Hard Times, a very very good
Megatraveller supplement.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:42:43 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Major Race Status

To:             	traveller@MPGN.COM
Date sent:      	Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:42:21 -0400

>>Black ICE writes:

>>Considering how many centuries after roswell it took for the solomani to hit
>>space, there's reasonable argument for 'yah, a trader crashed here, but it was
>>reduced to fine unanalysable rubble, so it didn't give us much of a boost...'

>OK, let's look at history.

Now I'd hate (that really is a huge understatement) for the Roswell/UFO/X-files 
conspiracy theories to become canon and I hate that DGP spelt out that the 
Aslan copied jump drive from the Solomani (I think at the most they should 
have restricted themselves to subtle hints so that individual referees could 
chose what they wanted for their own games). But I recognise that there are 
more than a few really fun senarios here. So.......

>The Roswell Incident was in 1947.  Terra was at TL6, about the middle of the 
>period.  Jump-1 comes availiable at TL9.

Howsabout this. Large scale radio transmissions began on Earth in the early 
1920s and Dingir (the Vilani) provincial capital is about 26-27 ly away....

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:11:31 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Lucan (was OT: Lord of the Rings)

"Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM> wrote

> >>ObTrav: Kevin Sorbo as Strephon.
> 
> >hmmm...how about as Dulinor?  With Mike Myers as Lucan?
> 
> How about Kevin Smith (plays Ares) as Lucan :*>

Kevin Smith is way too cute (IMHO) to "realistically" portray Lucan.

Most of the people you are suggesting are too attractive, too buff, &
too young for the roles you have suggested.  Take a look at the picture
of Lucan in MT's Rebellion Sourcebook (pg 45, Liz Danforth art).

Lucan is an average (or less if you notice that his beard serves to hide
his week chin & that the lines on his face show greater aging than you
would expect from someone his age, born 1088, is typical) looking,
intense individual who (if the puffyness of his face is any indication)
is a bit on the chubby side.

Does anyone know (canonically) if Lucan and Varian were identical of
fraternal twins?  They look very similar in the illo on pg 9 on Rebllion
SB but you can't see Varians face. If they were identical twins we can
use the same actor for Varian in his pre death scenes.

Note that in this illustration Lucan is wearing high heels & mascara
(you can see it running from his tears), notice also how he is portrayed
as wearing significantly more juwelry than his brother (at least 4 rings
& a rather elaborate & a large, apparently bejewled, chest piece. 

While dress standards in the far future will be different from those we
expect now this is, after all, a piece of art intended to be scene by a
twentieth century audience.  As such the notion of a man in high heals,
mascara, & jewely who is crying seems intended to suggest, by using
unflattering stereotypes (to put it mildly) that Lucan is perhaps not
the most heterosexual person out there. ( text evidence in the form of
Windhooks version of the story is at the time of Varian's death Lucan &
Varian were arguing because Elia had "decided to leave Lucan and become
Varian's female aquaintance".  Note that this version does not
necessarily imply that Lucan and Elia were intimate).  

As for Strephon I always pictured him as having an aura of gravitas &
presence to him.  Perhaps a 50 something Charleton Heston?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:22:05 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: re: Major Race Status

Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU> wrote

> I think the Aslan have pretty well proved that "Major Race" status is
> more a matter of what you tell other people, and what you have the
> firepower to make them believe.
> 
> Showing up on the coyns was a neat trick, though.
> 
> Of course, it's all just a Hiver Manipulation anyway... <g>

No everybody knows that the reason the Aslan are on the coyns is that
when Grandfather created the coyns he used CT Alien modules to pick his
subjects (he simplified by putting all human races (Solomani, Zhodani, &
Darrian) that these books covered on one conyn.)   :)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:07:48 MET
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

- -> Spaceport   
Raumhafen
- -> Starport
Sternenhafen, but Raumhafen would also do.
- -> Highport
No direct translation i can think of
- -> Downport
ditto
- -> Base
Basis
- -> Company & Corporation
Gesellschaft, Firma, Betrieb

- -> 
- -> Also, words for governmental bodies, ie:
- -> 
- -> Assembly
Versammlung
- -> Parliament
Parlament
- -> Legislature
Legilatur
- -> Council
Rat
- -> Bureau
Buero 
- -> Administration
Verwaltung
- ->    etc.
und so weiter ;-)
 
Ad Astra,
V.A.G.       
- ------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----
- -- Am Weidengraben 86,C6 - 54296 Trier - Germany - T+F: +49651148846 -
- ------- check out: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/4061 --------
- ---- Student of Law, Gamer, Illuminatus Primus, Slayer of Windows95 --

- -----  "Don't hold me up: I am just barely ahead of insanity!!!" -----

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:50:53 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

I'll just have to put the norwegian words in :-)

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, Volker A. Greimann wrote:

>-> Spaceport   
>Raumhafen
Romhavn
>-> Starport
>Sternenhafen, but Raumhafen would also do.
Stjernehavn
>-> Highport
>No direct translation i can think of
Banehavn (translated more like orbital port)
>-> Downport
>ditto
Bakkehavn
>-> Base
>Basis
Base
>-> Company & Corporation
>Gesellschaft, Firma, Betrieb
Firma, bedrift, virksomhet, selskap
>
>-> 
>-> Also, words for governmental bodies, ie:
>-> 
>-> Assembly
>Versammlung
Forsamling
>-> Parliament
>Parlament
Parliament
>-> Legislature
>Legilatur
Lovgivende
>-> Council
>Rat
Råd
>-> Bureau
>Buero
Byrå, Departement 
>-> Administration
>Verwaltung
Forvaltning
>->    etc.
>und so weiter ;-)
og så videre ;-)
>------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----

Tommy Grav
- -------------------------------------------------------------
tommy.grav@astro.uio.no     http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/  
Institute of Astrophysics, UiO, No  
IMTU tn++t4+tg+ ru+ge++ !3i jt+au+st+ls hi++dr-so++zh-sy-sw++ 
 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 06:53:31 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Discovery of a Machine Race

At 02:10 PM 10/15/98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Don't read too much into the fact that GURPS Traveller space combat
>missiles are remotely piloted vehicles rather than robots.

Well, then in that case I'm just going to make it IMC.  I happen to like a
prohibition against robot weapons; I'll just give them a few historical
examples of what happens when you allow them (not the least of which will
be the Ancients) and voila... 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 20:06:17 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Archival Materials

In mail you write:

>      Read a great book series, and in that series the main character is
> kind of like Indiana Jones.  He loves to find things no one elsa has.  In
> the second book he finds the remains of a civilization that had been dead
> for over 50,000 years.  He discovers a library.  Huge racks that hold
> computer books, open the cover the screen lights up and shows you the
> contents.  These books had no power when he finds them, but he is able to
> rig up a recharger, and then finds out about the ancient race from there
> writtings.  What would stop us from using the same type of system?  Build
> little books with PROM type chips and a power system.  If they run out of
> power recharge them.

ICs can't last that long. They depend on junctions between P-type and
N-type material. Over 50,000 years the dopant atoms would diffuse
across the junction, rendering it useless. I doubt that the "Liquid
Crystals" in LCD displays are stable over such periods, and I suspect
that the fluid they are suspended in would leak out long before. 

LEDs depend on junctions, so they'd suffere the same fate as ICs. 

Batteries aren't stable over such time spans either. They'd no longer
be rechargeable after as little as a *decade*. 

And BTW, how did he determine the voltage and *polarity* required for
the recharger? Get the polarity wrong, and you'll ruin anything that
wasn't already. If you get the voltage too high, you'll also ruin
things. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:04:42 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Major Race Status

Walt Smith wrote:
>I think the Aslan have pretty well proved that "Major Race" status is
>more a matter of what you tell other people, and what you have the
>firepower to make them believe.

>Showing up on the coyns was a neat trick, though.

>Of course, it's all just a Hiver Manipulation anyway... <g>



OK, so the Aslan got jump drive from the Solomani, the Solomani got jump
drive from the Vilani.

It's got to be within the realm of possibility (as Pratchett might say: at
one end of the probability curve at least), that *none* of the "major"
races actually developed jump drives themselves.

Anyone any bright ideas what to do about the coyns in that case?

tc

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:11:53 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: [GT] Ship Design Question

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:52:00 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: [GT] Ship Design Question
Well, this might be better asked on a GURPS list, but since I don't belong
to one, I thought I'd ask it here.
I was wondering if when figuring out the mass of compartmentalization and
stealth features, do you use the mass of the hull by itself, or the mass of
the hull+armor?
****************
just the hull by itself

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:34:46 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

Glenn Grant wrote:
>On the TWG list, somebody made reference to an old German-English lexicon


I guess that would be me.  If anyone knows where the list originates I'd be
interested.  It's an 18 page, two column list of (classic) Traveller terms
and their German counterparts.  The copy I've seen has a handwritten
'Zuber' at the top which I would guess is a reference to Siegfried Zuber
who translated some of the Traveller books into German (Safarischiff,
Roboter, Brennpunkt Bowman, etc.).  I assume it may have been a handlist to
aid translation but if anyone knows better...

It certainly isn't a recent thing.  'Early dot-matrix' would be my guess.


Well, as I'm sitting here looking at the list, it would seem churlish not
to help out with the Deutsch counterparts of these, but any Germans feel
free to jump in and correct them...

>Spaceport
          Systemhafen

>Starport
          Raumhafen

>Highport
          tc guess: Hochhafen?

>Downport
          tc guess: Tiefhafen?

>Base
          Basis

>Company
          Konzernherrschaft

>Corporation
             same as 'company' (in the list at least)

Megacorporation
             Megakonzernen


I'm sure others can jump with other languages.  I'm sure there's at least
half a dozen languages represented here off the top of my head.

>Also, words for governmental bodies, ie:


Couldn't find any of them on the list, I guess if you're desparate I could
start on the dictionary, but I've no doubt others could do better off the
top of their heads.


>Certainly, inventing names in foreign languages can be iffy, and the
>results will often be technically wrong. Fortunately, the game takes place
>thousands of years in the future, so one can always blame linguistic
drift.
>:)

>Comments?


I must confess that this is one reason I haunt old second hand bookshops as
they are an excellent source of dictionaries and grammar books that serve
really well in this sort of situation.  It doesn't have to *be* right
(unless of course you happen to have say, a Finn or a Hausa speaker playing
with you), but just *looking* right can be a great aid.  And as you say,
linguistic drift is a great excuse. (Not that I'd discourage aiming for
correctness...)  Of course for the really persevering PC types, it can be a
great source of clues as well.

Besides, a shelf of 50 odd language dictionaries/grammars/phrase books is a
great conversation starter!  (And you never know what language the
conversation might be in.)


tc

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:48:52 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Piracy

Ian Whitchurch wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You had better not ever dock at any normal starport. You'll stick out like
a coal pile in a ballroom.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Kibbitzer's note: "stick out like a coal pile in a ballroom" dates back,
in RPG terms, to the AD&D Player's Handbook, specifically the
discussion of the Thief character and his ability to hide in shadows and
how well it worked when you tried it while people were looking at you.

<G>

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 22:54:26
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Piracy - historical note

I've been re-reading Braudel's Meditteranean in the time of Phillip II, and
there is a number of excellent discussions on piracy, and some wonderful
quotes.

With a nod to the school who believe that the Imperium should not collect
paperwork on passengers and cargo 'In 1575, a French ship took on board in
Tripoli in Barbary a cargo of Moorish and Jewish passengers bound for
Alexandria ... Without hesitation, the captain sailed straight to Naples
where he sold the passengers, and all their baggage' (p869, citing a letter
from Henri III to Philip II, 30 September 1575).

'The capture of a Portuguese vessel in 1621 left in the hands of the re'is
of Algiers a collection of diamonds "with which all of Italy became rich"'
(p 889)

'Not so long ago, the entire coast of Apulia ... possessed very few watch
towers. So the Turkish fuste were forever sailing up and down the coast,
doing great damage to both shipping and to the territory ... Now because of
these towers, it seems the people on the shores are well protected, and
small boats can sail to and fro in full security, in the daytime. If an
enemy ship appears, they can take refuge under the towers where they are
safe, admirably defended by the artillery there' (p853, quoting Niccolo
Suriano, a Venetian naval bureaucrat in 1583).

'in 1559, Phillip II in Brussels is expressing surprise that the fort in
Alicante is held by only six men' (p 854, citing document dated 31 March
1559). Hmmm, is there an actual canon reference to the minimum size of a
naval base ...

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #956
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Friday, October 16 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 957



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
Re: Piracy - historical note
Re: Piracy
Request for Comments
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy
Interstellar trade (Was: Piracy)
Re: Piracy
Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:07:52 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 13:43:36 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
>Actually you have everywhere to hide.  Space is a big place.  Searching
even
>a 1 AU distance circle for a 1000 meter spherical ship with lidar would
take
>millinia.  If an object is not a signal emitter it's tough to find in all
>that blackness.  Stelth has it's uses.
If the pirate is at 1 AU, how is it going to intercept merchant ships
jumping
out at 100 diameters (800,000 miles, less than 0.01 AU)? It'll take a 1-G
merchant only a few hours to go from the surface to 100 diameters; the
pirate
will never even get into weapons range.
****************
Well......using GT rules and assuming a size 8 world...100 diamiters is 80
hexes.

An orbital command bridge can pick up an unstealthed 400dt ship at 71-100
hexes (assuming skill 16 or a computer running skill 16) on a six or
less...this is per turn(20 min) if the pirate lurks any time at all, he
will be picked up and once he is detected they only need a 10 or less to
keep a lock on him.   this is with just one fort. multiple forts will
greatly increase the odds.  the forts could either send out a patrol to
check on the blip, of if they are *really* parinoid they could launch a
spread of missiles.  :)

At 1 G a ship cam move from rest relative to the planet on the limit to
close orbit in 17 turns(just under 6 hours)

That means a raider could match velocities and cripple the ship, but if the
are any defenses to speak of they will have plenty of time to get involved.



(I can't believe I'm entering into a piracy debate...)
************
me either :)

If the pirate *is* lurking close enough to catch merchants, a big military
sensor array will probably detect it - space is very dark, IR emissions
from
warm objects are surprisingly easy to see - unless it has its power plant
completely shut down and has very good thermal masking. Take a look at my
sensor rules and FFS2...It's very unlikely even with this that one could
hide from the very large military arrays a high-pop high-TL world would
have
if you were as close as 100 diameters; you still need some power for life
support, and hence will have some IR emissions.
*************
Or even look at the GT rules....Same thing goes...


My personal take is that if you *really* want piracy, you should move the
100-diameter limit out to ~10 million miles instead...
*****************
I agree...push the limit back to 1000 diamiters, much better odds for
piracy. and if you keep the limit for leaving to 100 diamiters they have a
zone of operations in between, they can bag the merchies and then jump away
instead of scrambling for the limit.

BTW how long does it take to tranship cargo?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:45:07 +0000
From: "Carlos Alos-Ferrer" <Carlos.Alos-Ferrer@univie.ac.at>
Subject: Re: Piracy - historical note

From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>

>'in 1559, Phillip II in Brussels is expressing surprise that the 
>fort in Alicante is held by only six men' (p 854, citing document 
>dated 31 March 1559). Hmmm, is there an actual canon reference to 
>the minimum size of a naval base ...

I've lived in Alicante four years. The "fort" is up on a hill, not 
really close to the port (although you can see it from there). So, 
maybe it does not qualify as a naval base....

Carlos.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:45:36 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Charles Prevatte writes:

>At 03:37 PM 10/15/98 +0200, you wrote:
>>Charles Prevatte writes:
>>
>>>62.5?  Where did you get that number?
>>
>>_Rebellion_.
>>
>>>And were is the economy to pay for the support for that level of
>>>militarisation?
>>
>>Actually, if you estimate the cost of the Imperial Navy based on various
>>(IMO) reasonable extrapolations of the information in _Rebellion_, you find
>>that it comes to 34% of what it would be if you calculate the budget from
>>3% of total GWP for the Imperium. _ONE_ percent of GWP will pay for those
>>62.5 ships, an equal number of escorts, a lot of auxiliary vessels PLUS
>>the same number of subsector fleet ships PLUS 1.5 times the equivalent in
>>system defenses PLUS about the same amount money's worth of ground forces.
>>
>>>Good lord!  That's a capital ship and change per habital system on the
>>>average!
>>
>>At about 30 worlds to a subsector makes two regular, two subsector and
>>three planetary navy capital ships per world. Now do you see why I
>>believe a pirate would have problem making a living in the OTU?
> 
>The cocane effect will not allow this level of military build up. You have
>to deduct the cost of maintainence of the current ships from the budget
>before you figure what you can build.

That's why TCS limits your fleet to 10 times your annual budget. Once you
have that many, you can't afford to build any more because all your money
goes to maintain the ones your already have. BTW. you did notice that I
said that the _Rebellion_ navy only comes to 34% of the budget the _Striker_
rules gives, didn't you? 

>10% of the cost of the ships would pay for maintainence and maybe crew
>saleries but I doubt that.

That's what the rules say, and as far as I am concerned, they are shooting
high. Annual maintenance comes to 1% of the annual maintenance budget, and
crew salaries comes to about 2.5%. There remains 96.5% to pay for the
support structure.

>What about ammo, bases, training, pentions, supply ships, ect.

All included in the figure according to the rules.

>10% just does not cover it based on current military spending on the wet
>navy.

Perhaps the proportion of crew to hardware is different in a wet navy? You
have about one crewmember per MCr20 worth of ship in Traveller space navies.

>>That's one of the pirate's biggest problems. In space there is no place to
>>hide. If the pirate is in a position to intercept a ship that jumps into
>>the system (if he is so lucky that it actually arrives within range of him,
>>which the odds do not favor) then any system defenses can see him.
> 
>Actually you have everywhere to hide.  Space is a big place.  Searching even
>a 1 AU distance circle for a 1000 meter spherical ship with lidar would take
>millinia.  If an object is not a signal emitter it's tough to find in all
>that blackness.  Stealth has it's uses.

Dammit Charles, READ WHAT I WRITE! _If the pirate is in a position to
intercept a ship that jumps into the system_  And, please, when you propose
something, take a few minutes to do the numbers and reality check it! In 
this case, figure out how close to the 100 diameter limit a pirate has to
be in order to chase down an incoming merchant before it can reach to safety
and then figure out how to hide it there. It can't be done if the defenders
have a few military grade sensor arrays available. (And as I have repeatedly
admitted, if a place has NO defenses, a pirate can just jump in and help
himself).


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 06:47:50 PDT
From: "jim clem" <travmind@hotmail.com>
Subject: Request for Comments

Hello all,

I've just been struck with an idea for another milieu, The Fourth 
Imperium, or ROM2.

Starting, oh, about 2000 or so (using the 3I calender), it is the result 
of vigorous expansion of Terrans to fill in the void left by the 
Rebellion and Virus.  A couple of conditions.

1)  Virus has left the Terrans with a bad taste for high automation.  As 
such ships typically have higher crew requirements.

2)  Psionics are in use, though not common among people.  The 4th Imp 
makes serious use of 'psi cops' and in military uses.  This is _NOT_ a 
kinder, gentler Imperium.  Psi is also used for system interfaces, as to 
help prevent a recurrence of the Virus incident.  

3)  The 4I is still expanding beyond the old Solomani Rim sector, using 
both economic and military aggression.

4)  I'm not sure what to do with the alien races, I'd love some comments 
on that.

5)  The 4I rules like the 3I, but with a firmer grip, using hand picked 
governors and viceroys.  The psi cops make this easier.

6)  Not sure what to do about the Zho's.

7)  The 4I uses high tech, TL 17, but tries to limit subject worlds to 
no more than TL 12 or so.

Anyone, please respond with ideas.

Thanks in advance.

Jim Clem, B.S.E.
GM, The Scattered Worlds Traveller PbEM, Where Humaniti Carves out a New 
Home
http://www.geocities.com/area51/dimension/7081/trvpg1.html
Founder and CEO, Diasporan Systems, Inc.


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 23:58:44
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: re: Piracy
>
>Ian Whitchurch wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>You had better not ever dock at any normal starport. You'll stick out like
>a coal pile in a ballroom.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Kibbitzer's note: "stick out like a coal pile in a ballroom" dates back,
>in RPG terms, to the AD&D Player's Handbook, specifically the
>discussion of the Thief character and his ability to hide in shadows and
>how well it worked when you tried it while people were looking at you.
>

Shuddup Walt. You are making me seem like an old fart (then again, I do
remember the little brown booklets).

I was going to use 'You'll stick out like dogs' balls', but I figured that
was too Australian for most of youse (Australian form of y'all).

Ian

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 23:59:53
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
>
>The cocane effect will not allow this level of military build up.  You have
>to deduct the cost of maintainence of the current ships from the budget
>before you figure what you can build.  10% of the cost of the ships would
>pay for maintainence and maybe crew saleries but I dought that.  What about
>ammo, bases, training, pentions, supply ships, ect.  10% just does not cover
>it based on current military spending on the wet navy.

Do the numbers. Military ships in Traveller do not need that many crew, and
most Traveller designs are not 'bleeding edge' technology, as most modern
first-world ships are (incidentally, if crew have a major effect on
efficiency, then highly skilled crew should get paid more, a *lot* more,
than the upper ranges usually floated around. If a Ship Tactics-5 captain
is equivalent to MCr 50 of weapons upgrade, then that captain should be
able to ask for, and get, a salary of at least a megacredit a year when her
skills make a difference).

I can imagine most internal security forces lagging the 'state of the art'
by 1 or 2 TLs ... not modern enough to go in line of battle, but still
better than armed merchants and similar auxiliaries.

If a ship costs n% in maintainence etc per year, then you will eventually
build up to a fleet size of 100/n. It might take a while to build up your
capital stock if 90% of your budget goes to recurrent maintainence of the
capital stock, but you will get there eventually.

Note that pre-20th century warships had much longer operational lives than
20th century ships, and that WW2 cruisers were still part of third-world
fleets until quite recently.

The other thing to remember is if the Navy has to pay x% for maintainence
etc then pirates should have to pay some fraction of x as well, or
presumably risk lower efficiency, more breakdowns and higher misjump chances.

>Actually you have everywhere to hide.  Space is a big place.  Searching even
>a 1 AU distance circle for a 1000 meter spherical ship with lidar would take
>millinia.  If an object is not a signal emitter it's tough to find in all
>that blackness.  Stelth has it's uses.

Yes, but the pirates have to come within the defended sphere, because that
is where the merchant ships are.

>From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest wrote:
>> Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>Probably all ready considered, but... if a system can afford 2500 SDBs,
>there is a good chance that the civilian merchant sector is just as well
>capitalized, and the system is crawling with some 25 *thousand* small
>craft from pinnaces to ore transporters, thousands of orbital habitats
>and space platforms, and thousands of seekers in its asteroid belts and
>jovian moons, and god knows what else. Don't forget that pirates should
>be able to prey on a lot more than just the traffic too and from jump
>point.

Lets see. At work, I drill down to individual transaction level, in a
database dealing with 800 000 clients, about 500 000 employer records and
300 brokers with 1400 contracts dealing with those clients and employers.

And I can do it in very close to real time.

If an emergency hits, and it has to be done in real time, I can do it in
real time, or close enough that makes no odds (circa one hour lag).

>
>To avoid complete information overload, it wouldn't suprise me if
>everyone's funky super-cool transponders are only required for
>interstellar craft ... the small craft just build and proliferate too
>fast. If you have an asteroid settlement (and most high pop high tech
>worlds probably do) you'll get teenagers slamming a few engines onto a
>frame and going joyriding, for that matter... Maybe the best option for
>pirates is a surplus interstellar ore carrier with a big cargo bay and a
>couple of surplus TL12 SDBs from a world that has upgraded to TL13-14, 
>for preying on those TL8-11 systems... disguise the SDBs with some
>cosmetic work to make 'em look like in-system cargo haulers.
>

How do you respond to a System Defense signal using one of those 1000 AU
laser communicators when they detect weapons fire or a mayday signal ?

>Exactly. I want an SDB for piracy! Get a few 200-400 ton SDBs, take a
>Levianthan class 1800 merchant cruiser, rip out much of the guts, and use
>it a carrier. Stay out near the edge of the system, or vanish and come
>back later. Even if you don't play the transponder game as above, if you
>buy TL12 SDBs and hunt in TL9-11 systems you can probably out run the
>local defenses. If necessary do some minor remodelling to give you
>10-20 tons cargo. Use a pair of SDBs, and if necessary fit them with
>grapples so you can tow away your target (and blow the tow line if the
>enemy fleet comes by) if you hit something that is interesting but won't
>fit in the cargo bay... 
>

You can outrun the immediate local defenses, but what about the attention
that comes in when the word gets out to the real Navy ?

>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>Do crooks register thier guns?  Of course not.  As for who paid for it, there
>are a number of ways:  one which immediatly springs into mind is a consortium
>of pirates.
>

The operation you sketch out is going to cost hundred of megacredits,
possibly gigacredits. Seriously serious money.

>>the pirates are criminals anyway...they aren't squeamish about having and
>>using nukes (look at the North Hollywood bank robbery last year in LA).
>
>  Weren't you pointing out that the Imperium gets _very_ upset about the
>inappropriate use of nukes?
>
>  BTW, they ended up shot up, didn't they?
>
>Well, since the pirates are already liable for a death sentence for
>piracy...just how much more upset can the Navy get?  And while the bank
>robbers did get waxed, they seemed to me to be staying to shoot it out w/ the
>cops...I think they could have escaped if the chose to.
>

The difference is whether you are at the bottom or the top of the Subsector
Vice-Admiral's in tray. Grabbing a couple of freighters in what may well be
an insurance scam might get lost in the blizzard of paper. Using nukes wont.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:03:44 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Interstellar trade (Was: Piracy)

David L. Pulver writes:

>Probably all ready considered, but... if a system can afford 2500 SDBs,
>there is a good chance that the civilian merchant sector is just as well
>capitalized, and the system is crawling with some 25 *thousand* small
>craft from pinnaces to ore transporters, thousands of orbital habitats
>and space platforms, and thousands of seekers in its asteroid belts and
>jovian moons, and god knows what else.

Actually, one of the greatest obstacles to reaching a consensus on the
piracy issue is that the size of the merchant navy and other civillian
ships is not defined anywhere. The closest I have come is the description
of the merchant fleet in Aramis subsector form _The Traveller Adventure_.
Based on that the merchant fleet is nowhere near the size of the IN. But
then, Aramis is supposed to be a bit of a backwater. Abd the intersystem
traffic is not quantified anywhere.

>Don't forget that pirates should be able to prey on a lot more than just
>the traffic too and from jump point.

Not that much more. Jump ships are actually more economic than boats for
a lot of intrasystem travel. If travel time exceeds a week then jumping is
faster and if it exceeds a few days more (I haven't calculated the exact
breakeven point) then it is also cheaper (the time saved outweighing the
added cost of the jump drive and the lower cargo capacity).

>Maybe the best option for pirates is a surplus interstellar ore carrier
>with a big cargo bay and a couple of surplus TL12 SDBs from a world that
>has upgraded to TL13-14, for preying on those TL8-11 systems... disguise
>the SDBs with some cosmetic work to make 'em look like in-system cargo
>haulers.

The bigger and more elaborate your setup is, the more cargoes you have to
capture to make it worth while. I have yet to see a plausible setup worked
out in details. The big problem is that the various proportions are
different than they are for sea travel. You can spot other ships at
relatively greater distances and the number of places a defender has to
defend is much fewer. And, of course, there are no places for a pirate to
lurk. An appropiate analogy would be sea travel on a world where ships
could teleport from just outside one harbor to just outside another.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:19:21 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

DustyLV769@aol.com writes:
> 
>In a message dated 10/15/98 0:56:38 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca writes:
> 
>As for who paid for it, there are a number of ways:  one which immediatly
>springs into mind is a consortium of pirates.

Steven was pointing out (for the umpteenth time) that the more expensive
the hardware a pirate needs to perform his job, the more cargoes he has
to capture to break even. Where did he get the nukes and how much did he
have to pay for them?

>Yes...again, I am not attempting to argue this from a canonical point of view.
>I feel that the canon material is at best, greviously flawed.

So when I say that IMO the rules don't allow pirates and you say that if you
change the rules they do, we basically agree?
 
>Steve again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>  If you're going to jump around 100 D then how can a different point on
>that sphere add four hours to flight time?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>I'll bet that a Navigator would look at you funny if you said that. I'm sure
>there's more to getting ready for jump than just getting past 100 D,
>why couldn't fine tuning the possible jump vector by clearing some
>gravity well occlusion be possible?

Don't you think that "Jump Point Zed" would be chosen with a view to
minimizing the transit time to the planet? But the real problem, once more,
is that if ships arrive at random points, then the pirate can't lurk at
the 100 diameter limit without arousing suspicion, and even if he could, he
couldn't be sure that any ships would arrive close enough for him to
intercept.
 
>My point was that there will be recommended shipping lanes, and
>there will be ships that stray from the recommended shipping lanes.
>Not all of these strayings will have criminal intent.

And my point is that a pirate is pissing away money every minute his ship
isn't earning anything. If the odds of catching someone who is off the
normal shipping lane are so low that he loses more money in the time he
waits than the cargoes he capture is worth, then his activity is not
economically sound.
 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:31:57 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)

At 01:43 PM 10/15/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>Actually you have everywhere to hide.  Space is a big place.  Searching even
>>a 1 AU distance circle for a 1000 meter spherical ship with lidar would take
>>millinia.  If an object is not a signal emitter it's tough to find in all
>>that blackness.  Stelth has it's uses.
>
>If the pirate is at 1 AU, how is it going to intercept merchant ships jumping
>out at 100 diameters (800,000 miles, less than 0.01 AU)? It'll take a 1-G
>merchant only a few hours to go from the surface to 100 diameters; the pirate
>will never even get into weapons range.
>

Not quite what I ment.  I ment that he jumps in at a distant part of the
system to hide his jumo signature and then coasts to target range with his
preprogramed delta V.

>(I can't believe I'm entering into a piracy debate...)
>
>If the pirate *is* lurking close enough to catch merchants, a big military
>sensor array will probably detect it - space is very dark, IR emissions from
>warm objects are surprisingly easy to see - unless it has its power plant
>completely shut down and has very good thermal masking. Take a look at my
>sensor rules and FFS2...It's very unlikely even with this that one could
>hide from the very large military arrays a high-pop high-TL world would have
>if you were as close as 100 diameters; you still need some power for life 
>support, and hence will have some IR emissions.   

IR emission are in the 'light' part of the EM spectrum.  'Large arrays' are
used to pick up radio waves which are much farther down in the EM spectrum.
To do a IR search is little different than doing a visual search you just
use a slightly different telescope.  As for IR masking all heat radiated
into space is in the form of IR light as convection and conduction are not
posible into a vaccum.  The soultion is to radiate in only one dirrection,
aft.  With the front of the ship cold and facing the detecters if will fall
below the treshold of 'visability' whil the heat is shown out the back like
a flashlight.  Sence it is a vaccume there are no reradiaters to give the
ships position away.  Todays military subs use a blending method to do the
same thing to hide their IR signature.  They have a harder time do to the
conductive and convective media of water.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:32:03 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 03:16 PM 10/15/98 -0700, you wrote:
>You will all notice that the piracy debate is back and I haven't
>posted a single thing!
>
>Nope!  No mention of how I think that piracy depends on the
>assumtions you use and how "controlling" you see the Imperium
>as being and that is can't be prov...
>

I had not thought of that.  I guess it really does come down to the way the
gm interprets the TU.  If the Empire is strong and opressive little priracy.
If the EMpire is laso-fare then piracy is a local problem and more
prevailent.  It seams that a great deal of the debate on this list depend on
your assumtions (or interpretations) of the nature of the central government
behavior.  This is at the heart of the piracy debate and the transponder
debate and probably most other debates as well.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:32:08 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>I use Australia as an example. About 20 million citizens. We have (from
>memory) five working submarines, half a dozen frigates, a couple of
>obsolete destroyers, seventy odd F18s, about 20 F111s plus I think a dozen
>P3 Orion patrol craft.
>

How many of those did Austalia pay to build as apposed to just maintaining?
How many of those 20 million are producers?  How may are dependants?  You
have to look at the cost to the producers as a percentage of disposable
income.  Taxes have to come out of the part of the producers income that he
does not need to support himself or you will attition you tax base.

>In interstellar terms, that would turn into five SDBs, half a dozen
>Escorts, a couple of obsolete Colonial Cruisers, seventy odd small
>fighters, twenty big fighters and a dozen type S scouts.
>

Not true.  Space craft are far more expensive than planet bound craft.

>This is about right for a small world - about 10 000 ton of military
>shipping for about 20 million people. Call it KCr 100 a year per dton in
>maintainence ... about a gigacredit a year. Maintainence could be higher
>with 'bleeding edge' technology, lower for centuries-proven designs.
>

Hardly.  Show me in cannon where a world of 20million has a fleet with
several colonial cruisers.

>Fifty credits a head for twenty million citizens. Could be a bit on the
>high side, but it's a pretty decent flotilla ... easily justifiable for 100
>million people.
>

NOT 20 MILLION only the producer in that 20 million.  Producers are those
that generate wealth.

>>I'd like to see your calculations for the 1000 battleship & 4000 destroyer
>>per secter navy!  The maintainence cost alone would take the entire
>>planetary output of 100 worlds!  That's 100% tax for those worlds!
>>
>
>The navy doesnt have to be that big to make piracy in and around mainworlds
>very very unheathy. I think Hans can repost his numbers, if you'd like to
>see them though.
>

I'd love to see them.

>>>You also have the time lags in getting the messages from the informants to
>>>the secret pirate base (or Gvorrdun Commonality, or whatever).
>>>
>>
>>That cuts both ways as well.
>
>Yes, but it cuts against the pirates. The Free Traders are quite happy to
>go 'Damn. We missed them by 4 days'.
>

They jump in early and lay in wait.

>>
>>And exactly how do you spot a 1000 meter object at 1 au?  Any pirate worth
>>the name will be running dark with RAM and scatter coating.  
>
>You had better not ever dock at any normal starport. You'll stick out like
>a coal pile in a ballroom.
>

These coating would be SOP on nearly any ship that might enter combat or
want to avoid combat.  They are only paint after all.

>>>Pirates require at least 3 gees of acceleration. More if they want to play
>>>with competantly-built SDBs. 3 gees of acceleration pushes your power plant
>>>size up, as does the additional weaponary.
>>>
>>
>>Or a good head start.  Also what if the pirate used SDBs or equivalent
>>carried by battle transports?
>
>One problem is can the sub-craft trust the mothership not to bug out ?
>

VERY true.

>A second problem is if you have a head start then stopping to board is an
>issue.
>

Use multiple craft.  One for the cargo and the others to keep the locals
busy or take a pot shot at the planet with missles.  The SDB would have to
choose between a city being bombed and a pirate getting away with cargo that
does not yet belong to anybody that pays his salery.

>>>How much ? I dont disagree with you, but I want to see some numbers.
>>>
>>
>>Well the cargo much absorb the cost of shiping.  I think that is 2k per ton
>>per jump.  The cargo must be work cost + 2k per ton.  If the cost were cheep
>>like dirt or rock at say 100c per ton then the final cost would be 2100c per
>>ton.  Much to much!  One ton of IBM PCs at 1kc per PC and 100 PC per ton the
>>cost of shiping 1 parsec would add 20c to the price of each unit.  Not to
>>much really.  I'd say that not counting emergencies the cost per ton would
>>need to be at least 2k per jump to ofset the cost of shipping.  That makes
>>shiped in good have a markup of 100% minimum to cover shiping.  Not an
>>unreasonable markup by todays standards for consumer goods.
>>
>
>So cargos are in the range of KCr 10-40 per dton ? Therefore, how many does

per jump transported.  I'd say the avaerage would be higher.  Profit margin
don't you know.  You could afford to ship a 100kcr per ton load 5 parcecs to
a buyer and still make good money.  A 10kcr load and you'd break even and
compared to setting it locally you loose profite assuming a 100% local
markup.  Note that the value of tha cargo will vary with location.  TL10
computers are not worth much on a TL15 wourld but nearly priceless on a TL8
baucanised world preparing for a local war.

>our hypothetical pirate need to capture each year ?
>
>>>In which case insurance rates for trading at that system will rise,
>>>reducing trade and inducing those that come along to get Combat Rated for
>>>insurance purposes.
>>>
>>

Say he get 1 haul of 100tons worth 100kcr per ton.  That 10Mcr!  And I think
there would have to be more high than 100kcr per ton loads on long jump
routes.  Corador would be heavy with specialty high credit loads and armed
merchant to carry them so you have a trade off of high risk to high profit.
I can not see any cargo with a final sale price of less than 4kcr per ton
per jump being suficiently profitable to attact busness.  Companies do not
normal support operation with low proffit margins unless the volume of sales
is very high.  Like gasoline sales in the US.  VERY high volume but low
proffit for the retainer compared to other goods.  It all come down to
return on investment.  How many credit will you get for your investment. 2
to 1 in wholesale/retail per transaction is ok.  Maufacturer make twice what
it cost him to make, the wholesaler make twice what it cost him and the
retailer makes twice what it cost him.  This breaks down when the item cost
is high compared to it's expected utility but a 20% proffet on a
multimillion dollar item is not bad.  And yes a 500 dollar VCR does cost 50
to 80 dollars to make in 10000+ lots. Where do you think those clerance sale
prices come from?  They are selling near cost to clear their floor space for
more proffitable items.

>>What insurence?  I've not seen any insurence companies that would cover free
>>trader.  Where is the information on these companies and their rates?  My
>>player would love to get coverage for their expensive ships.
>>
>
>Check with your local insurance company on insurance costs. I think about
>5% of ship value per annum sounds about right for Free Traders ... that
>will turn into more than several megacredits per year.
>
>>I expect convoys to start up.  The Navy will not be present (except local
>>ones) as the players are cut of in a pocket.  They have to 'make do' with
>>what they can scratch up.  There will be a high pop. TL10 world, a med. pop.
>>TL13 world, and several others.  The cental core of on subsecter posible in
>>the Marches.  None have what it takes to build up their defences on their
>>own but by trading they can all get what they need.  It's a Yankee trader
>>type campain where the players are traped in the situation unless they want
>>to run the gauntlet back to Core secter.
>>
>
>Not a problem. You might try and get hold of Hard Times, a very very good
>Megatraveller supplement.
>

Thanks for the info.  I'll look for it.

Charles L.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #957
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Friday, October 16 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 958



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Archival Materials
Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)
[GT] Midu Agashaam class Destroyer
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: Piracy
Re: Interstellar trade (Was: Piracy)
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #956
Re: Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:32:12 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Archival Materials

At 08:06 PM 10/15/98 PST, you wrote:
>In mail you write:
>
>>      Read a great book series, and in that series the main character is
>> kind of like Indiana Jones.  He loves to find things no one elsa has.  In
>> the second book he finds the remains of a civilization that had been dead
>> for over 50,000 years.  He discovers a library.  Huge racks that hold
>> computer books, open the cover the screen lights up and shows you the
>> contents.  These books had no power when he finds them, but he is able to
>> rig up a recharger, and then finds out about the ancient race from there
>> writtings.  What would stop us from using the same type of system?  Build
>> little books with PROM type chips and a power system.  If they run out of
>> power recharge them.
>
>ICs can't last that long. They depend on junctions between P-type and
>N-type material. Over 50,000 years the dopant atoms would diffuse
>across the junction, rendering it useless. I doubt that the "Liquid
>Crystals" in LCD displays are stable over such periods, and I suspect
>that the fluid they are suspended in would leak out long before. 
>
>LEDs depend on junctions, so they'd suffere the same fate as ICs. 
>

Dropout reaches unexceptable levels in as little as 5 years for some types
of electronic parts.  Storage condition effect the shelf life of electronic
parts greatly.  Poor conditions cut shelf life dramaticly.

>Batteries aren't stable over such time spans either. They'd no longer
>be rechargeable after as little as a *decade*. 
>
>And BTW, how did he determine the voltage and *polarity* required for
>the recharger? Get the polarity wrong, and you'll ruin anything that
>wasn't already. If you get the voltage too high, you'll also ruin
>things. 
>

Any deginer worth the name will either key the recharger so it can not be
put in backwards or design in a safety circuit to protect the device from
reverse bias or both.  This applies only to comsummer goods though.  For
equipment that is normally only serviced by experts such precautions are
left out to save cost.  A pocket computer will have a keyed recharger.  A
jump drive's power connections will be plainly marked but otherwise not
protected.  A car battery is plainly marked (at least when new) but there is
nothing like a physical key to prevent you from hooking up your jumper
cables backwards.

Figuring out the type of power a discharged and unmarked battery would want
would be a real pain.  It's doable if you have enough to destroy a few in
the experimenting.  I wouldn't want to predict what a precussor artifact
would do if improperly recharged.  They could be using rechargeable
antimatter bateries for all a PC could know. (BIG GRIN and even bigger BANG!)

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:32:05 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)

At 05:18 PM 10/16/98 +1300, you wrote:
>At 14:52 15/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:
>>At 03:37 PM 10/15/98 +0200, you wrote:
>
>>>That's one of the pirate's biggest problems. In space there is no place to
>>>hide. If the pirate is in a position to intercept a ship that jumps into
>>>the system (if he is so lucky that it actually arrives within range of him,
>>>which the odds do not favor) then any system defenses can see him.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Actually you have everywhere to hide.  Space is a big place.  Searching even
>>a 1 AU distance circle for a 1000 meter spherical ship with lidar would take
>>millinia.  If an object is not a signal emitter it's tough to find in all
>>that blackness.  Stelth has it's uses.
>
>You don't have to search a 1AU sphere, though. All you need to patrol and
>search is the 100 dia limit around your homeworld (unless you are using the
>stellar 100 dia. border as your jump limit), and this can be readily
>covered by 4-8 vessels even if the world has a size of 'A'.
>

Assumting the the planet is 5000 mile in diameter.  Then 100 dias. is a
sphere 505,000 miles in diameter.  Surface area = 4 pi r squared. r =
252,500 miles.  Surface area = 801,184,666,481.7 square miles. 801 billion
square miles and you say you can actively scan this area with 4-8 vessels
looking for a 100 meter object?  Even with 8 ships that 100 billion square
miles.  What exactly are you using to scan this area?  Lidar is the best
candidate.  As scan rate increases signal return strength decreases by the
square of the change plus returned signal strengh is reduce by 4 for each
doubling of signal travel distance.  Not to mention propagation delay
problems and space junk blind spots.  I find it very hard to believe that
any one ship can maitain survelence on 100billion square miles of space and
that is just the 100 diameter shell much less all the space beyond it the a
pirate could be in.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:36:22 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)

Ian Whitchurch writes:

>Not a problem ... piracy exists in the outsystem, and by consent.

ROTFL! Ian, you've just made this whole round of the Grand Piracy Debate
worth it to me...
 
>>I'd like to see your calculations for the 1000 battleship & 4000 destroyer
>>per sector navy!  The maintainence cost alone would take the entire
>>planetary output of 100 worlds!

Well, maybe I've made a mistake in my calculations. It's happened before.
Feel free to point out any errors you find.

>That's 100% tax for those worlds!

First of all, an average sector has 400 worlds, so we're already down to
25% ;-).

>The navy doesnt have to be that big to make piracy in and around mainworlds
>very very unheathy. I think Hans can repost his numbers, if you'd like to
>see them though.

Sure. Here you go:
- ---------------------

AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPERIAL NAVY IN THE CLASSIC ERA
===================================================

Main sources: _Fighting Ships_, _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and _Rebellion_.

NUMBER AND TYPE OF SHIPS

_Rebellion_ p. 27 states that each sector of the Imperium theoretically has a
group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships. This number includes combat vessels
such as cruisers, carriers, battleships, and _some_ escorts (emphasis mine).
It does not include auxiliaries, support ships, and scouts.

The first ambiguity lies in just what kinds of escorts are included in the 1000
ship figure and what kinds are not. Are the 5,000 T _Sloan_ class escorts so
big that they are counted, or is there a class of escorts smaller than a
light cruiser (30,000 T ships), but bigger than Sloans?

One could postulate an escort class of around 10-20,000 T, big enough to mount
a spinal weapon, but too light to be classed as even a light cruiser. A bit
inelegant, especially since FS states that escorts are ships of up to 5000 T
and that the presence of a spinal mount is what distinguishes a cruiser, but
OTOH, are there really no ships in the 5,000-20,000 T range? And this way we
can define 'combat vessels' as ships with spinal mounts and auxiliaries as
ships without. 

Perhaps escorts in BatRons and CruRons are not counted while escorts organized
into squadrons of their own (EscRons? ;-) are?

The simplest solution is propably to ignore the ',and some escorts' part and
just consider the presence of a spinal mount the criteria for being part of
the 1000 ship figure.

The second ambiguity is whether battleriders are included in the figure or
not. I would have preferred that they were not, but the one detailed squadron
I know of (the 154th Battle Rider Squadron described in SMC) clearly implies
that they are.
 
In the following for ease of reference I'm going to use the word 'armada'
about the sector fleets and reserve the word 'fleet' for the sub-sector-sized
fleets that the armadas are composed of. Also 'combat vessels' for the ships
included in the 1000 ship figure and 'auxiliaries' for all the ships that
isn't.

If the 1000 ships are for a sector with a full sixteen sub-sectors, then the
average fleet has 1000/16 = 62.5 ships. Since there are 320 regular fleets in
the Imperium, the total of combat ships for the Imperium would be around
20,000.

Further down it is stated that a regular fleet has between 2 and 10 squadrons
amounting to a total of between 50 and 200 ships. This would appear to average
out to 125 ships per fleet with an average of 6 squadrons per fleet and 21
ships per squadron.

Possibly this means that the squadrons are combat vessels _plus_ escorts and 
that the 125 ship figure includes auxiliaries. This would give us a navy of
20,000 combat vessels and a like number of auxiliaries.

However, FS states that CruRons are generally of 4 to 8 ships and the examples
in it implies that 8 ship BatRons are the norm. (Also, I seem to remember
squadrons of non-combat vessels mentioned somewhere, but I can't recall the
references).

Possibly the 2-squadron fleets and 25-ship squadrons are rare and almost all
fleets have 8-10 squadrons with almost all squadrons running to between 8 and
20 ships (half combat vessels and half escorts). With an average of about 9
squadrons per fleet and 14 ships per squadron we'll get about 20,000 combat
vessels and the same number of escorts. This still leave the pure auxiliary
squadrons like tanker squadrons and patrol squadrons (PatRons ;-) unaccounted
for, but it's a start.

SIZE AND COST OF A SQUADRON

The 154th Battle Squadron detailed in SMC consists of:

  1 300,000 T _Lurenti_ Class Carrier @ MCr23,056         =  23,056
  7 20,000 T _Nolikian_ Class Battle Riders @ MCr9,268.25 =  64,878
200 50 T _Sylean_ Class Heavy Fighters @ MCr105.33        =  21,066
  7 5,000 T _Sloan_ Class Escorts @ MCr3,334.5            =  23,342 
  
A total of MCr132,342 of which MCr109,000 goes to the combat vessels and the
remaining 17.6% goes to the escorts.

Obviously this must be one of the cheapest squadrons in the navy. If all the
20,000 combat ships cost around MCr19,000 (including the cost of its pendant
auxiliary) then the total cost of the regular Imperial navy would be TCr380.
This would represent 15% of the Imperium's total military investment, which
would make the whole shebang cost TCr2,533. Annual maintenance would run to
TCr254. Divided by the 15 trillion inhabitants of the Imperium that would be
Cr17 per man.

If we assume that the ships in FS constitutes a representative sample, then
we see that the average cruiser/carrier is of 52,714 T and costs MCr31,193.
If we reduce that to 50,000 T and add the cost of a 5,000 T escort apiece,
the average cruiser works out at roughly MCr33,000. The three battleships
average 300,000 T and costs MCr206,106 apiece, which with the escort and a
little rounding comes to MCr210,000.

Unfortunately, that just isn't enough. Even if we assume that ALL the combat
ships are battleships, it still only amounts to a total cost of TCr4,200,
which works out at a military budget of Cr187 per inhabitant of the Imperium.
If we assume a ratio of battleships to cruisers similar to the one in FS
(3:7), the the cost falls to TCr1723, or Cr77 per inhabitant.

Of course, we might say that we still haven't accounted for most of the
auxiliary ships yet. We've included one 5,000 T escort for each combat ship,
but what about the couriers, destroyers, smaller escorts, transports and
tankers that appear in FS and elsewhere? For example, I happen to believe that
a navy would have a massive number of couriers, say 20 per fleet, but even
6400 couriers only amount to another 1.6 TCr. The same would apply to
destroyers and the like -- you need a huge number of them to affect the budget
noticeably. Some of the other auxiliaries like tankers would cost more
individually -- the milion T _Gorodish_ class fleet tenders mentioned in FS
might run to MCr400,000 apiece, but how many of those are the average fleet
likely to have? One? Two? OK, that's another 256 TCr, which is a help, but it
still leaves a long way to go. Remember that every credit we increase the
budget with represents another 3000 destroyers (just to pick an example), and
we know from the recent pirate debate that the Imperium apparently lack the
small ships to police all its member worlds adequately. So we may push the
budget up to Cr85/man by use of the smaller fry, but not much more than that.

There are two more possibilities that I can see. One is that battleriders are
NOT, after all, included in the 1000 ship figure. If a carrier and half a
dozen dreadnaught-sized battleriders counted as one ship instead of 6, then
we could get some really expensive ships. Unfortunately battleriders tend to
be cruiser-sized. The carrier needed to carry 6 200,000 T battleriders would
have to be about 2-2.5 million tons and the maximum size of a ship in CT is
1 million. A 1 million T carrier would only amount to about twice the cost
of the average battleship (MCr430) and according to FS the 500,000 T
_Tigress_ class dreadnaught is the largest ship in the Spinward Marches. A
500,000 T carrier would cost about the same as an average dreadnaught, which
leaves us back where we started.

The other possibility is that a large number of ships are laid up in
ordinary. That would require that part of the annual budget was used to
maintain these inactive ships, which would make the active part of the navy
a correspondingly smaller share. If we assume that the wartime budget of the
Imperium is 1.5 times the peacetime budget (a guesstimate based on the
various government multipliers in TCS) and that there would be enough ships
in ordinary to operate on the wartime budget, then there would be about one
ship in ordinary for each two active ships and about 6% of the budget would
be spent on maintaning them. If instead we assume that peacetime spending is
the 3% of GNP that _Striker_ gives and wartime spending would be 15% of GNP
then the Imperium could have EIGHT ships in ordinary for each active ship and
spend 45% of its peacetime budget on maintaining them. That would push the
military spending up to about Cr150/citizen. Whether you like the idea of an
Imperial reserve fleet of 160,000 combat vessels is another matter. (There is
some small support for the notion in the fact that acording to _Arrival
Vengeance_ ships are still being reactivated in 1123, six years after the
beginning of the Rebellion, with at least two more years to go before they
are finished. OTOH it requires an implausibly long view to maintain reserves
that will take 8 years to activate...)

And in the end, even with the best will in the world it appears that the 
Imperial navy is only about half the size that it should be (Cr150 would be
1.5% of the GNP and we were calculating with 3%).

To those who would suggest that perhaps the Imperium feels so secure that it
is using even less than the standard 3% peacetime spending I'd like to point
to the Solomani, Zhodani, and K'Kree and suggest that it is rather implausible
that the Imperium would feel so secure.

I'd like to finish off by re-emphasizing that all those ships, the 20,000 
combat vessels, the 20,000 big escorts and the unspecified number of lesser
ships only represent 15% of the Cr150. Another 15% goes to the subsector
fleets and the remaining 70% goes to planetary defenses, though admittedly
6-40% of that (4.2-28% of the total) would go to armies.
- ---------------------

That was my original post. Later I did a few more calculations:

- ---------------------
Hypothetical average fleet:

Assume 9 combat squadrons @ 14 ships.

Assumed ratio of battleships:cruisers:escorts = 3:7:10

3 BatRons @ 7 battleships + 7 escorts
6 CruRons @ 7 cruisers + 7 escorts
1 TankRon (see below for composition)

Assumed average size of battleship = 300,000 T
Assumed average size of cruiser = 50,000 T
Assumed average size of escort = 10,000 T

Average size of BatRon =   2,170,000
Average size of CruRon =     420,000
Average size of TankRon =  3,000,000

Total tonnage:

3 BatRons @ 2,800,000 T =       6,510,000 T
6 CruRons @ 420,000 T =         2,520,000 T
1 TankRon                       3,000,000 T
100 Fleet Couriers                 40,000 T
100 Scouts                         10,000 T
40 assorted small fry             120,000 T
                               ------------
                               12,200,000 T 

320*16.7 million tons = 3,904 million tons


Average cost of battleship =      206,000 MCr
Average cost of cruiser =	   29,500 MCr
Average cost of escort =	    6,500 MCr

Average cost of a BatRon =      1,487,500 MCr
Average cost of a CruRon =        252,000 MCr
Average cost of a TankRon =     1,124,000 MCr
Cost of Fleet Courier =              ~250 MCr
Cost of Scout =                       ~30 MCr
Average cost of small fry =         2,500 MCr

Total cost:

3 BatRons @ MCr1,487,500 =      4,462,500 MCr
6 CruRons @ MCr252,000 =        1,512,000 MCr
1 TankRon @                     1,124,000 MCr
100 Fleet Couriers @ MCr250 =      25,000 MCr
100 Scouts @ MCr30 =                3,000 MCr
40 small fry @ MCr2,500 =         100,000 MCr
                                -------------
                                7,226,500 MCr


320 fleets @ 7.3 TCr = TCr2,336 



- -----------------------

I've made a stab at arriving at a slightly more exact figure for the Imperial
taxes available for the Classic Era fleet. I've gone through Deneb Sector as
representative of a frontier sector and Massilia Sector as representative of
a core sector and noted down all the high-population planets and worked out
their contribution, turning everything into Crimp. The result was roughly
TCr350/subsector for Deneb (I didn't count the three almost empty subsectors)
and roughly TCr550/subsector for Massilia. Taking the average, TCr450, and
multiplying by the number of subsectors in the Imperium (about 300) I get a
yearly GWP of TCr135,000.

1% of that would be the Imperial cut of the military budget: TCr 1,350. Of
this half would go to the colonial fleets. The remainder, TCr675, corresponds
to a regular fleet worth TCr6,750.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:43:51 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: [GT] Midu Agashaam class Destroyer

Here's my first attempt at a GT ship design. The only thing I'm not sure of
(seeing that I'm not an expert with GURPS) is whether the DR is high enough,
and how to handle the Nuclear Damper.

Any mistakes are my own, of course...

For reference, here's the original high guard (which is what I'm using):

DD-C246BJ2-052400-50506-0   3,000tons
            3     4 1 1        TL=15.
            3     4 1 1      Crew=33.
Two Cutters.

==============================================================
MIDU AGASHAAM class Destroyer (TL 12)

Crew: Captain, First Officer, Pilot, Navigator, Sensors/Commo Officer,
Tactical Officer, 6 Missile Gunners, 6 Sandcaster Gunners, 8 Laser Gunners,
Particle Gunner, Chief Engineer, 2 Jump Technicians, 5 Drive Hands, Ship's
Doctor, Medic

3,000-ton SL Hull, DR 1100, 6 turrets with three missile racks each, 8
turrets with three 405-MJ lasers each, 6 turrets with three sandcasters
each, 1 12,810-MJ particle accelerator bay, 4.86 meson screen (DR 1000), 120
nuclear dampner (45mi radius), radical stealth, radical emission cloaking,
total compartmentalization, command bridge (w/basic backup bridge),
engineering, 495 maneuver, 150 jump, 1200 fuel, 5 utility,  18.75 fuel
processor (8 hours), 200 spacedock (capacity 2x50 ton cutters), 37
staterooms, 7 cargo (480 SIM-12 missiles carried as cargo).

Statistics: EMass 7844.94, LMass 8262.72, Cost: MCr1,502.25, HP 117,933,
Hull Size Modifier: +11.

Performance: Accel: 6.3/6 Gs, Jump 4, Air Speed 6,059


+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                         |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/ - AOL IM: Iowa Akins |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/ - AOL IM: CMS AndyA  |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+    |
|       vi+ da+                                                        |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+      |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                             |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 07:54:26 -0700
From: Sanders <timmon@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

At 11:07 AM 10/16/98 +0100, you wrote:
>-> Council
>Rat

Thus a German speaker in the Imperium call would the Zhodani Council the
Zhodani Rat? ;-)

L8r,
Paul

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:18:14 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>That's why TCS limits your fleet to 10 times your annual budget. Once you
>have that many, you can't afford to build any more because all your money
>goes to maintain the ones your already have. BTW. you did notice that I
>said that the _Rebellion_ navy only comes to 34% of the budget the _Striker_
>rules gives, didn't you? 
>

Yes, but I do not have any rebellion information so I do not understand the
reffence.  I have also not read striker in 15 years so I'm a little fussy on
that as well.

>>10% of the cost of the ships would pay for maintainence and maybe crew
>>saleries but I doubt that.
>
>That's what the rules say, and as far as I am concerned, they are shooting
>high. Annual maintenance comes to 1% of the annual maintenance budget, and
>crew salaries comes to about 2.5%. There remains 96.5% to pay for the
>support structure.
>

I think you mean 6.5%.  10% - 3.5% = 6.5%

>>What about ammo, bases, training, pentions, supply ships, ect.
>
>All included in the figure according to the rules.
>

So a war ship cost the same to maintain in peace time as in full combat
conditions?  That does not make sence.

>>10% just does not cover it based on current military spending on the wet
>>navy.
>
>Perhaps the proportion of crew to hardware is different in a wet navy? You
>have about one crewmember per MCr20 worth of ship in Traveller space navies.
>

That maybe it.  A 2000MC carrier had a crew of 5000!  This months PS had an
artical on the economics of a Nimitz class carrier.  The 5000 does not count
air crews.  Cost to maintain the ship is more than 10% per year not counting
saleries.

>>>That's one of the pirate's biggest problems. In space there is no place to
>>>hide. If the pirate is in a position to intercept a ship that jumps into
>>>the system (if he is so lucky that it actually arrives within range of him,
>>>which the odds do not favor) then any system defenses can see him.
>> 
>>Actually you have everywhere to hide.  Space is a big place.  Searching even
>>a 1 AU distance circle for a 1000 meter spherical ship with lidar would take
>>millinia.  If an object is not a signal emitter it's tough to find in all
>>that blackness.  Stealth has it's uses.
>
>Dammit Charles, READ WHAT I WRITE! _If the pirate is in a position to
>intercept a ship that jumps into the system_  And, please, when you propose
>something, take a few minutes to do the numbers and reality check it! In 
>this case, figure out how close to the 100 diameter limit a pirate has to
>be in order to chase down an incoming merchant before it can reach to safety
>and then figure out how to hide it there. It can't be done if the defenders
>have a few military grade sensor arrays available. (And as I have repeatedly
>admitted, if a place has NO defenses, a pirate can just jump in and help
>himself).
>

I'm sorry I was not more explicit.  100 dias. is the Minimum limit.  What is
the limit of navagational error?  How much breathing room does the ship
have?  Do they jump in at 110 dias?  200 dias?  If they give themselves some
slop then they will not be at the 100 diameter shell when they first arrive.

As for the pirate, he can hide nearly anywhere as lomg as he can beat the
SDB to the prize.  The 1 AU statement was that he could enter the system
behind and object like a moon a coast in quitely on Delta V.  To find him
running silent you have to search everywhere he could be.  His course could
pass close to known arrival points and he could grab a target of
oppertunity.  If he was expecting a particullar target he could plan his
course to put him in the best posible intercept position based on the slop
facter I mention before.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:18:18 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Interstellar trade (Was: Piracy)

>The bigger and more elaborate your setup is, the more cargoes you have to
>capture to make it worth while. I have yet to see a plausible setup worked
>out in details. The big problem is that the various proportions are
>different than they are for sea travel. You can spot other ships at
>relatively greater distances and the number of places a defender has to
>defend is much fewer. And, of course, there are no places for a pirate to
>lurk. An appropiate analogy would be sea travel on a world where ships
>could teleport from just outside one harbor to just outside another.
>


The problem as I see it is that pirates are canon so we are left to explaon
them as best we can with little information.  For the pirate to exist their
mush be crack for them to hide in.  The random incouter charts make them
seem fairly common as far as pirates can be common.  So it they do exit how
do they exits?  I see several posibilities.

1)  The number of military ships are low compared to the area they must
patrol.  Reasonable idea if the tax base could not support that large an IN.
(My vote for most likely sigle answer but I think it will take several of
these together.)

2)  Pirates can hide from sensor in system and jump out after they attack
with a reasonable chance for escape.

3)  The slop facter in jump navagation is large enough to give the pirate a
window of opertunity.  This slop would also limit the defence advantage of
convoys as they would be scattered some what it jump.

4)  There are so many merchant ships that the pirates have little trouble
picking a safe target and the SDB have trouble protecting all of them.

5)  Any other suggestions?

Pirates are canon people.  Instead of arguing the fact that they can not be
why don't we try to come up with a combination of facters that will explain
why they can be?

You have to admit that they spice up the TU.

Charles L

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:26:53 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #956

     Your arguments are very sound, for 1998 technology.  We are talking
about items created by a race that had starflght while we were still
hunting bronto burgers.  Consider a radio made 20 years ago and one made
today.  Much of the internal structure is the same, but most has been
improved upon.  Now take that example and spread it from say a military
satellite uplink and a cave mans hollow log drum.  Both items allow you to
communicate with someone a ways away, but otherwise there is nothing else
incommon.  My point is that the items you picked nits with are in todays
equipment, not necessarily in the equipment from 3000 years into the
future.

Leo




- ------------------------------

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 20:06:17 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Archival Materials

In mail you write:

>      Read a great book series, and in that series the main character is
> kind of like Indiana Jones.  He loves to find things no one elsa has.  In
> the second book he finds the remains of a civilization that had been dead
> for over 50,000 years.  He discovers a library.  Huge racks that hold
> computer books, open the cover the screen lights up and shows you the
> contents.  These books had no power when he finds them, but he is able to
> rig up a recharger, and then finds out about the ancient race from there
> writtings.  What would stop us from using the same type of system?  Build
> little books with PROM type chips and a power system.  If they run out of
> power recharge them.

ICs can't last that long. They depend on junctions between P-type and
N-type material. Over 50,000 years the dopant atoms would diffuse
across the junction, rendering it useless. I doubt that the "Liquid
Crystals" in LCD displays are stable over such periods, and I suspect
that the fluid they are suspended in would leak out long before.

LEDs depend on junctions, so they'd suffere the same fate as ICs.

Batteries aren't stable over such time spans either. They'd no longer
be rechargeable after as little as a *decade*.

And BTW, how did he determine the voltage and *polarity* required for
the recharger? Get the polarity wrong, and you'll ruin anything that
wasn't already. If you get the voltage too high, you'll also ruin
things.

- - --
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

- ------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:31:36 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:26:15
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy


I use Australia as an example. About 20 million citizens. We have (from
memory) five working submarines, half a dozen frigates, a couple of
obsolete destroyers, seventy odd F18s, about 20 F111s plus I think a dozen
P3 Orion patrol craft.
In interstellar terms, that would turn into five SDBs, half a dozen
Escorts, a couple of obsolete Colonial Cruisers,
**********************8
beg to differ...I suggest that they translate directly to a couple of
obsolete destroyers....

seventy odd small
fighters, twenty big fighters and a dozen type S scouts.
******************
or a dozen modular cutters with big sensor platforms on them.

but yeah,  that looks about right.:
5 SDBs
6 Fer-de-lance
a pair of 3-5000 DT destroyers from a TL or two back
70 ramparts
20 Strike Fighters
12 modular cutters with modules full of sensors.

there should be more...doesn't Australia have customs cutters or something?
SAR boats? ASW helicopters? so tack on:
2-4 Patrol Cruisers
40-50 assorted small craft (including 5-10 Gunned Gigs, and another 5-10
ships boats with cargo converted to sensors)

your anti piracy could work much like this:

Suppose your system mainworld is New Australia :)
There is a GG named Tasmania with colonies on some of the moons

The only systems within a few jump range are New New Zealand, In-the-Knees,
New New Guinea, Solomon's Planet, Bjorne, Canal, and Simone :)

Of these only N.N.Z. has high enough pop and Tech to do its own anti piracy
patrols.
you have postal union agreements with the high pop high tech worlds on the
other side though (Nippon New Hong Kong and Sing-pure)

Your Parliament wouldn't spring for those orbital forts you wanted, so you
use your cutters in shifts of 3 to get global coverage (shifts of 4 if you
use 3d combat) for your mainworld.

The ships boats can do the same for the gas giant.

You can use your fighters in groups of 4-6 for patrol sweeps, with the
strike fighters in groups of 2-4 for backup.

The SDB can either be used to search for intruders, or just to patrol your
spacelanes between the mainworld and the colonies/jumpoints.

Customs duties can be handled by the gunned gigs or even unarmed craft

Each of the DDs can be grouped with 3 DEs to go out and patrol other
systems between you and your trading partners. The PCs can do the same.  if
you have 4 PCs you can make 4 three ship groups
2 with DD and 2xDE
2 with DE and 2xPC

Keep one group at home each month, And the other three out on patrol.

when taking increased costs for space navies into account if you up the pop
from 5 to 7 it is still quite workable.

I think the best solution to keep piracy 'canon' without changing a whole
bunch of stuff is to increase the incoming jump threshold to 1,000
diameters (or more) and keep the outgoing threshold where it is at 100
diameters

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #958
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Friday, October 16 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 959



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Piracy
Roswell jump
Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
Re: Major Race Status
4th Imperium (wuz: Jim's Request for Comments)
Re:  Major Race Status
re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))
Re: 4th Imperium (wuz: Jim's Request for Comments)
GT space combat.
[GT] Midu Agashaam class Destroyer
FFS2/DSR analysis of the hiding pirate problem
Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy) 
future systems
Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy) 
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:33:20 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Piracy

     If Traveller Cannon says there is piracy, then could we please quit
trying to prove it could not work and start trying to find out how it did?

Leo

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:34:49 -0700
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: Roswell jump

Kevin writes:
>FWIW, this opens the door for the *possibility* that the Roswell Incident 
>*did* make a difference in Terra's developement.  After all, of the 430-odd 
>known races, only *5* discovered jump drive on their own.  (The Aslans copied 
>it, which we know for *sure*.)  This suggests to me that developement of jump 
>drive depends on several factors:  ready access to lanthanum, a high enough 
>tech level to allow developement of jump drive *theory*, and a goodly amount 
>of *pure luck*.  There have been a few Minor Races that were starfarers using 
>STL 'slowboats', even carving out small pocket empires with generation
ships.  
>IINM, these proto-TL10 cultures *also* had a good understanding of gravitics 
>theory.  Why did they *not* develope jump drive on their own?

   Check out "The Day After Roswell" by Lt. Colonel Phillip J. Corso.  I
saw this on the new release shelf at Barnes & Noble a few months ago.
Personally, I'm waiting for the paperback before I buy it. 
According to the dust jacket notes, Lt. Col. Corso, formerly of Army
Intelligence, asserts that a UFO did go down at Roswell in 1947.  The
government has been studying it and has leaked ideas to think tanks over
the years.  Ideas that have lead to things like silicon based computer
chips and fiber optic data transmission.


- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/  Opinions Mine!
"The whole world loves a lover" is an interesting 
theory, but a very bad legal defense.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:45:26 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)

I think I'll be using the System Jump Point Cascade system from JTAS.
The gravity whorl of the primary screws up jump space for 1000 AU
in every direction, your J-1 ships can only come out at the J-1 point,
100d from the biggest gravity source (the system primary). J-2 ships
can come out at either the J-1 point or the J-2 point (probably the 
biggest gas giant), and so on.

I'll also have ships coming out of jump space make the transition
as they pass the 100d limit of whatever jump point they're aiming
at, in a very rough straight line from where they left - you don't get
to choose what point on the sphere you enter, so the main world
can be on the other side of the sun when you show up.

Also, just for fun, I'll have the physics of jump space bleed your
ship's velocity so it enters realspace at rest with respect to the
gravity well that kicked you out.

The better your navigation solution, the closer your jump exit point
will be to a line drawn from where you are to the center of the gravity
well you're dropping out at. A clunky free trader with an old Model/1
computer will probably drop out anywhere within a 30 to 40 degree
perimeter, and may even drop a little short in response to gravimetric
disturbances along the route.

Jump exit will be a relatively calm affair, some energy signature
that you'll see if you're looking that way but not a big graviton
or energized hydrogen pulse that lights up boards all across the
system.

Jump-4 military ships can come out right at the main world's 100d
limit for some systems with this rule, but Free Traders will have
to fly in from the 100d of the primary, which may or may not be
near the orbital path of the main world.

This kind of environment - especially with limited detection ranges
as per CT and Mayday - should make the spacelanes a little more
interesting. Traders come in-system all over the place, the top of the
line ships (high jump merchants) can jump directly into the inner system,
the clunkers the PC's often drive have to fly through the outer system
on their inbound (and fuelless) leg. Pirates can hide, can potentially
even have a base in the outer system. System defense forces must
actually patrol instead of sip coffee dirtside until a satellite tells them
the exact location, vector and identity of every suspicious ship 
in the system. 

Thoughts?

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:04:11 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Major Race Status

Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk wrote:

> It's got to be within the realm of possibility (as Pratchett might say: at
> one end of the probability curve at least), that *none* of the "major"
> races actually developed jump drives themselves.
> 
> Anyone any bright ideas what to do about the coyns in that case?

Why the obvious, silly...Whenever another race discovers one of his
carefully seeded relic jump drives, and no one _catches_ them doing so,
Gramps just hops back in time, adds another coyn, and hops forward
again.

Why didn't he just hop back and keep himself from making all his
children, which caused all that trouble???

Believe me, you _don't_ want to know... but for some reason, the number
'42', a starship in the form of a golden running shoe, and some white
mice are involved....

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:18:39 -0600
From: chet-el@juno.com (Chester L Cox)
Subject: 4th Imperium (wuz: Jim's Request for Comments)

Jim's scenario below gives me a fairly clear answer to his comment #6. 
I'd almost bet that the Zhodani are orchestrating the restructuring of
the Imperium to make it a kinder, gentler imperium this time around.  But
that's just speculation.

*jeep!
  ---Chet

From: "jim clem" <travmind@hotmail.com>

I've just been struck with an idea for another milieu, The Fourth 
Imperium, or ROM2.

Starting, oh, about 2000 or so (using the 3I calender), it is the result 
of vigorous expansion of Terrans to fill in the void left by the 
Rebellion and Virus.  A couple of conditions.

1)  Virus has left the Terrans with a bad taste for high automation.  As 
such ships typically have higher crew requirements.

2)  Psionics are in use, though not common among people.  The 4th Imp 
makes serious use of 'psi cops' and in military uses.  This is _NOT_ a 
kinder, gentler Imperium.  Psi is also used for system interfaces, as to 
help prevent a recurrence of the Virus incident.  

3)  The 4I is still expanding beyond the old Solomani Rim sector, using 
both economic and military aggression.

4)  I'm not sure what to do with the alien races, I'd love some comments 
on that.

5)  The 4I rules like the 3I, but with a firmer grip, using hand picked 
governors and viceroys.  The psi cops make this easier.

6)  Not sure what to do about the Zho's.

7)  The 4I uses high tech, TL 17, but tries to limit subject worlds to 
no more than TL 12 or so.
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:32:25 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Re:  Major Race Status

>>>>
Of course, it's all just a Hiver Manipulation anyway... <g>
>>>>
And who do you think is manipulating the Hivers?  Grandfather of
course! <bg>
- - Joseph

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:40:19 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))

>IR emission are in the 'light' part of the EM spectrum.  'Large arrays' are
>used to pick up radio waves which are much farther down in the EM spectrum.
>To do a IR search is little different than doing a visual search you just
>use a slightly different telescope.

I am extraordinarily aware of what infrared radiation is, in as much as I am
a professional infrared astronomer, and did large amounts of modelling of
spacecraft emission for FFS2. The assumption in FFS2 (and early traveller
versions) is that while low-tech sensors (TL6-9) are telescopes with cameras,
by higher TLs they are interferometric arrays, the vis/IR equivalent of a
phased array, with each element coherently detecting incoming radiation and
assembling them into a sensor picture. (Hence the use of the word "array".) 
(This is a minor detail, of course; you can get similar effects with telescopes,
but it makes it easier to build arrays with 1000 m2 area.) 

>As for IR masking all heat radiated
>into space is in the form of IR light as convection and conduction are not
>posible into a vaccum.  The soultion is to radiate in only one dirrection,
>aft.  With the front of the ship cold and facing the detecters if will fall
>below the treshold of 'visability' whil the heat is shown out the back like
>a flashlight.
This is implicitly in the FFS2 model - even normal (non-masked) ships are
assumed to be radiating directionally enough that a sensor only sees about 
10% of the waste heat you'd get if they were radiating isotropically. More
extreme masking helps you do this better and also includes equipment for
cooling the hull (you have to get the hull well below 200 K or you'll still
stand out quite sharply.) You also have to paint the hull very, very, very
black (better than 99.99%) to avoid being detected by reflected sunlight. 
And (in the Definitive Sensor Rules written to go with FFS2) you can do better
by (as you suggest) radiating all heat away from the sensor. However, that
only really works if the sensor is only in one direction. If there are 4-6
fixed sensor platforms out at 100 diameters, they'll see the pirate as it
goes by and enters the 100 diameter sphere...

Still, there might be soem combinations for which it works (a low-budget 
world in which the outer sensor platforms aren't very good, for 
example.) Take a look at FFS2 and the DSR; the modelling is good enough to
answer these questions quantitatively rather than qualitatively.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:48:51 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: 4th Imperium (wuz: Jim's Request for Comments)

AAACK!  Zhodani Hivers!  Not only will we manipulate you, we will read your
minds to find out how to make it more effective.

Kurt


At 09:18 AM 10/16/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Jim's scenario below gives me a fairly clear answer to his comment #6. 
>I'd almost bet that the Zhodani are orchestrating the restructuring of
>the Imperium to make it a kinder, gentler imperium this time around.  But
>that's just speculation.
>
>*jeep!
>  ---Chet
<<SNIP>>
>2)  Psionics are in use, though not common among people.  The 4th Imp 
>makes serious use of 'psi cops' and in military uses.  This is _NOT_ a 
>kinder, gentler Imperium.  Psi is also used for system interfaces, as to 
>help prevent a recurrence of the Virus incident.  
>
<<SNIP>>
>
>6)  Not sure what to do about the Zho's.
>


Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:57:30 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: GT space combat.

ran our first live battle last night... a pair of TL 10 fighters vs a pair
of free Traders.

The scenario a band of ruthles hijackers have stolen the traders from a
small port on a moon 8 hexes from a planet.  the hijackers think the have
goten away clean, but the base got a message off.....the jump limit is 80
hexes. the jacker gang are good for lowlife scum, the have skills of 14.
the fighter crews are crack troops for local navies...they have skill 15.

positions are in this format. Hijackers / Velocity /
Distance........Fighters /Velocity  /Distance

first turn...the jackers boost out at max accell  the fighters warm up. no
detection
h/1/5   f/0/0

second turn the fighters take off towards the moon no detection
h/2/7 f/4/4

third turn now the jackers need 14skill+38scan+6size-44range-3EM=11 or less
to detect both fail
the fighters need 15+35+8-44=14 or less to detect both make it, the manuver
to within 3 hexes and fire on passive sensors.  they need
15skill+15acc+7comp+8size+4rof-44=5 or less to hit they both miss
h/3/10 f/3/7

fourth turn the fighters switch to active sensors this gives them
15+39+8+4-44=22 or less to continue detection.  the freightrs now need
(using radscanners) 14skill+31scan+39scan of active sensors+6-10TL of
active sensors-44=36  (more than skill+10) so detection is automatic.  the
jackers continue to run but the fighters manuver to 1 hex range. the
fighters now need 15skill+15acc+7comp+8size+2active+4rof-41range=10 or less
to hit. the jackers need 14+14+8+6+4-41=5 or less to hit.....
h/4//14 f/6/13

over the nex few turns the jackers switch to active sensors, now need a 7
to hit(but they roll 4 times each)they cripple both the fighters one loses
the laser and 2 G acell, the other loses the laser a computer and a
cremamber.
one of the free traders takes minor damage, with one turret lightly damaged
(still funtional) and depressurised (with 6 jackers killed).

in short the merchies aren't that great, but they can soak up lots of
damage due to their size.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:58:23 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: [GT] Midu Agashaam class Destroyer

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:43:51 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: [GT] Midu Agashaam class Destroyer
Here's my first attempt at a GT ship design. The only thing I'm not sure of
(seeing that I'm not an expert with GURPS) is whether the DR is high
enough,
and how to handle the Nuclear Damper.
Any mistakes are my own, of course...
For reference, here's the original high guard (which is what I'm using):
DD-C246BJ2-052400-50506-0   3,000tons
            3     4 1 1        TL=15.
            3     4 1 1      Crew=33.
Two Cutters.
==============================================================
MIDU AGASHAAM class Destroyer (TL 12)
Crew: Captain, First Officer, Pilot, Navigator, Sensors/Commo Officer,
Tactical Officer, 6 Missile Gunners, 6 Sandcaster Gunners, 8 Laser Gunners,
Particle Gunner, Chief Engineer, 2 Jump Technicians, 5 Drive Hands, Ship's
Doctor, Medic
3,000-ton SL Hull, DR 1100, 6 turrets with three missile racks each, 8
turrets with three 405-MJ lasers each, 6 turrets with three sandcasters
each, 1 12,810-MJ particle accelerator bay, 4.86 meson screen (DR 1000),
*************
these are meant to be whole modules...5 modules give you DR
(20,800,000*5/105,00)990 not really much at all..the average damage at 4
hexes is 15,750 for a meson bay. so 8 hit on your ship unprotected vs 9
hits protectedif you make it 20 modules you can take 11 average hits and
you don't get a major damage roll from the first one.  perhaps consider
leaving it off if you can't give it more DR.




 120
nuclear dampner (45mi radius),
************8
you need 128 dampers to get 45 mile radius


 radical stealth, radical emission cloaking,
*********
I dont see this as having radical, consider toning it back down to basic.it
is deplyed with the wall of battel after all.  somthing will get detected,
if only the tankers.



total compartmentalization, command bridge (w/basic backup bridge),
***********
consider hardening these. the orignal had fiber optic backup.


engineering, 495 maneuver, 150 jump, 1200 fuel, 5 utility,
************
should be 6 utility to cover the entire ship


  18.75 fuel
processor (8 hours),
*****************
whole numbers please   19 is good.


 200 spacedock (capacity 2x50 ton cutters), 37
staterooms, 7 cargo (480 SIM-12 missiles carried as cargo).
***************
I get 29.5 cargo,  the missles take up 1 space per 80 (or about 6 spaces.)
Statistics: EMass 7844.94, LMass 8262.72, Cost: MCr1,502.25, HP 117,933,
Hull Size Modifier: +11.
Performance: Accel: 6.3/6 Gs, Jump 4, Air Speed 6,059
*********
I get these Stats:

Emass: 9018.3  LMass 9350 Cost: 1585.609  Acell 5.29 Jump 4 Airspeed 6016
Cargo 29.5 HP 120,000

for the diffence in mass Isuspect the surface area for the turrets and the
bay they need armor as wellthe accell is because of the armor mass.  the
cost is the armor cost and the airspeed is the surface area again.   hit
pointsd should be 80,000*1.5 or 120,000
the total surface area is 105,000 including the turrets and the bay.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 10:23:00 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: FFS2/DSR analysis of the hiding pirate problem

Let us consider a moderate-population TL-12 world. It's main passive
sensor array might be a PEMS14.5 on an orbital station - MCr 5000 or so, 
1000 m2 area spread out over a 100-m-diameter ring. (PEMS14 for a lower-
population world, PEMS-15 for a higher population world.) It would probably
have several picket sensors or SDBs with PEMS-13.5 or so out at the 
100-diameter limit. 

A hypothetical 400-ton pirate with a Military Black hull (MCr 500 or so for
a spherical hull) and Advanced IR masking (I can't recall the price) would
have a visible-light signature of -1.5 and a IR signature at full power of 
- -0.5. At minimum power (a few megawatts) its IR signature would be about -1.5.

The 100-diameter limit is a range of 11.5; let's have the pirate lurk slightly
outside, at a range of about 12. The PEMS 14.5 main warning sensor will have
a visible-light signal of (14.5 - 12 - 1.5 = 1) at this range, an Average 
task every half hour to detect the pirate. (The IR signal is about the same.)
If the sensor operator isn't very alert (if no-one expects any
pirates) the task becomes a level or so harder.

About the only trick the pirate can use to make itself harder to detect
in the visible is being on the line of sight to the sun - worth -0.5 to 
signature, for
a signal of 0.5; a Staggering task every turn to be detected. It still won't
be able to hide from a competent operator for more than a few hours 
(especially since a competent operator will dedicate extra effor to scanning
the sun arc, spending a turn every few hours scanning only that arc for an
extra +0.5). If the sensor operator isn't alert the task is a diff level
harder, which may make it possible to hide for a day or so before the operator
gets lucky.

On the other hand, at a medium-low population world probably all one has to 
worry about is a PEMS-14 (MCr 500, which is also the kind of sensor a typical 
Imperial destroyer might carry.) In that case, the pirate lurking close to 
the sun is undetectable by a non-alerted operator, or an Impossible task for
a alert operator or on turns when the sensor is scanning only the sun
arc.

However again, a sensible planetary defense net with even one deployable
sensor or SDB will put it at the ~150 diameter point between the sun and the
homeworld. That will put it at a range of about 11 from the pirate, and 
the pirate won't get the sun bonus under most conditions (especially if their
are two arrays), for a signal of (13.5 - 11 - 1.5 = 1), making the pirate
not that hard to detect even for a non-alert operator. Also, no merchant
in its right mind would depart on the line towards the sun because that is
indeed the obvious lurking ground for a pirate...

To really be able to hide, you have to get down to a system that can only
spend MCr 50 or so on its main warning sensor (in which case the pirate
doesn't need to hide near the sun) and/or systems with no sensor warning
pickets at all. Alternatively, dusty star systems make all targets harder
to see and will be favourite lurking grounds for pirates. A dusty system
with only MCr 50 worth of sensors would be ideal. A system like that will
probably only be able to afford one SDB, anyway. By this point you have a 
pirate who's ship is worth about ten times the total military budget of the
system, probably about a hundred times the total value of cargo leaving
the system in a week...

(A TL13 pirate could buy a
Military Ultrablack hull coating (about 99.99% black), but that costs MCr
5000 for a 400-ton ship - out of most pirates price range.)

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:36:06 -0500
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy) 

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:

> _Rebellion_ p. 27 states that each sector of the Imperium theoretically has a
> group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships. This number includes combat 
> vessels such as cruisers, carriers, battleships, and _some_ escorts (emphasis
> mine). It does not include auxiliaries, support ships, and scouts.
>
> The first ambiguity lies in just what kinds of escorts are included in the 
> 1000 ship figure and what kinds are not. Are the 5,000 T _Sloan_ class 
> escorts so big that they are counted, or is there a class of escorts smaller
> than a light cruiser (30,000 T ships), but bigger than Sloans?
[...]
> The second ambiguity is whether battleriders are included in the figure or
> not. I would have preferred that they were not, but the one detailed squadron
> I know of (the 154th Battle Rider Squadron described in SMC) clearly implies
> that they are. 

_Rebellion Sourcebook_ was written at the same time as _Fighting Ships of the
Shattered Imperium_, which despite its other shortcomings does seem to have a
hard set of definitions:

  * Battleships are spinal-mount armed ships capable of combat in the 
    line of battle.  By extension this includes battleriders, and also
    their battletenders/battlecarriers.
  * Cruisers are all other spinal-mount armed ships.  In addition, the
    cruiser count includes fighter carriers (considered a specialized
    type of cruiser).  The pocket spinal mounts of TNE and T4 did not
    exist at this point, so cruisers range in size from light 10,000
    ton models to very large 100,000 ton rift cruisers as big as some
    battleships (if perhaps less powerful).
  * Escorts are major combatants that lack a spinal-mount.  Looking at
    their examples, this seems to cover the PF Sloan fleet escort (or
    "missile escort" in FSSI parlance), the Rapier escort destroyer, 
    and a heavy 20,000 ton fleet escort.  It excludes anything smaller
    than a Sloan (destroyers, destroyer-escorts, corvettes, couriers,
    and close escorts).

  -- Steve Bonneville

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:01:20 -0700
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: future systems

"Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com> types:
>     Your arguments are very sound, for 1998 technology.  We are talking
>about items created by a race that had starflght while we were still
>hunting bronto burgers.  Consider a radio made 20 years ago and one made
>today.  Much of the internal structure is the same, but most has been
>improved upon.  Now take that example and spread it from say a military
>satellite uplink and a cave mans hollow log drum.  Both items allow you to
>communicate with someone a ways away, but otherwise there is nothing else
>incommon.  My point is that the items you picked nits with are in todays
>equipment, not necessarily in the equipment from 3000 years into the
>future.

Take a look at 

http://glenfiddich.lcs.mit.edu/caa/masc/
and
http://www.sds.lcs.mit.edu/SpectrumWare/home.html

The hardware doesn't even need to be hardware...
For example...The virtual radio...



- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/  Opinions Mine!
"Treeware" - Manuals and documentation.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 11:13:34 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy) 

Steve Bonneville sayth
>  * Battleships are spinal-mount armed ships capable of combat in the 
>    line of battle.  By extension this includes battleriders, and also
>    their battletenders/battlecarriers.
>  * Cruisers are all other spinal-mount armed ships.  In addition, the
>    cruiser count includes fighter carriers (considered a specialized
>    type of cruiser).  The pocket spinal mounts of TNE and T4 did not
>    exist at this point, so cruisers range in size from light 10,000
>    ton models to very large 100,000 ton rift cruisers as big as some
>    battleships (if perhaps less powerful).
>  * Escorts are major combatants that lack a spinal-mount.  Looking at
>    their examples, this seems to cover the PF Sloan fleet escort (or
>    "missile escort" in FSSI parlance), the Rapier escort destroyer, 
>    and a heavy 20,000 ton fleet escort.  It excludes anything smaller
>    than a Sloan (destroyers, destroyer-escorts, corvettes, couriers,
>    and close escorts).


I *REALLY* like these definitions.  

douglas

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls 
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:32:48 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

"Keven R. Pittsinger" wrote:

> James Woods as Strephon?  Or would Costner be better?

Costner is _never_ better.
Than anyone.
period.

;-)

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:06:22 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
...
>problems and space junk blind spots.  I find it very hard to believe that
>any one ship can maitain survelence on 100billion square miles of space and
>that is just the 100 diameter shell much less all the space beyond it the a
>pirate could be in.
...

  You might wish to compare notes with the author of the following suggestion:

>1 sensor web (100 satalite scatter arround the system.)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:06:29 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>I think the best solution to keep piracy 'canon' without changing a whole
>bunch of stuff is to increase the incoming jump threshold to 1,000
>diameters (or more) and keep the outgoing threshold where it is at 100
>diameters

  That means outgoing will actually be safer; 1000 D is likewise an obscenely
large surface for U-boats, er, pirates, to lurk for victims - any ship they
do find may already have a sufficient vector to make matching it either unsafe
or impossible to match.

  I prefer the outer system or non-starship model for dedicated piracy.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:18:15 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 11:31 AM 10/16/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:26:15
>From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>
>I use Australia as an example. About 20 million citizens. We have (from
>memory) five working submarines, half a dozen frigates, a couple of
>obsolete destroyers, seventy odd F18s, about 20 F111s plus I think a dozen
>P3 Orion patrol craft.
>In interstellar terms, that would turn into five SDBs, half a dozen
>Escorts, a couple of obsolete Colonial Cruisers,
>**********************8
>beg to differ...I suggest that they translate directly to a couple of
>obsolete destroyers....
>
>seventy odd small
>fighters, twenty big fighters and a dozen type S scouts.
>******************
>or a dozen modular cutters with big sensor platforms on them.
>
>but yeah,  that looks about right.:
>5 SDBs
>6 Fer-de-lance
>a pair of 3-5000 DT destroyers from a TL or two back
>70 ramparts
>20 Strike Fighters
>12 modular cutters with modules full of sensors.
>
>there should be more...doesn't Australia have customs cutters or something?
>SAR boats? ASW helicopters? so tack on:
>2-4 Patrol Cruisers
>40-50 assorted small craft (including 5-10 Gunned Gigs, and another 5-10
>ships boats with cargo converted to sensors)
>
>your anti piracy could work much like this:
>
>Suppose your system mainworld is New Australia :)
>There is a GG named Tasmania with colonies on some of the moons
>
>The only systems within a few jump range are New New Zealand, In-the-Knees,
>New New Guinea, Solomon's Planet, Bjorne, Canal, and Simone :)
>
>Of these only N.N.Z. has high enough pop and Tech to do its own anti piracy
>patrols.
>you have postal union agreements with the high pop high tech worlds on the
>other side though (Nippon New Hong Kong and Sing-pure)
>
>Your Parliament wouldn't spring for those orbital forts you wanted, so you
>use your cutters in shifts of 3 to get global coverage (shifts of 4 if you
>use 3d combat) for your mainworld.
>
>The ships boats can do the same for the gas giant.
>
>You can use your fighters in groups of 4-6 for patrol sweeps, with the
>strike fighters in groups of 2-4 for backup.
>
>The SDB can either be used to search for intruders, or just to patrol your
>spacelanes between the mainworld and the colonies/jumpoints.
>
>Customs duties can be handled by the gunned gigs or even unarmed craft
>
>Each of the DDs can be grouped with 3 DEs to go out and patrol other
>systems between you and your trading partners. The PCs can do the same.  if
>you have 4 PCs you can make 4 three ship groups
>2 with DD and 2xDE
>2 with DE and 2xPC
>
>Keep one group at home each month, And the other three out on patrol.
>
>when taking increased costs for space navies into account if you up the pop
>from 5 to 7 it is still quite workable.
>

A very good break down.  A sharp pirate could grab a single ship in these
system but he would have to be on his toes and he would have to run like the
hounds of hell were on his heals.  He'd better have good intel on the target
or he might get a load of tracter parts.  A distant jump in and a coast near
the trade lanes at arrond the time the target is due to arrive would be the
a good plan.  An attrition attact verses the sensor ship or some sabotage or
bribes could open a hole in the sensor net that would give the pirate more
time to ge his booty.  A combines attrition attack against the small craft
and smash and grab would be a real coup.  The DDs and DEs you don't want to
mess with unless you have a spinal mount!

>I think the best solution to keep piracy 'canon' without changing a whole
>bunch of stuff is to increase the incoming jump threshold to 1,000
>diameters (or more) and keep the outgoing threshold where it is at 100
>diameters
>

I proposed something like this.  If the jump drives are not all that
accurate with arrival location then it makes sence to jump to a more distant
location to allow for that slop to not put you somewhere you do not want to be.

Charles L.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #959
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Friday, October 16 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 960



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #956
Re: GT space combat.
Re: FFS2/DSR analysis of the hiding pirate problem
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Piracy
Quick question (please do not reply to the list)
Re: Piracy
RE: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon 
Re: Piracy
Re: Roswell jump 
Re: Lucan
Book ID? (was Re: Archival Materials)
Re: Piracy
RE: [GT] Midu Agashaam class Destroyer
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon (long)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:18:24 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)

At 11:45 AM 10/16/98 -0400, you wrote:
>I think I'll be using the System Jump Point Cascade system from JTAS.
>The gravity whorl of the primary screws up jump space for 1000 AU
>in every direction, your J-1 ships can only come out at the J-1 point,
>100d from the biggest gravity source (the system primary). J-2 ships
>can come out at either the J-1 point or the J-2 point (probably the 
>biggest gas giant), and so on.
>
>I'll also have ships coming out of jump space make the transition
>as they pass the 100d limit of whatever jump point they're aiming
>at, in a very rough straight line from where they left - you don't get
>to choose what point on the sphere you enter, so the main world
>can be on the other side of the sun when you show up.
>
>Also, just for fun, I'll have the physics of jump space bleed your
>ship's velocity so it enters realspace at rest with respect to the
>gravity well that kicked you out.
>
>The better your navigation solution, the closer your jump exit point
>will be to a line drawn from where you are to the center of the gravity
>well you're dropping out at. A clunky free trader with an old Model/1
>computer will probably drop out anywhere within a 30 to 40 degree
>perimeter, and may even drop a little short in response to gravimetric
>disturbances along the route.
>
>Jump exit will be a relatively calm affair, some energy signature
>that you'll see if you're looking that way but not a big graviton
>or energized hydrogen pulse that lights up boards all across the
>system.
>
>Jump-4 military ships can come out right at the main world's 100d
>limit for some systems with this rule, but Free Traders will have
>to fly in from the 100d of the primary, which may or may not be
>near the orbital path of the main world.
>
>This kind of environment - especially with limited detection ranges
>as per CT and Mayday - should make the spacelanes a little more
>interesting. Traders come in-system all over the place, the top of the
>line ships (high jump merchants) can jump directly into the inner system,
>the clunkers the PC's often drive have to fly through the outer system
>on their inbound (and fuelless) leg. Pirates can hide, can potentially
>even have a base in the outer system. System defense forces must
>actually patrol instead of sip coffee dirtside until a satellite tells them
>the exact location, vector and identity of every suspicious ship 
>in the system. 
>
>Thoughts?
>
>

I'd make jump accuracy related to the ships maintainence level, age,
quallity of charts, and computer power and inversely related to distance
jumped.  It make sence to make a ships jumping 4 have more inaccuracy than a
jump 1.  The jump 4 ship has more gravity wells to have to figure into their
flight path.

say closest distance = (((JnxJn)/comp number) x 100dias. x chart constant x
years sence maintainence+1 squared)

so a j4 merchant with a little maintiance due and a comp 4 and basic charts
would be... (((4X4)/4) x 100 x 4 x (1+1) squared)= 1600dias.

a j1 with good charts and maintaince and comp 4  (((1x1)/4 x 100 x 2 x (1)
squared = 50 dais.

Hummm....need a little work but... any one got some suggestion?  How about a
small randomizer?  How could that be added?

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:18:27 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))

At 09:40 AM 10/16/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>IR emission are in the 'light' part of the EM spectrum.  'Large arrays' are
>>used to pick up radio waves which are much farther down in the EM spectrum.
>>To do a IR search is little different than doing a visual search you just
>>use a slightly different telescope.
>
>I am extraordinarily aware of what infrared radiation is, in as much as I am
>a professional infrared astronomer, and did large amounts of modelling of
>spacecraft emission for FFS2. The assumption in FFS2 (and early traveller
>versions) is that while low-tech sensors (TL6-9) are telescopes with cameras,
>by higher TLs they are interferometric arrays, the vis/IR equivalent of a
>phased array, with each element coherently detecting incoming radiation and
>assembling them into a sensor picture. (Hence the use of the word "array".) 
>(This is a minor detail, of course; you can get similar effects with
telescopes,
>but it makes it easier to build arrays with 1000 m2 area.) 
>

Similar to the computer corrected compound mirror telescopes.  Good idea.
Had not thought of that but they are still limited in resolution and
detection threshold to that of each individual sensor array.  

This is not true with phased array radio antenas.  They can directly add to
each other without a thresshold except the natural noise threshold which can
not be avoided.

This has to due with the diferences between photons and electrons.  Unless
or untill, 'light conducters' with effecencies equal to that of copper wire
conducting electricity and capable of maintaining vissual infomation content
are invented, it is not posible to directly increase signal strength by
addative arrays for light as the signal must be converted to another medium
and in that convertion there is a fixed noise threshold set by the
converting sensor.  What you would in effect need is multiple mirrors
looking at the same immage and somehow able to combine their light images
directly onto a single sensor with out and polarization on phase distortion.
The mirrors themselves would have to be very cold for IR imaging to prevent
raising the noise threshold unnecessarily.  In theory it could be done on a
usable scale if you have a 'light conducter' good enough.  Perhaps with huge
'gravity lens' to gather the light to the sensor?  I don't know what can be
invented to get arround the nature of photons to make this posible.  

What does current tech. use to get get arround the limits of apurture size?
I know that there are ways to create 'artilicial' apurtures by electronicly.
combining the output of many mirrors but the detection threshold is limited
to that of the camera used.  This method is normally used to clean up an
image not to detect what can not be seen by the individual mirrors.  If
thing have gone beyond this I'd love to know about it.

>>As for IR masking all heat radiated
>>into space is in the form of IR light as convection and conduction are not
>>posible into a vaccum.  The soultion is to radiate in only one dirrection,
>>aft.  With the front of the ship cold and facing the detecters if will fall
>>below the treshold of 'visability' whil the heat is shown out the back like
>>a flashlight.

>This is implicitly in the FFS2 model - even normal (non-masked) ships are
>assumed to be radiating directionally enough that a sensor only sees about 
>10% of the waste heat you'd get if they were radiating isotropically. More
>extreme masking helps you do this better and also includes equipment for
>cooling the hull (you have to get the hull well below 200 K or you'll still
>stand out quite sharply.) You also have to paint the hull very, very, very
>black (better than 99.99%) to avoid being detected by reflected sunlight. 

It would be easier to use stealth technique to prevent the reflection from
shining back tward the the target.  The is the way stealth work, some
absorbtion and the rest is directed and defused away from the potential
reciever.

>And (in the Definitive Sensor Rules written to go with FFS2) you can do better
>by (as you suggest) radiating all heat away from the sensor. However, that
>only really works if the sensor is only in one direction. If there are 4-6
>fixed sensor platforms out at 100 diameters, they'll see the pirate as it
>goes by and enters the 100 diameter sphere...
>

Very true.  Remote sensors would be a major problem to a pirate.  You'd have
to design a non radiator ship powered be batteries to fool the sensors if
they can 'see' your heat radiator.  The best solution is a directed
(columated) radiator as discribed in the novel "Sun Diver".  The ship was
cooled by dumping it's heat into a laser.  That laser could then be directed
into deep space and thus undetectable disposal of the heat if this tech.
exist in the TU.  The problem with remote sensors this widely spaced is time
lag and syncronization from various locations.  Good computers would be
required.  The sensors would be very expensive due to the need for high gain
AND wide area coverage.  You are talking about a system far larger than a
ship could mount reasonablly due to surface area.  I think the cost and
maintain costs would rule this out for pourer and lower tech worlds.

>Still, there might be soem combinations for which it works (a low-budget 
>world in which the outer sensor platforms aren't very good, for 
>example.) Take a look at FFS2 and the DSR; the modelling is good enough to
>answer these questions quantitatively rather than qualitatively.
>

That's true also.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:25:38 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #956

Leo Hale wrote:

> My point is that the items you picked nits with are in todays
> equipment, not necessarily in the equipment from 3000 years into the
> future.

Unfortunately, those nits are based on very real and unchanging physical
principles.

If you increase the density of data storage to the molecular or near
molecular level, without some form of constant error correction, errors
creep in over time beecause atoms and molecule aren't fixed, and move
around. Over a long time period, these errors will cause the data to
become garbled beyond recognition.

As you get smaller and smaller structures to hold this data, they become
more susceptible to these quantum effects, which are the basis of things
like atoms diffusing through a crystal. On a large scale, these changes
cancel each other out simply because a bit of information is composed of
so many atoms...properly stored, a cunieform tablet will retain its
legibility damn near forever, but it is _not_ a dense data store. A
powered down hard drive will store the equivalent of all of Babylonia's
tablets in a few cubic centimeters, but it will lose that data because
the bits are stored of so many fewer atoms.

Posit your 'circuits etched in crystal' systems. Aside from the fact
that this is, essentially, _exactly_ what an IC is...crystals maintain
their structure so well for so long because they are uniform in nature.
If two atoms swap places, the structure hasn't changed.

Data is all about non-uniform structures; that's how data is encoded on
a uniform substrate, whether it's cuniform marks on clay tablets,
electric charges in a RAM chip, or gene sequences on a DNA strand.
Anything that alters the non uniformity destroys the data. You smash the
clay tablet, you power down the RAM chip, you chew up the DNA strand
with an enzyme.

Your crystal will depend on non-uniform structures within the crystals
to hold the data, the slow, inevitable molecular changes that occur even
in the most stable crystals over time wil slowly alter the data in a
random fashion, destroying the meaning of the data.

As things change around in a non-uniform crystal things get messed up,
whereas the same random changes within a uniform crystal do not mess
anything up, in the main.

Also, crystals, in particular, derive their stability from their rigid,
uniform structure. Altering that structure to contain data, introduces
weaknesses and stresses in the crystal that actually hastens their
deterioration.

Of course...all you have to do is wave Clarkes Third Law over anything,
and it works...look at Ancient Artifacts. They're _all_ Clarke wands. So
if you want your 50kyr storage facility in a tiny crystal, just say so.

Just don't let the TML gearheads at it ;-)



- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:32:48 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: GT space combat.

Shawn A Fisher <safisher@CSWNET.COM> on 10/16/98 03:10:23 PM

To:   Aerron Winsor/IAS
cc:
Subject:  Re: GT space combat.




At 12:57 PM 10/16/1998 -0400, you wrote:
>ran our first live battle last night... a pair of TL 10 fighters vs a pair
>of free Traders.
>over the nex few turns the jackers switch to active sensors, now need a 7
>to hit(but they roll 4 times each)they cripple both the fighters one loses
>the laser and 2 G acell, the other loses the laser a computer and a
>cremamber.
>one of the free traders takes minor damage, with one turret lightly
damaged
>(still funtional) and depressurised (with 6 jackers killed).
How do you like the damage system. Does it seem logical. Also, how come som
many jackers died? Where they not wearing vacc suits?
****************
It seems to work very well,  very easy to apply damage, and the major
damage tables add exitment to the game.

we assumed vaccsuits,  the same thing hapeened to them as happened to the
pilot on one of the fighters...rolled an 8 on the major damage table. 1d
crew are hit for 5d damage each rolled 6 for the number and rolled 20+ for
damage (shortcut, applied the same damage to all of them) for simplicity we
declared them as dead. when the fighter was hit, only got a 1 on the die
tho, so the other guy flew it home.

now we need to try a big battle and see how that stresses the system.

another not...the vector based movement sounded harder than it really was,
really quite simple to perform movement.  the fighters had no trouble
matching vectors with the traders (they shouldnt given the diffences in
accel.

next time we add missiles to the combat.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:30:26 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: FFS2/DSR analysis of the hiding pirate problem

At 10:23 AM 10/16/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Let us consider a moderate-population TL-12 world. It's main passive
>sensor array might be a PEMS14.5 on an orbital station - MCr 5000 or so, 
>1000 m2 area spread out over a 100-m-diameter ring. (PEMS14 for a lower-
>population world, PEMS-15 for a higher population world.) It would probably
>have several picket sensors or SDBs with PEMS-13.5 or so out at the 
>100-diameter limit. 
>

And this system can scan the entire 100 diameter sphere at that level of
resolution in how many hours?  How about behind the planet?  It's moon?

>A hypothetical 400-ton pirate with a Military Black hull (MCr 500 or so for
>a spherical hull) and Advanced IR masking (I can't recall the price) would
>have a visible-light signature of -1.5 and a IR signature at full power of 
>-0.5. At minimum power (a few megawatts) its IR signature would be about -1.5.
>
>The 100-diameter limit is a range of 11.5; let's have the pirate lurk slightly
>outside, at a range of about 12. The PEMS 14.5 main warning sensor will have
>a visible-light signal of (14.5 - 12 - 1.5 = 1) at this range, an Average 
>task every half hour to detect the pirate. (The IR signal is about the same.)
>If the sensor operator isn't very alert (if no-one expects any
>pirates) the task becomes a level or so harder.
>
>About the only trick the pirate can use to make itself harder to detect
>in the visible is being on the line of sight to the sun - worth -0.5 to 
>signature, for
>a signal of 0.5; a Staggering task every turn to be detected. It still won't
>be able to hide from a competent operator for more than a few hours 
>(especially since a competent operator will dedicate extra effor to scanning
>the sun arc, spending a turn every few hours scanning only that arc for an
>extra +0.5). If the sensor operator isn't alert the task is a diff level
>harder, which may make it possible to hide for a day or so before the operator
>gets lucky.
>

The other problem is light and IR glare.  The sun would wash out nearly
anything that did not have a mirror surface and if you pointed a sensor that
could detect that pirate at 100 dias in the dark of space the sun would fry
it with the ammount of power it would collect.

>On the other hand, at a medium-low population world probably all one has to 
>worry about is a PEMS-14 (MCr 500, which is also the kind of sensor a typical 
>Imperial destroyer might carry.) In that case, the pirate lurking close to 
>the sun is undetectable by a non-alerted operator, or an Impossible task for
>a alert operator or on turns when the sensor is scanning only the sun
>arc.
>
>However again, a sensible planetary defense net with even one deployable
>sensor or SDB will put it at the ~150 diameter point between the sun and the
>homeworld. That will put it at a range of about 11 from the pirate, and 
>the pirate won't get the sun bonus under most conditions (especially if their
>are two arrays), for a signal of (13.5 - 11 - 1.5 = 1), making the pirate
>not that hard to detect even for a non-alert operator. Also, no merchant
>in its right mind would depart on the line towards the sun because that is
>indeed the obvious lurking ground for a pirate...
>
>To really be able to hide, you have to get down to a system that can only
>spend MCr 50 or so on its main warning sensor (in which case the pirate
>doesn't need to hide near the sun) and/or systems with no sensor warning
>pickets at all. Alternatively, dusty star systems make all targets harder
>to see and will be favourite lurking grounds for pirates. A dusty system
>with only MCr 50 worth of sensors would be ideal. A system like that will
>probably only be able to afford one SDB, anyway. By this point you have a 
>pirate who's ship is worth about ten times the total military budget of the
>system, probably about a hundred times the total value of cargo leaving
>the system in a week...
>
>(A TL13 pirate could buy a
>Military Ultrablack hull coating (about 99.99% black), but that costs MCr
>5000 for a 400-ton ship - out of most pirates price range.)
>

Add radical stealth instead.  Don't just absorb it refect it away fron the
sensor and scatter it.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:46:21 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

Bloo posted:
>
>"Keven R. Pittsinger" wrote:
>
>> James Woods as Strephon?  Or would Costner be better?
>
>Costner is _never_ better.
>Than anyone.
>period.

Nope. Costner is better than John Belushi.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:23:10 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>>I think the best solution to keep piracy 'canon' without changing a whole
>>bunch of stuff is to increase the incoming jump threshold to 1,000
>>diameters (or more) and keep the outgoing threshold where it is at 100
>>diameters

>  That means outgoing will actually be safer; 1000 D is likewise an obscenely
>large surface for U-boats, er, pirates, to lurk for victims - any ship they
>do find may already have a sufficient vector to make matching it either unsafe
>or impossible to match.

If one moves the outgoing surface to 1000 diameters or more life isn't
hopeless for pirates/raiders; the pirates can almost be guaranteed to see
the ship departing (even if it's not running its transponder, a fully-powered
non-masked merchant is a thousand times brighter than a lurking pirate, and
the pirate can concentrate a whole sensor array on the planet hex), and a 
6-G pirate ship will stand a good chance of making an intercept on a 1-G 
merchant over a big chunk of the departure sphere surface.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:28:32 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Quick question (please do not reply to the list)

In a quick and simple design system such as GURPS Traveller would you
rather calculate energy consumption and powerplant output or have it
included in the cost and mass of the components?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:30:10 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:33:20 -0700, "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>

>     If Traveller Cannon says there is piracy, then could we please quit
>trying to prove it could not work and start trying to find out how it did?

I have found it sufficient to cast a critical eye at the assumptions
designed to prove the piracy can't exist (being able to identify
before hand which ships are pirate, being able to track them
after they leave the system, etc.).

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 06:23:39 +1000
From: "cjbrain" <cjbrain@bigpond.com>
Subject: RE: OT: Lord of the Rings

How 'bout Arnold S and Danny DeVito as Stephron and his clone ? I know, it's
been done before.

"I'm your tvin brudder..."

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:36:42 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon 

> At 11:07 AM 10/16/98 +0100, you wrote:
> >-> Council
> >Rat
> 
> Thus a German speaker in the Imperium call would the Zhodani Council the
> Zhodani Rat? ;-)

Yeah, he would.  But would he use a Cagney accent?

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:33:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:

> If one moves the outgoing surface to 1000 diameters or more life isn't
> hopeless for pirates/raiders; the pirates can almost be guaranteed to see
> the ship departing (even if it's not running its transponder, a
> fully-powered non-masked merchant is a thousand times brighter than a
> lurking pirate, and the pirate can concentrate a whole sensor array on the
> planet hex), and a  6-G pirate ship will stand a good chance of making an
> intercept on a 1-G  merchant over a big chunk of the departure sphere
> surface. 

Considering 1000d from a G2 star is about 4.5 AU, you'll also have about two
weeks to make your intercept ;).  If the jump limit is more than about 200d we
find that the jump shadow for the star overwhelms the planetary limit unless
you're well outside of the life zone.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:38:45 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Roswell jump 

> Kevin writes:
> >FWIW, this opens the door for the *possibility* that the Roswell Incident 
> >*did* make a difference in Terra's developement.  After all, of the 430-odd 
> >known races, only *5* discovered jump drive on their own.  (The Aslans copied 
> >it, which we know for *sure*.)  This suggests to me that developement of jump 
> >drive depends on several factors:  ready access to lanthanum, a high enough 
> >tech level to allow developement of jump drive *theory*, and a goodly amount 
> >of *pure luck*.  There have been a few Minor Races that were starfarers using 
> >STL 'slowboats', even carving out small pocket empires with generation
> ships.  
> >IINM, these proto-TL10 cultures *also* had a good understanding of gravitics 
> >theory.  Why did they *not* develope jump drive on their own?
> 
>    Check out "The Day After Roswell" by Lt. Colonel Phillip J. Corso.  I
> saw this on the new release shelf at Barnes & Noble a few months ago.
> Personally, I'm waiting for the paperback before I buy it. 
> According to the dust jacket notes, Lt. Col. Corso, formerly of Army
> Intelligence, asserts that a UFO did go down at Roswell in 1947.  The
> government has been studying it and has leaked ideas to think tanks over
> the years.  Ideas that have lead to things like silicon based computer
> chips and fiber optic data transmission.

Interesting.  Now all I need is some space in a working low berth for about a
hundred years & enough for a ticket outta here!!!!!!!!!!!  <grin>

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:43:29 -0400
From: "Shade" <jwatts@catt.com>
Subject: Re: Lucan

I have always pictured Lucan as the young Roddy McDowall ( protraying
Augustus ) in Cleopatra.

Generally, I have also protrayed him as just slightly less sane than the
average person ( to put it mildly ).  I have him randomly shooting
generals.  I have characters who have to pay him visits in the night to
bring messages find him lounging in bed with children.  I've had him speak
to people who werent there.  I have him come up with brilliant military
strategy only to bungle it if he personally takes command.  

Simply.... he is Nero, Caligula, Richard III ( Shakespeare's version ) and
Hitler all rolled into one.  

:)  Never had anyone really like him in the game either.

As for Strephon.... yep... always Heston.


Shade

The problem with religious texts is that the answers
arent in the BACK, either. 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Book ID? (was Re: Archival Materials)

In mail you write:

>      Read a great book series, and in that series the main character is
> kind of like Indiana Jones.  He loves to find things no one elsa has.  In
> the second book he finds the remains of a civilization that had been dead
> for over 50,000 years.  He discovers a library.  Huge racks that hold
> computer books, open the cover the screen lights up and shows you the
> contents.  These books had no power when he finds them, but he is able to
> rig up a recharger, and then finds out about the ancient race from there
> writtings.  What would stop us from using the same type of system?  Build
> little books with PROM type chips and a power system.  If they run out of
> power recharge them.

I missed the post which idenitifed this series.  It sounds majorly cool
(being a serious lover of interstellar archeology SF).  Who wrote this
series and what are the titles. 

Many & eternal thanks-


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:11:48 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/16/98 7:27:32 AM Pacific Daylight Time, rancke@diku.dk
writes:

<< >Yes...again, I am not attempting to argue this from a canonical point of
view.
 >I feel that the canon material is at best, greviously flawed.
 
 So when I say that IMO the rules don't allow pirates and you say that if you
 change the rules they do, we basically agree?
   >>

Yes...or, alternatively, if you keep setting conditions or rules which make
piracy impossible, piracy will then be impossible.  <G>

I did not understand at first that you were saying canonical piracy (as
depicted in CT) was not possible...we were indeed having to different
discussions.

As the rules are now written (T4/T5/GT), piracy does appear to be dead...the
DSR is the primary culprit for this.  It might be accurate...but is it fun?
As far as I know, there was only one reference to sensors in CT:  a mil-spec
sensor could detect a vessel out to 2LS, and any sensor can track a target
once detected to 3LS.  This kind of blows the "SDB's will see you at once and
respond immedialtly) argument out of the water (source: The Traveller Book)
Note this does not give an ID of the contact...thats a transponder issue
(which is somewhere I'M not willing to go <G>)  So how do those SDB's know you
are a pirate until you actually attack?  Most merchants will not risk getting
hurt...it's not thier cargo, they got insurance, etc...they would likely just
give it up.

The starship combat system as presented in CT and MT are based on a
Napoleanics-war style of combat, like the fabulous Honor Harrington novels.
With TNE and T4 (using DSR esp), it's now more like "Harpoon goes to space".

As for the number of ships the navy can field...nowhere have I ever seen
anyone who accounted for the Fleet Resupply units;  where are all the tankers,
ordinance resupply vessels, repair ships, hospital ships, couriers, etc. ?
These all have to come out of the TCS budgets as well as combatants. BTW,
ordinance vessels are extremely crucial to lower TL fleets:  missiles are,
IMHO, the most effective weapons in the game from a cost standpoint.  They
take no (or very little) power to use;  this is very important at lower TLs.
But they are ammo-restricted:  The Burke-class DDG is probably the finest
vessel afloat with full mags; empty, it's a multi-million dollar target.

Is there anyone who has any real-world knowledge of the proportion of
auxiliaries/non-combatants to combatants today?

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:46:29 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: RE: [GT] Midu Agashaam class Destroyer

First of all, thanks for your comments...I'm new GURPS and GURPS Vehicles,
so errors were bound to happen.

Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com wrote:
> these are meant to be whole modules...5 modules give you DR
> (20,800,000*5/105,00)990 not really much at all..the average damage at 4
> hexes is 15,750 for a meson bay. so 8 hit on your ship unprotected vs 9
> hits protectedif you make it 20 modules you can take 11 average hits and
> you don't get a major damage roll from the first one.  perhaps consider
> leaving it off if you can't give it more DR.

I understand the not enough DR argument, and you're right. But I don't see
why they have to be whole modules. Looking in vehicles, you can build these
to any size - the math still works out. And there are examples of "modules"
that are not integer - Basic Bridge, Low Berths, Vehicle Bays. My
understanding is that these are not actual "tangible" modules, but useful
abstractions. Reducing a module by a given fraction should be allowed in
most cases, with an appropriate adjustment in performance. In particular,
Jump, Maneuver, Meson Screen, Spacedock, Fuel Processor, and so on. If the
rules say you can't do this, or if there is a compelling reason not to,
please let me know.

>  120
> nuclear dampner (45mi radius),
> ************8
> you need 128 dampers to get 45 mile radius

This is a rounding issue used by the spreadsheet...I've fixed it. You are
correct.

> consider hardening these. the orignal had fiber optic backup.
I did harden them...I just didn't list it.

> engineering, 495 maneuver, 150 jump, 1200 fuel, 5 utility,
> ************
> should be 6 utility to cover the entire ship

You are correct...I missed the "round up" statement.

> whole numbers please   19 is good.
See my above comments.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                         |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/ - AOL IM: Iowa Akins |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/ - AOL IM: CMS AndyA  |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+    |
|       vi+ da+                                                        |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+      |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                             |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:19:31 +0200
From: Guillem Plasencia <guillemp@ciberia.es>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon (long)

> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:58:37 -0400 (EDT)
> From: neo@total.net
> Subject: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

<snip>

>  Perhaps we might ask TMLers who speak languages other than English
> to provide translations for the following terms...
>

I'm Spanish, so the Spanish words for these names is

> Spaceport

- ---> Espaciopuerto...i think no Spanish would use this literal translation as it's too long,but rather something compound like  Puerto Espacial.

> Starport

This HAS to be tranlated as a compund name, BTW Puerto Estelar.

> Highport

This has no literal translation, but i guess it means orbital facility of the spaceport, so the translation would be Estaci+APM-n Orbital (yes, i know you may have trouble displaying the first word, as it has one of our "accents" over the o, and your navigator may not be configured to display it).

> Downport

This, again, has no obvious translation, but if you mean the surface facilities of a starport, it could be translated as Estaci+APM-n de Superficie (Surface station).

> Base

Pretty easy :  Base (but it's pronounced in a different way, i would tell that it sound exactly as it's written, but i don't know if that does help)

> Company

This is a hard to display word, as in Spanish is Compa+APEA7Q-a (that is, if your navigator can't display it, almost exactly as in English, but instead of ending with ny, it ends with our special letter +APE- (if you can't see it well, it's an "n" with a flat bar over it, a tilde i think you call it) followed by an "i" with an accent over it.

> Corporation

Also , this is very similar Corporaci+APM-n (change t with c and put an accent over the o).

>    etc?
>

It is abbreviated the same in Spanish, etc. but if you want to write it complete it should put etc+AOk-tera, tha is, add "etera" to etc and accent the first e  :)

> Also, words for governmental bodies, ie:
>



> Assembly

Asamblea.

> Parliament

> Legislature

Legislatura

> Council

Consejo

> Bureau

Oficina

> Administration

Administraci+APM-n (change t with c and accent the o )

>    etc.

The same above, it doesn't change with the topic you are talking of<diving for cover>   :)

> (Usage examples would be helpful, too...)
>
> Traveller GMs could then combine these terms with proper nouns, adjectives,
> whatever (easily found in dictionaries) to produce plausible names for
> ports, corporations, governmental bodies, etc. Thus, we might be able to
> get away from a universe full of worlds settled by English speakers, as
> suggested by names like, say, "Cornwallis Downport".

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #960
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Friday, October 16 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 961



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Pirate Bases
Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
Re: Piracy
Re: High Tech troops
Re: Piracy
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #960
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #960
Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy) SHORT
GMs Wanted!
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon (long)
Re: Piracy
Re: New Austrlia
Re: Major Race Status
Piracy and Sensor Ranges

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:52:34 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)

At 12:06 PM 10/16/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Imperial economics (Was: Piracy)
>...
>>problems and space junk blind spots.  I find it very hard to believe that
>>any one ship can maitain survelence on 100billion square miles of space and
>>that is just the 100 diameter shell much less all the space beyond it the a
>>pirate could be in.
>...
>
>  You might wish to compare notes with the author of the following suggestion:
>
>>1 sensor web (100 satalite scatter arround the system.)
>
>

I know but even that large a web would have holes and limitations.  You plug
the holes as you can afford to.  100 passive satalites with simple lissening
systems for jump signatures would be more practical that a system that could
resolve a ships sized object at 100 dias.  You triagular on the entry point
and send a SDB to check out any strange arrivals.  The SDB has the good sensors.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 17:08:14 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

"Smart, David J (David)" wrote:

> Bloo posted:
> >
> >Costner is _never_ better.
> >Than anyone.
> >period.
>
> Nope. Costner is better than John Belushi.

Given that he is dead.  I agree.
Belushi was only really good at being Belushi.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:59:20 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Pirate Bases

I'm working on a cost/profit profile for a pirate cruise in the CT
pre-5th Frontier War Spinward Marches sector, with possible
operations just across any of the borders. I'm looking to home
port the example vessel at the Alexin belt (2405 Pax Rulin/Trojan
Reach) for purposes of annual maintenance - it has a class B
starport, law level zero and no Impie bases in-system. There is
a navy base one parsec away, but considering the starport there
(class E), you're not supposed to be able to support one - this
"Naval Base" is probably no more than a fueling stop.

I'm assuming that the pirate will be transferring cargos to smugglers,
and will need drop points for the goods - hollowed out asteroids,
unexamined areas of poorly-settled worlds, etc, even places to
lie doggo while field repairs are completed.

Note that there is no way a pirate can operate if, IYTU, the Imperium
can detect, stop and search every small starship that refuels in every
system in the Imperium. There must be poorly patrolled (low pop, 
unimportant) worlds available for a pirate ship to move through, or
you will have no pirates. I realize this creates a security problem for
the Imperium regarding enemy spy ships - but consider that a spy
ship would have to be small and furtive, and that anything it finds
out will take months or more to get to anyone's ears. I'm not sure
how secret the location of the 83rd CruRon six months ago needs
to be.

Of course, the pirate will generally avoid the high-pop worlds rich enough
to fill space with patrol craft. 

Here are some ideas I have for the ideal system to build
a corsair's forward base in:

Starport no higher than class C, and the lower the better.
No Imperial interdiction squadron
No Imperial bases
Low population
Low tech
Gas giants and/or planetoid belts present
In a cluster of worlds within jump-1 of each other

The pirate I'm working out the numbers for will find some systems
like this and establish caches for loot. Smugglers in cahoots with
the pirates will have some way of knowing there is loot to be had
(a code left somehow along a trade route) and will supplement their
income with the stolen cargo during their otherwise normal (that is,
shady) course of business. A cargo of sufficient value per ton
(say computers, gemstones or radioactives) might be retained on
board the Corsair for sale at the end of cruise back at the pirate
haven.

Crew will probably take salaries as most historical pirates did - shares
of booty. Captain gets 5 shares, Chief officers get two or three,
everyone else gets one, there may be a bonus share or two voted
on by the crew for good gunnery or boarding actions. Expenses of
running the ship are taken out of booty, remainder is split by shares.
I'll have to dig up that old "Ship's Articles" flyer I have lying around,
it's a copy of a contract used on a pirate vessel - included things like
offenses, an agreement not to split the swag 'till the cruise was done,
cash payouts for maimings, that kind of thing. Should be good for
ideas.

Now I'll just have to find a bunch of stuffed parrots to stitch to the
shoulders of their vac suits...<g>

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:27:30 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)

Charles Prevatte posted:
>
>I'd make jump accuracy related to the ships maintainence level, age,
>quallity of charts, and computer power and inversely related to distance
>jumped.  It make sence to make a ships jumping 4 have more inaccuracy than
a
>jump 1.  The jump 4 ship has more gravity wells to have to figure into
their
>flight path.
>
>say closest distance = (((JnxJn)/comp number) x 100dias. x chart constant x
>years sence maintainence+1 squared)
>
>so a j4 merchant with a little maintiance due and a comp 4 and basic charts
>would be... (((4X4)/4) x 100 x 4 x (1+1) squared)= 1600dias.
>
>a j1 with good charts and maintaince and comp 4  (((1x1)/4 x 100 x 2 x (1)
>squared = 50 dais.
>
>Hummm....need a little work but... any one got some suggestion?  How about
a
>small randomizer?  How could that be added?

How would replacing the chart constant with the navigator's skill level?
Most stars won't change their stellar class within the lifetime of the
average PC (or stellar empire). Besides, the sensors on any mid-hi tech
ship are good enough to figure out the stellar class of most stars within
6 parsecs (aren't they?). Also, keep in mind that regardless how good the
jump conditions are, a ship propagates out of J-space at the 100d limit.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:54:07 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/16/98 7:27:32 AM Pacific Daylight Time, rancke@diku.dk
writes:

<< >Yes...again, I am not attempting to argue this from a canonical point of
view.
 >I feel that the canon material is at best, greviously flawed.
 
 So when I say that IMO the rules don't allow pirates and you say that if you
 change the rules they do, we basically agree?
   >>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:15:22 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: High Tech troops

In a message dated 10/16/98 0:44:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
jamstar@glasscity.net writes:

<< And the mercs are working under the limitation of *NO* resupply.  And those
 *weren't* M16's, they were FN-FAL's.  A *MUCH* superior rifle.
  >>

There was resupply...just very limited, and dependant on having something to
use for trade.  As for the weapons, they seemed to me to be a mix of personal
choice:  mentioned are M16's, H&Ks, Ingrams, Colts, Walthers, etc.  These were
mercs, not regular troops.

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:22:30 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/16/98 7:09:52 AM Pacific Daylight Time, ianw@orac.net.au
writes:

<< Do the numbers. Military ships in Traveller do not need that many crew,  >>

This is not necessarily true...I doubt if very many individuals, when
designing thier vessels, take into account manning for 3 watches (I know I
usually don't), and there is always casualty replacements (frozen watch
usually). GT addresses this a little bit, I believe.

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:34:36 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #960

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 12:25:38 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #956

Leo Hale wrote:

> My point is that the items you picked nits with are in todays
> equipment, not necessarily in the equipment from 3000 years into the
> future.

Unfortunately, those nits are based on very real and unchanging physical
principles.

*Only if we continue with the same set of physical laws.  Traveller is
science fiction, and as such will move outside the bounds of the laws as we
know them.  If I really thought a computer in the year 53** would be the
same as one today, or that space travel would be limited to the physical
laws as we now know them, I'd quit now while I'm ahead.

If you increase the density of data storage to the molecular or near
molecular level, without some form of constant error correction, errors
creep in over time beecause atoms and molecule aren't fixed, and move
around. Over a long time period, these errors will cause the data to
become garbled beyond recognition.

*line up a group of molecules, and then lock them in place.  I think they
can do that even now.

As you get smaller and smaller structures to hold this data, they become
more susceptible to these quantum effects, which are the basis of things
like atoms diffusing through a crystal. On a large scale, these changes
cancel each other out simply because a bit of information is composed of
so many atoms...properly stored, a cunieform tablet will retain its
legibility damn near forever, but it is _not_ a dense data store. A
powered down hard drive will store the equivalent of all of Babylonia's
tablets in a few cubic centimeters, but it will lose that data because
the bits are stored of so many fewer atoms.

Posit your 'circuits etched in crystal' systems. Aside from the fact
that this is, essentially, _exactly_ what an IC is...crystals maintain
their structure so well for so long because they are uniform in nature.
If two atoms swap places, the structure hasn't changed.

Data is all about non-uniform structures; that's how data is encoded on
a uniform substrate, whether it's cuniform marks on clay tablets,
electric charges in a RAM chip, or gene sequences on a DNA strand.
Anything that alters the non uniformity destroys the data. You smash the
clay tablet, you power down the RAM chip, you chew up the DNA strand
with an enzyme.

Your crystal will depend on non-uniform structures within the crystals
to hold the data, the slow, inevitable molecular changes that occur even
in the most stable crystals over time wil slowly alter the data in a
random fashion, destroying the meaning of the data.

As things change around in a non-uniform crystal things get messed up,
whereas the same random changes within a uniform crystal do not mess
anything up, in the main.

Also, crystals, in particular, derive their stability from their rigid,
uniform structure. Altering that structure to contain data, introduces
weaknesses and stresses in the crystal that actually hastens their
deterioration.

Of course...all you have to do is wave Clarkes Third Law over anything,
and it works...look at Ancient Artifacts. They're _all_ Clarke wands. So
if you want your 50kyr storage facility in a tiny crystal, just say so.

Just don't let the TML gearheads at it ;-)

*My point was that we can not determine what kinds of storage may or may
not be possible 3000 years into the future.  If you told someone in 1920
that they would one day drive around in their ford with a phone, a liar
would have been the best of the names he/she called you.  Gearhead away,
but remember you can not always apply the laws of physics used today,
because in the future they may have been proved wrong.

- - --
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

- ------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:42:17 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #960

- ------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Book ID? (was Re: Archival Materials)

In mail you write:

>      Read a great book series, and in that series the main character is
> kind of like Indiana Jones.  He loves to find things no one elsa has.  In
> the second book he finds the remains of a civilization that had been dead
> for over 50,000 years.  He discovers a library.  Huge racks that hold
> computer books, open the cover the screen lights up and shows you the
> contents.  These books had no power when he finds them, but he is able to
> rig up a recharger, and then finds out about the ancient race from there
> writtings.  What would stop us from using the same type of system?  Build
> little books with PROM type chips and a power system.  If they run out of
> power recharge them.

I missed the post which idenitifed this series.  It sounds majorly cool
(being a serious lover of interstellar archeology SF).  Who wrote this
series and what are the titles.

Many & eternal thanks-


- - -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

- ------------------------------

      Sorry I didn't identify the series.  I have a great deal of trouble
      remembering the titles, but could tell you half or better of the
      story.  I will post the Author and titles of the three books
      tomorrow.  I think the names go as follows:  Dragon Jewels, Serpents
      Crown, and Lair of the Cyclops.  Anyway I will post the correct
      answers to your questions tomorrow.



Leo

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 17:47:33 -0400
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy) SHORT

- -----Original Message-----
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Friday, October 16, 1998 10:40 AM
Subject: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)
>AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPERIAL NAVY IN THE CLASSIC ERA
>===================================================
>
>Main sources: _Fighting Ships_, _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and
_Rebellion_.
>
>NUMBER AND TYPE OF SHIPS
>
>      Hans Rancke
>University of Copenhagen


Hans,
    Did it ever occur to you that you are using "canon" material to disprove
"canon" material?
Thom

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 18:27:56 -0400
From: Tal Meta <talmeta@bellatlantic.net>
Subject: GMs Wanted!

Greetings.

I'm the RPG coordinator for MonCon '99, which will be held on March
19-21st at the Tinton Falls Hilton in Tinton Falls NJ. In that capacity,
I'm looking for GMs (and players, too) for Traveller events at the
convention. As one of the oldest and most highly respected RPGs, it has
surprised me that none of the local conventions in my area (that I have
attended, mind you) have had any Traveller games (of any flavor). My
goal is to change that. If you're in the NJ/NY/PA/MD area, and think
you'd be interested in running such an event, please contact me
- -OFF-LIST- and I'll give you more specifics.

Thanx for your time...

- -- 
talmeta@bellatlantic.net - I *am* one of the Chosen Few!
ICQ - 12594453
AIM - talmeta1
TANJ Lives! - <http://members.bellatlantic.net/~talmeta/>
Alternate Homepage - <http://members.xoom.com/talmeta>

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:36:51 +0200
From: "Jonas Karlsson" <Jonas.Karlsson@baldakinen.umea.se>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon (long)

> Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon (long)
> > From: neo@total.net
> >  Perhaps we might ask TMLers who speak languages other than English
> > to provide translations for the following terms...

And in Swedish it would be...

> > Spaceport

"Rymdflygplats", or possibly "Rymdhamn" (flygplats is airport, hamn is
seaport)

> > Starport

"Stjärnflygplats" or "Stjärnhamn" (the character after the "Stj" bit is an
"a" with two dots above it.)

> > Highport

No literal translation. Possibly "Rymdstation" (actually space-station) or
"Rymdhamn i omloppsbana" ("omloppsbana" means orbit)

> > Downport

No literal translation. Possibly "Landbaserad rymdhamn".

> > Base

"Bas"

> > Company

"Företag" (the second character is an o with two dots above it.)

> > Corporation

"Bolag"

> >    etc?

"Och så vidare" or "osv" for the usual abbrevation. ;-)

> > Also, words for governmental bodies, ie:
> > Assembly

"Församling" or perhaps "Representantförsamling" ("församling" is also the
word for congregation.)

> > Parliament

"Parlament" or "Riksdag"

> > Legislature

"Lagstiftande församling" or "Legislatur"

> > Council

"Råd", "Rådsförsamling", "Styrelse"

> > Bureau

"Byrå", "Ämbetsverk", "Verk"

> > Administration

"Förvaltning", "Ministär" (ministry)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 08:18:34
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>>I use Australia as an example. About 20 million citizens. We have (from
>>memory) five working submarines, half a dozen frigates, a couple of
>>obsolete destroyers, seventy odd F18s, about 20 F111s plus I think a dozen
>>P3 Orion patrol craft.
>>
>
>How many of those did Austalia pay to build as apposed to just maintaining?

Ummm, all of them. We are friends with the Yanks, but they have this funny
thing about actually getting paid for stuff that is bought off them.

The tension between training, maintainence and buying new equipment is very
real for all militaries ... Australia is trying to figure out how it can
afford 3 AWACs type aircraft, and still keep the rest of the stuff.

>How many of those 20 million are producers?  How may are dependants?  You
>have to look at the cost to the producers as a percentage of disposable
>income.  Taxes have to come out of the part of the producers income that he
>does not need to support himself or you will attition you tax base.

Surplus wages and surplus profit are easily high enough in Australia to
support 2% expenditure on the military.

>
>>In interstellar terms, that would turn into five SDBs, half a dozen
>>Escorts, a couple of obsolete Colonial Cruisers, seventy odd small
>>fighters, twenty big fighters and a dozen type S scouts.
>>
>
>Not true.  Space craft are far more expensive than planet bound craft.
>

Not for the same level of functionality ... a Traveller Escort is about
1000 dtons. A modern real-world frigate is a lot bigger, and has a much
larger crew.

>Hardly.  Show me in cannon where a world of 20million has a fleet with
>several colonial cruisers.

One of the problems with this whole debate is that there are very few canon
examples of what actual government budgets exist in the Traveller universe,
and what it's spent on. My case is I can confidently assert a planet
*could* spend a small fraction of GPP on a fleet quite big enough to
intimidate the heck out of any reasonable pirate, and give most Navy
commerce raiders second thoughts as well.

Oh, and by 'obsolete colonial cruiser' I mean something TL11, maybe 12,
pulling three gees when new and about 2500 tons. And it was probably forty
years old when they got it. The equivalent ships in the Australian fleet
are the gun-armed DEs ... we are too cheap and/or stupid to figure out how
to strap a couple of Penguin boxes onto them.

>NOT 20 MILLION only the producer in that 20 million.  Producers are those
>that generate wealth.

You can raise taxes in a lot of ways (including on fixed wealth ie land).
Most Traveller rules on the subject crunch annual per capita income at
between five and twenty thousand credits per person per year. I really dont
think that 1% of GDP is going to put your economy into trouble ... modern
democratic states have quite happily spent 7% of GDP on defense in
peacetime, and not got into too much trouble. Though if you spend over 10%
on defense for more than 5 years you're asking for it, IMO.

>They jump in early and lay in wait.
>

For how long ? And what if their approach vector is wrong, because the
target ship jumped in late and had to adopt a different course ? If the
approach vector is wrong, you need to fire up the power plant to produce
the power to run the maneuver drive.

>These coating would be SOP on nearly any ship that might enter combat or
>want to avoid combat.  They are only paint after all.

Ahhh. Naval ships, pirates and smugglers. Got it.

>
>Say he get 1 haul of 100tons worth 100kcr per ton.  That 10Mcr!  And I think
>there would have to be more high than 100kcr per ton loads on long jump
>routes.  Corador would be heavy with specialty high credit loads and armed
>merchant to carry them so you have a trade off of high risk to high profit.

I completely agree with you.

Cargos worth KC100 a dton will be routine, and cargoes valued at a
megacredit per dton will be not unknown. For *really* high value cargos, go
for starship sensors ... they cost megacredits per cubic meter ... call it
MCr 10 per dton including packing. At these values, the opportunity cost on
holding the cargo gets to be as signifigant as the cost of shipping.

The problem is that whilst the cargo is worth MCr 10, the ship to carry it
in is going to (in all probability) be worth MCr 20, and a ship that can
reliably capture a MCr 20 ship is going to cost MCr 100.

So our pirate needs 10 good hauls (or one great haul) to pay for their
ship, before combat damage, crew salaries, bribes and profit are
considered. If our pirate has backers, they will be expecting a pretty
healthy rate of return on investment.

A second problem for our hypothetical pirate is what happens if he did take
a couple of lumps coming in ... the captain dinna wanna give ooop wi'aat a
scrap (or hoped to cripple the pirate with a couple of lucky shots, and
then claim the pirate ship in lieu of his annual bonus in accordance with
clause 5 (b) (iiii) of his contract). Our pirate is in baaaaad trouble if
the ship cant jump out, and one assumes that starport officials will
routinely collect 'after action reports' from any ship limping into port
with combat damage. Avoiding this will be possible, but expensive and risky.

A third problem is high value cargos will go in high jump ships. Lets take
a Recollet. Jump-3, pulls 2 gees, couple of laser turrets, nuke damper,
couple of sandcasters. Not really combat capable, except against a hopped
up type S scout or similar. Now, we've got a highly valuable cargo we need
to protect. Our best protection IMO is to write off 55 dton of cargo space,
and install enough collapsible tankage to do an emergency jump-1. Now,
given that we've got power plant to do a jump-3, we'll be able to pull it
off unless severely combat damaged. The plan is to do a running jump to
avoid combat, either to another system or to the other side of this one
(preferably near somewhere we can refuel).

It's an expensive strategy (writing off about a quarter of our cargo
space), but it will keep us out of trouble nine times out of ten. Which
could be a damn fine idea if we are hauling something valuable enough to
make us all rich *if* we can get it to Mora.

>I can not see any cargo with a final sale price of less than 4kcr per ton
>per jump being suficiently profitable to attact busness.  Companies do not
>normal support operation with low proffit margins unless the volume of sales
>is very high.  Like gasoline sales in the US.  VERY high volume but low
>proffit for the retainer compared to other goods.  It all come down to
>return on investment.  

Yep. And what I'm trying to figure out is the return on investment in the
piracy business ... and compare it to something else, like going to another
state with your stolen ship, and hiring yourself out as a Naval Auxilary.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 08:55:08
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: New Austrlia

>From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>5 SDBs
>6 Fer-de-lance
>a pair of 3-5000 DT destroyers from a TL or two back
>70 ramparts
>20 Strike Fighters
>12 modular cutters with modules full of sensors.
>
>there should be more...doesn't Australia have customs cutters or something?
>SAR boats? ASW helicopters? so tack on:
>2-4 Patrol Cruisers
>40-50 assorted small craft (including 5-10 Gunned Gigs, and another 5-10
>ships boats with cargo converted to sensors)
>

Australia's ASW helos go on the destroyers and frigates. I cant remember if
the Fremantle class patrol boats are still in service.

Customs cutters are completely unarmed. Our frigates and destroyers often
pull SAR and fishing patrol duty.

>your anti piracy could work much like this:
>
>Suppose your system mainworld is New Australia :)
>There is a GG named Tasmania with colonies on some of the moons
>
>The only systems within a few jump range are New New Zealand, In-the-Knees,
>New New Guinea, Solomon's Planet, Bjorne, Canal, and Simone :)

You forgot Rimward Samo'a (aka Manu Samo'a). ITK also bought a
only-one-owner, slightly-used navy when Trailing Allemagne merged with
Spinward Allemagne in a friendly takeover. And now cant maintain it. 

>
>Of these only N.N.Z. has high enough pop and Tech to do its own anti piracy
>patrols.
>you have postal union agreements with the high pop high tech worlds on the
>other side though (Nippon New Hong Kong and Sing-pure)

From memory, Fiji has a couple of unarmed patrol boats. And a rugby team.
Me, I'd be more scared of the rugby team (infantry on the other hand ...
there is this story about the Fijians on a UN patrol in Lebannon who
carried maps of the South Pacific to show the locals where they came from).
Oh, btw, the recent Australia-Western Samoa match was a cracker ...
Australia tried to run up the score from five yards out in the last 30
seconds. Not only did the guy not score, he isnt doing much for the next
four to eight weeks either ...

Oh, if you want to pull paperwork piracy, Sing-pure is the place to do it.
As long as they have a veneer of legality, and their people arent getting
burned, they dont give a damn.

>
>Your Parliament wouldn't spring for those orbital forts you wanted, so you
>use your cutters in shifts of 3 to get global coverage (shifts of 4 if you
>use 3d combat) for your mainworld.
>
>The ships boats can do the same for the gas giant.

Oh, I have this great article on the Tasmanian Navy. We had one, at one
point ... a single Torpedo Boat, with four Whitehead torpedos. They
actually launched one in the Derwent, just before the Navy was signed over
with Federation in 1901.

>I think the best solution to keep piracy 'canon' without changing a whole
>bunch of stuff is to increase the incoming jump threshold to 1,000
>diameters (or more) and keep the outgoing threshold where it is at 100
>diameters

Well, something needs to be done, because it just dont work with what we
know about the way technology and society works in Traveller.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:58:57 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Major Race Status

At 13:04 16/10/98 +0100, Timothy Collinson wrote:

>OK, so the Aslan got jump drive from the Solomani, the Solomani got jump
>drive from the Vilani.
>
>It's got to be within the realm of possibility (as Pratchett might say: at
>one end of the probability curve at least), that *none* of the "major"
>races actually developed jump drives themselves.
>
>Anyone any bright ideas what to do about the coyns in that case?

They're obviously a list of species that are going to be allowed the jump
drive ;)

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 11:25:30 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

At 14:32 16/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:

>At 05:18 PM 10/16/98 +1300, you wrote:
>>You don't have to search a 1AU sphere, though. All you need to patrol and
>>search is the 100 dia limit around your homeworld (unless you are using the
>>stellar 100 dia. border as your jump limit), and this can be readily
>>covered by 4-8 vessels even if the world has a size of 'A'.
>>
>
>Assumting the the planet is 5000 mile in diameter.  Then 100 dias. is a
>sphere 505,000 miles in diameter.  Surface area = 4 pi r squared. r =
>252,500 miles.  Surface area = 801,184,666,481.7 square miles. 801 billion
>square miles and you say you can actively scan this area with 4-8 vessels
>looking for a 100 meter object?  Even with 8 ships that 100 billion square
>miles.  What exactly are you using to scan this area?  Lidar is the best
>candidate.  As scan rate increases signal return strength decreases by the
>square of the change plus returned signal strengh is reduce by 4 for each
>doubling of signal travel distance.  Not to mention propagation delay
>problems and space junk blind spots.  I find it very hard to believe that
>any one ship can maitain survelence on 100billion square miles of space and
>that is just the 100 diameter shell much less all the space beyond it the a
>pirate could be in.

OK, I'm talking about the TU here, so I'm using Traveller sensors
(specifically TNE's), but from what I understand these rules understate the
range of passive sensors massively. Anyway a size A planet runs to a little
less than 18,000 km which gives 100 dia as 1,800,000 km. This gives 60
hexes at 30,000 km each. This gives a surface area of about 45,000 hexes. 

A range 16 active EMS has a long range of 64 hexes which is more than 100
diameters, so the sensor array can be in orbit around the mainworld (though
obviously you'd need at least two to avoid the planet blocking the sensors
field of view). If the operator has an asset of 8-9 they'll have a
detection chance of 20% per half-hour turn on a target of 100-999 tons
which has EMM, which gives a 93% chance of being detected within 6 hours
(it's almost certain that they'll have at least this, an asset of 10+ is
more likely and gives a detection chance of at least 25% per turn and a 97%
chance in 6 hours).

A range 8 passive EMS has the same chance on a ship running 'cold' at 8
hexes or an accelerating ship at 32 hexes. IMO while it's nice to be able
to pick up a ship that's loitering before it starts accelerating it's not
really necessary for reasons I'll go into later (besides that's what our
nice big active EMS is for). This gives us a sensor area (cutting through
the sphere) of 200 and 3200 hexes, respectively. If the patrolling vessels
look for accelerating vessels we only need 14 to cover the 100 dia limit,
otherwise we'll need 225. That's ignoring the fact that, IMO, with 14+
patrol vessels (remember I'm using TNE, and thus HEPlaR. I don't know if
this applies with thrusters, but I think so) the would-be pirate is very
likely to have his high signature exhaust pointed towards one of them.

Now about why I think you only need to look for accelerating vessels. To be
an effective pirate you need to capture vessels and/or their cargo, and to
do this you need to match velocities with a victim, or shoot it up to the
point that it can't maneuver so that you can board it later. In the second
case the victim cries for help and you'll never get to board tham, as
they'll be towed into port, so it has to be the former. So all the
authorities need to look for is ships that are on an intercept course with
another ship. Accelerating outside sensor range of the patrols won't work,
because by the time you get to intercept the victim will be so close to the
port you'll never get thenm disabled and the cargo into your ship before
the patrols arrive. Therefore you'll have to accelerate from fairly close by.

Alright assuming that you actually get to board the victim without anyone
else knowing until the victim squealed for help when you shot their drives
out (well nigh impossible). The patrol vessels in orbit (we'll ignore the
perimeter one's because I can't be bothered working out their average
distance) will be within 20 hexes (a reasonable weapon range) in 2.5 hours
(5 turns) at 4 G's, and from that time on need never be outside 20 hexes.
If they want to match velocities and location (so that they can shoot you
without risk to the target) with you it'll take them about 4 hours. Either
way the only way out of this one is to take some hostages onto your ship
and run like hell for the 100 dia limit or make a dangerous jump. You'd
better hope the locals care about your hostages.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #961
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Friday, October 16 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 962



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Piracy
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon 
sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
Re: Piracy
Re: mostly piracy
Tech Limits & Laws of Nature
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Pirate Bases
Re: Margesi/Rhylanor
Re: Physics - Help!
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: Re CinemaKiwi
Re: Request for Comments

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 11:41:34 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 15:18 16/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:

>As for the pirate, he can hide nearly anywhere as lomg as he can beat the
>SDB to the prize.  The 1 AU statement was that he could enter the system
>behind and object like a moon a coast in quitely on Delta V.  To find him
>running silent you have to search everywhere he could be.  His course could
>pass close to known arrival points and he could grab a target of
>oppertunity.  If he was expecting a particullar target he could plan his
>course to put him in the best posible intercept position based on the slop
>facter I mention before.

He doesn't just have to beat the SDB to the prize. He has to get to the
prize (which will be running like hell as soon as either you tell her to
behave or they sense you), board her (possibly after disabling her),
transfer the cargo (or fuel and prize crew the other way), and get the hell
out, all before the SDB gets into gunnery range. Also bear in mind that
even if you do sort your intercept vector out beyond the 100 dia limit the
target will be much closer to home by the time you get there, and you'll
still have to deaccelerate when you are close to the prize. Note that the
SDB doesn't need to deaccelerate nearly as much because he can afford to
overshoot.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:00:09 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon 

>> At 11:07 AM 10/16/98 +0100, you wrote:
>> >-> Council
>> >Rat
>> 
>> Thus a German speaker in the Imperium call would the Zhodani Council the
>> Zhodani Rat? ;-)
>
>Yeah, he would.  But would he use a Cagney accent?
>
SPLURT!!!

ROFL

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:03:35 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

>>by higher TLs they are interferometric arrays, the vis/IR equivalent of a
>>phased array, with each element coherently detecting incoming radiation and
>>assembling them into a sensor picture.

>Similar to the computer corrected compound mirror telescopes.  Good idea.
>Had not thought of that but they are still limited in resolution and
>detection threshold to that of each individual sensor array.  

>This is not true with phased array radio antenas.  They can directly add to
>each other without a thresshold except the natural noise threshold which can
>not be avoided.

>This has to due with the diferences between photons and electrons.  Unless
>or untill, 'light conducters' with effecencies equal to that of copper wire
>conducting electricity and capable of maintaining vissual infomation content
>are invented, it is not posible to directly increase signal strength by
>addative arrays for light as the signal must be converted to another medium
>and in that convertion there is a fixed noise threshold set by the
>converting sensor.  What you would in effect need is multiple mirrors
>looking at the same immage and somehow able to combine their light images
>directly onto a single sensor with out and polarization on phase distortion.

It's not strictly true that you can't increase signal to noise by simple
addition of images from seperate telescopes. For example, if I have 16
1-m telescopes and each takes a digitized picture of the same piece of the 
sky, and I add the 16 images together in software, since each has independent
noise I get an image with 1/sqrt(16)=4 times less noise, or 4 times higher
signal-to-noise, the same as if I had a single 4-meter telescope. 

What you don't get is the same resolution as a 4-meter or larger telescope,
of course, since you're adding the images incoherently. The assumption is 
that at TL10 and above there are indeed "light conductors" and "light
amplifiers" that can maintain the phase information of the seperate arrays
(or that their are electronics fast enough to operate at the frequencies
corresponding to visible light.)


>What does current tech. use to get get arround the limits of apurture size?
>I know that there are ways to create 'artilicial' apurtures by electronicly.
>combining the output of many mirrors but the detection threshold is limited
>to that of the camera used.  This method is normally used to clean up an
>image not to detect what can not be seen by the individual mirrors.  If
>thing have gone beyond this I'd love to know about it.
I'm not quite sure what you mean. Current telescopes can be made with
big pieces of glass (Gemini, VLT) or segmented mirrors (Keck), usually
adding up to one big mirror. In principle (see above) you can combine the
images from several telescopes electronically (or several images from one
telescope in the same fashion.) This provides more sensitivity that you
would get from a single image. The tricky part is getting bigger resolution
than a single dish can provide; most techniques for this ("interferometers")
use mirrors to shuffle the light around coherently.

>It would be easier to use stealth technique to prevent the reflection 
>[of visible sunlight] from
>shining back tward the the target.  The is the way stealth work, some
>absorbtion and the rest is directed and defused away from the potential
>reciever.

My intuition is that this would not generally work, since you can't
guarantee that there won't be a spacecraft on a line-of-sight such
that it sees the reflection of the sun off of you (in the same fashion
that bistatic radars are a problem for stealth aircraft.) Even an instant's
glint would show up, and diffusing it 
into a wider beam is bad since the sun is so amazingly bright...you also
have to keep the specular (diffuse) reflection below 99.99%; overall it
seems to me easier to get a black surface than to do it with mirrors. 
(A mirrored spacecraft would also run into trouble with reflected 
starlight - and with radiating heat, since mirrors are (by definition) poor
radiators.) 


>The best solution is a directed
>(columated) radiator as discribed in the novel "Sun Diver".  The ship was
>cooled by dumping it's heat into a laser.
The laser trick turns out not to work (minor thermodynamic error by
Brin.) In general, ships will try to collimate their waste heat, but they
won't be perfect. Extreme IR masking assumes that 99.99% of the waste heat
goes into collimated beams, which is pretty damn good...

>The problem with remote sensors this widely spaced is time
>lag and syncronization from various locations.  Good computers would be
>required.  The sensors would be very expensive due to the need for high gain
>AND wide area coverage.  You are talking about a system far larger than a
>ship could mount reasonablly due to surface area. 
The remote sensors don't need to be that big (see my other post; a PEMS 13.5,
about 10m2 at TL12, would be quite useful) since the one that detects the
pirate will be close to it.

>>Let us consider a moderate-population TL-12 world. It's main passive
>>sensor array might be a PEMS14.5 on an orbital station
>And this system can scan the entire 100 diameter sphere at that level of
>resolution in how many hours?  How about behind the planet?  It's moon?
It scans the whole sky roughly every few hours (implicitly, sensors are 
scanning the whole sky every 10 minutes or so in a rapid scan perhaps once
an hour and using the rest of the time for a deep scan of limited pieces
of the sky.) 

>>About the only trick the pirate can use to make itself harder to detect
>>in the visible is being on the line of sight to the sun - worth -0.5 to 
>>signature
>The other problem is light and IR glare.  The sun would wash out nearly
>anything that did not have a mirror surface and if you pointed a sensor that
>could detect that pirate at 100 dias in the dark of space the sun would fry
>it with the ammount of power it would collect.

The pirate can't stay in front of the sun's disk for very long if it's
coasting (due to motion of the planet and of sensors orbiting the planet). 
(And even if it is on the disk, a seperate sun-watching telescope will see
it's silouhette.) Near the sun, the glare does indeed make it harder to see
(that's the -0.5 to signature) but not as much as one might think,
since these are space-based sensors and can be optimized for high contrast
and include coronagraphs to block out the sun. Still, the sun case isn't
one I've carefully modelled; perhaps the bonus should be more like -1.

If the pirate uses its engines to stay close to the sun line-of-sight then it 
will be obvious to other sensor platforms in the system.


DustyLV769 writes
>As the rules are now written (T4/T5/GT), piracy does appear to be dead...the
>DSR is the primary culprit for this.  It might be accurate...but is it fun?
My apologies...I didn't *mean* to spoil everyone's fun. I do feel that you
can still use the DSR in a short-range-sensor universe by reducing everyone's
signatures by about a point; the scaling laws will still work pretty well.

Even in CT, however, there was always the problem that the 100-diameter
limit isn't that far away for a 6-G ship - only a couple of hours - which
didn't leave much time for the pirate to capture a ship and jump out.

>As far as I know, there was only one reference to sensors in CT:  a mil-spec
>sensor could detect a vessel out to 2LS, and any sensor can track a target
>once detected to 3LS.

2 LS is halfway to the 100-diameter limit...



Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 12:06:26 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 14:11 16/10/98 EDT, DustyLV769@aol.com wrote:

>As the rules are now written (T4/T5/GT), piracy does appear to be dead...the
>DSR is the primary culprit for this.  It might be accurate...but is it fun?
>As far as I know, there was only one reference to sensors in CT:  a mil-spec
>sensor could detect a vessel out to 2LS, and any sensor can track a target
>once detected to 3LS.  This kind of blows the "SDB's will see you at once and
>respond immedialtly) argument out of the water (source: The Traveller Book)
>Note this does not give an ID of the contact...thats a transponder issue
>(which is somewhere I'M not willing to go <G>)  So how do those SDB's know
you
>are a pirate until you actually attack?  Most merchants will not risk getting
>hurt...it's not thier cargo, they got insurance, etc...they would likely just
>give it up.

2LS is still 33 dia for the biggest possible size A world, so you don't
need a whole lot of CT SDBs to get that effect.


- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:22:35
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: mostly piracy

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
>
>I'd make jump accuracy related to the ships maintainence level, age,
>quallity of charts, and computer power and inversely related to distance
>jumped.  

>say closest distance = (((JnxJn)/comp number) x 100dias. x chart constant x
>years sence maintainence+1 squared)
>

Use <comp number+navigator skill-2>, to make PC skills more important

>so a j4 merchant with a little maintiance due and a comp 4 and basic charts
>would be... (((4X4)/4) x 100 x 4 x (1+1) squared)= 1600dias.
>
>a j1 with good charts and maintaince and comp 4  (((1x1)/4 x 100 x 2 x (1)
>squared = 50 dais.
>
>Hummm....need a little work but... any one got some suggestion?  How about a
>small randomizer?  How could that be added?
>

You would need to cut the time ships are in jump, which has commo time
implications ... you take a long time to get to the mainworld, but you can
squirt off a message to a waiting ship. This will cut commo times in the
Imperium substantially, which I dont think we want.

>Very true.  Remote sensors would be a major problem to a pirate.  You'd have
>to design a non radiator ship powered be batteries to fool the sensors if
>they can 'see' your heat radiator.  

This is one of a lot of good reasons to use batteries. Another one is it
lets you have a peak combat output in a much more cost-effective manner.

>The best solution is a directed
>(columated) radiator as discribed in the novel "Sun Diver".  The ship was
>cooled by dumping it's heat into a laser.

Entropy is a problem. The laser wont be 100% efficient, so running it
creates more heat.

>
>From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:33:20 -0700, "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
>
>>     If Traveller Cannon says there is piracy, then could we please quit
>>trying to prove it could not work and start trying to find out how it did?
>
>I have found it sufficient to cast a critical eye at the assumptions
>designed to prove the piracy can't exist (being able to identify
>before hand which ships are pirate, being able to track them
>after they leave the system, etc.).
>

Gosh. And there was me thinking that big guns and three gees or more of
maneuverability was a dead giveaway, and that people would be keeping
records to stop you chaninging the name of your ship, and selling the
paying passengers into slavery and their baggage and freight as if it was
your own.


>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Piracy
>
>As the rules are now written (T4/T5/GT), piracy does appear to be dead...the
>DSR is the primary culprit for this.  It might be accurate...but is it fun?
>As far as I know, there was only one reference to sensors in CT:  a mil-spec
>sensor could detect a vessel out to 2LS, and any sensor can track a target
>once detected to 3LS.  This kind of blows the "SDB's will see you at once and
>respond immedialtly) argument out of the water (source: The Traveller Book)
>Note this does not give an ID of the contact...thats a transponder issue
>(which is somewhere I'M not willing to go <G>)  So how do those SDB's know
you
>are a pirate until you actually attack?  Most merchants will not risk getting
>hurt...it's not thier cargo, they got insurance, etc...they would likely just
>give it up.
>

Well, it isnt dead ... it's dead around mainworlds. As long as they stick
to chicken-stealing in the outsystem - mugging belters, selling their gear
to other belters, raiding new colonies and not disturbing anyone important,
then I think pirates can make a living.

Now, if the outsystem is dangerous, then development there is going to be
stifled (explaining why all these systems only seem to have one mainworld),
and any Free Traders venturing there are presumably going to be able to ask
hazard rates for freight.

Hmmmm.

>The starship combat system as presented in CT and MT are based on a
>Napoleanics-war style of combat, like the fabulous Honor Harrington novels.
>With TNE and T4 (using DSR esp), it's now more like "Harpoon goes to space".
>

It's actually worse ... modern missiles are at or over sensor range, while
with Trav rules as written, sensor range is well outside the limit that
speed of light lag imposes on combat. My analogy would be
Napoleonic-plus-radar-helos.

>As for the number of ships the navy can field...nowhere have I ever seen
>anyone who accounted for the Fleet Resupply units;  where are all the
tankers,
>ordinance resupply vessels, repair ships, hospital ships, couriers, etc. ?
>These all have to come out of the TCS budgets as well as combatants. BTW,
>ordinance vessels are extremely crucial to lower TL fleets:  missiles are,
>IMHO, the most effective weapons in the game from a cost standpoint.  They
>take no (or very little) power to use;  this is very important at lower TLs.
>But they are ammo-restricted:  The Burke-class DDG is probably the finest
>vessel afloat with full mags; empty, it's a multi-million dollar target.
>
>Is there anyone who has any real-world knowledge of the proportion of
>auxiliaries/non-combatants to combatants today?
>

Well, a Far Trader makes a decent auxilary, and they cost about MCr 0.3 per
dton, as opposed to the about MCr 1 per dton a military ship costs.

Personally, I think the 10% maintainence cost we keep kicking around is 1%
salaries, 2% bureaucracy, 3% actual maintainence and 4% auxilaries and bases.

>DustyLV769@aol.com
>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:35:07 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Tech Limits & Laws of Nature

>*My point was that we can not determine what kinds of storage may or may
>not be possible 3000 years into the future.  If you told someone in 1920
>that they would one day drive around in their ford with a phone, a liar
>would have been the best of the names he/she called you.  Gearhead away,
>but remember you can not always apply the laws of physics used today,
>because in the future they may have been proved wrong.

True, but we can (a) avoid breaking them without a good game reason, and
(b) consider all the implications of the laws we do break.

For example, we have calculated the maximum amount of information we can
theoretically pass through a single fibre. We are still a ways away from
reaching that limit, but it is hard-coded into information theory and
physics. To boost your system past that limit you would have to (i) add
more fibres or (ii) compress your data. 

One must be careful to distinguish between technological limits and
physical limits. To exceed a physical limit one must either change
existing laws, or extend them. For example, there is a limit to how
powerful a chemical explosive we can make, but using non-chemical
explosives we get bigger bombs. Instead of rewriting the 'laws of
chemistry' we have added the 'laws of atomic physics'.

Traveller already _has_ new areas where we can (essentially) write new
laws. Contragravity, jumpspace... But we must examine the implications of
the changes we make, in order to have a consistent game universe.

(I don't care what you do in your game universe, but I like my game
universe to be consistent and as close to known science as possible. Part
of that is the players I have, so can spot scientific goofs or
inconsistencies and milk them extremely quickly. I wish the existing
Traveller universe had had a scientific consultant, I've had to rewrite
many bits of all the adventures because of inconsistencies spotted by my
players.)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 01:41:04 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Jens \"Spacejens\" Rydholm" <spacejens@h72.ryd.student.liu.se>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, Smart, David J (David) wrote:

> Nope. Costner is better than John Belushi.

"Fix the cigarette lighter"
- - Jake Blues, played by John Belushi

Belushi was only really good at playing Jake, but he is (sadly) dead. :-(

+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Jens "Spacejens" Rydholm    http://spacejens.ml.org     |
| jenry023@student.liu.se     Telephone: +46(0)13-4730961 |
| ICQ UIN: 3844745            Linköping, Sweden           |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU ?tc t4 ru ge+ 3i- jt+ a ?st ls kk++ hi+ as++ va++  |
|      ?dr so- zh ?da sy+                                 |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
|               In politics, left is right!               |
+---------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 18:41:59 -0500
From: warlock@imagin.net
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

Bloo replied:
> 
> 
> "Smart, David J (David)" wrote:
> 
> > Bloo posted:
> > >
> > >Costner is _never_ better.
> > >Than anyone.
> > >period.
> >
> > Nope. Costner is better than John Belushi.
> 
> Given that he is dead.  I agree.

My point exactly. Even with Dances With Wolves, I'm clueless
as to what Hollywood sees in Costner.

> Belushi was only really good at being Belushi.

Ah, but what a great Belushi he was.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:56:08
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Pirate Bases

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: Pirate Bases
>
>I'm working on a cost/profit profile for a pirate cruise in the CT
>pre-5th Frontier War Spinward Marches sector, with possible
>operations just across any of the borders. I'm looking to home
>port the example vessel at the Alexin belt (2405 Pax Rulin/Trojan
>Reach) for purposes of annual maintenance - it has a class B
>starport, law level zero and no Impie bases in-system. There is
>a navy base one parsec away, but considering the starport there
>(class E), you're not supposed to be able to support one - this
>"Naval Base" is probably no more than a fueling stop.
>

Cool

>Starport no higher than class C, and the lower the better.
>No Imperial interdiction squadron
>No Imperial bases
>Low population
>Low tech
>Gas giants and/or planetoid belts present
>In a cluster of worlds within jump-1 of each other
>

Thisbe. Trin's Veil 2539. E4305AD-5. It has 2 planetoid belts, 2 gas
giants, pop of 5, tech 5 and government class A. It is a jump-3 from
Wurzburg, a lo-pop planet in Glisten subsector (for an alternate route
home), and has a bunch of lo-pop lo-tech worlds nearby, and *lots* of
asteroid belts in that part of the subsector. Pyramus (TV 2538, E566335-2
214) is also an option.

Dodds is the economically dominant world in that part of Trin's Veil, and
they are TL7.

It is also on the 'safe' edge of the Marches ... most of the 207th Fleet is
going to be up in Lunion subsector, or closer to the Vargr and Zhodani.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:59:15 +0100
From: Simon Early <sre@taz.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Margesi/Rhylanor

> I'm leaning toward the military-base-with-supporting-civilians idea. One interesting
> twist, though, is that the government is a feudal technocracy. Ah, yes, that
> so-hard-to-define type we all love. I will take a stab at it and post the results to
> the list.

If you've read the Honor Harrington books (as many on the TML have) you can imagine 
this as Steadholder Harrington's place - her old Naval contacts ensured that the large 
naval presence continued and the Steading has developed into mostly administrative 
running of franchises (possibly including the shipyard).  Only direct employees of the 
Steadholder are conted in the population, but not transient naval personnel (there are 
1000's at any one time) nor the franchise holders working the ice mining circuit, 
entertainment palaces and various other lucrative businesses that paid for the right.

If we believe Pocket Empires, there is no way 900 people could "afford" a class A 
starport.

Alternative idea: much higher POP before the Fourth Frontier war, when the world was 
attacked.  Due to Steadholder Harrington's foresight in providing the high tech 
equivalent of fallout shelters, hers was the only steading to survive ... the 
shipyards suffered only supperficial damage, and they were vital to the on-going war 
effort.  Over the decades since then, the POP have been leaving when they could and 
the place is dying.  The vast shipyards lie quiet and the once-impressive starport is 
now a cruel reminder of a glorious past.  If it were not for the current tensions, 
there would be no navy base and the world would continue to die.  The current 
Steadholder is trying to revitalise the world, but 900 people can only do so much.  
With service commitments to the naval base, the pop is not self-sustaining ... 
perhaps an immigration drive is in order?


Simon

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:04:51 +1300
From: "Anson Betts" <Lord.High.Executioner@xtra.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Physics - Help!

>Thanks to one and all who replied to my request.
>I really appreciate your helping out.
>
>BTW, "ronon" was a miskey in the article I read. It
>should have been "roton" (I see all the light bulbs
>turning on out there!). This was discovered thanks to
>Dr. Kinsler of the University of Leeds in the U.K. who
>said a roton is "...a quasi-particle carrying angular
>momentum."
>
>(I *love* the Web!)


80% of all things on the Web are false!
Sourced from an anonymous site on the web...

Cheers,
 Anson

I want to die in my sleep like my grandfather,
not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car
.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:14:55 +1300
From: "Anson Betts" <Lord.High.Executioner@xtra.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

Why not invent some slang terms? Here are my humble suggestions,

>Spaceport
>Starport

Port  'My friend, you can find him at port, sailing for...'


>Highport

Up   'Jim's up at the moment. Try his cellphone.'

>Downport


Port  'Mary is at the port meeting with a trader..'

>Base


Home   'We'll hit home in just under 3 hours, if our LS gear lasts that
long...'

>Company

>Corporation


The boss (or Bruce?) 'Yeah I'd like to help you out, but Bruce won't let
me...'

>Also, words for governmental bodies, ie:
>
>Assembly
>Parliament
>Legislature
>Council
>Bureau
>Administration
>   etc.


Them, they etc 'Watch it or they'll get you.'


>Traveller GMs could then combine these terms with proper nouns, adjectives,
>whatever (easily found in dictionaries) to produce plausible names for
>ports, corporations, governmental bodies, etc. Thus, we might be able to
>get away from a universe full of worlds settled by English speakers, as
>suggested by names like, say, "Cornwallis Downport".
>
>Certainly, inventing names in foreign languages can be iffy, and the
>results will often be technically wrong. Fortunately, the game takes place
>thousands of years in the future, so one can always blame linguistic drift.
>:)
>
>Comments?
>
Just make it up as you go :)

Cheers,
 Anson

I want to die in my sleep like my grandfather,
not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:21:01 +1300
From: "Anson Betts" <Lord.High.Executioner@xtra.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Re CinemaKiwi

>At least, unlike disney, Herculese, Xena, Sinbad, Kull, etc are OBVIOUSLY
>NOT Historical. Disney at one point put that abomination "Pocohontus" onto
>their Historical Films List (Prerelease)... The only thing they got right
>was the list of names.
>
>William F. Hostman


It's surprising how few people know that Pocahontus was only 12 when he got
hold of her...
Sick b^$!^rd.

Cheers,
 Anson

I want to die in my sleep like my grandfather,
not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:32:52 +1300
From: "Anson Betts" <Lord.High.Executioner@xtra.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Request for Comments

>Hello all,

Hi :)

>I've just been struck with an idea for another milieu, The Fourth
>Imperium, or ROM2.
>
>Starting, oh, about 2000 or so (using the 3I calender), it is the result
>of vigorous expansion of Terrans to fill in the void left by the
>Rebellion and Virus.  A couple of conditions.
>
>1)  Virus has left the Terrans with a bad taste for high automation.  As
>such ships typically have higher crew requirements.


I can see that, yep.

>2)  Psionics are in use, though not common among people.  The 4th Imp
>makes serious use of 'psi cops' and in military uses.  This is _NOT_ a
>kinder, gentler Imperium.  Psi is also used for system interfaces, as to
>help prevent a recurrence of the Virus incident.

I've always like psionics, my players don't seem to impliment them much,
they say thet psionics are useless. But form my point they just aren't
trying to use them. So many opportunities, so little use :(

>3)  The 4I is still expanding beyond the old Solomani Rim sector, using
>both economic and military aggression.


This reminds me of Path of Tears and Smash and grab...

>4)  I'm not sure what to do with the alien races, I'd love some comments
>on that.


Aliens don't have to be non-human... Give them thier own kingdoms, let them
rule with thier own values. At the risk of quoting something somebody said
on this list (sorry but I don't remember your name) give them thier own
customs and values, like the Aztecs. They had a game where if you won then
you got the privalige of being sacraficed to the gods, you were to be with
the god for all eternity. Kind of a high praise kind of thing. You don't
have to go that far but let cultures develop something unique to them. If
the rainy seaon comes on the full moon due to funny orbits and that then the
moon can become a god. Work out something about the world and then develop
an idea behind it, works for me :)

>5)  The 4I rules like the 3I, but with a firmer grip, using hand picked
>governors and viceroys.  The psi cops make this easier.


Sounds kind of nasty, what about the underground? those with Psi skills who
use them to block out the gov guys, that would be a cool character to play,
sort of Paranoiaish.

>6)  Not sure what to do about the Zho's.

Make them happy, give them thier own playground :P

>7)  The 4I uses high tech, TL 17, but tries to limit subject worlds to
>no more than TL 12 or so.


Sounds easy but kind of hard to stop. Look at customs here on earth, they
can't stop illicit material from being imported, sure they get some of it
and look effective. When you can hide the specs to any kind of item you wish
to mention on a microdot no bigger than a pinhead the only limitation
becomes the availability opf the materials, and then there is the black
market.

>Anyone, please respond with ideas.
>
>Thanks in advance.
>
Cheers,
 Anson

I want to die in my sleep like my grandfather,
not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #962
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Saturday, October 17 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 963



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re Pirates and MT and Sensors
Re: Margesi/Rhylanor
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: Piracy
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: Piracy
Sensors and piracy
Taint of the Week
Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
Re: Lucan
Re: Lucan
Re: Archival Materials
Re: Lucan
Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)
Re: High Tech troops
Starship crewing levels (was Re: Piracy)
Re: Interstellar trade (Was: Piracy)
Intelligence ships (was Re: Pirate Bases)
Re: mostly piracy
The Imperial fleet and auxiliaries (Re: mostly piracy)
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:39:00 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Pirates and MT and Sensors

>> >> TL 15, with 140-200 MCr in computer/sensor array alone? Again, you'd best
>>be an enemy warship to explain this one.
>>
>>This is one of the things I didn't necessarily like about MTrav...a top-of-
>>the-line sensor suite was dirt cheap:  At most MCr 5.  The priciest items
>>would seem likely to be the hull, j-drives, and the afore-mentioned computer.
>>The whole ship doesn't have to be TL15, just certain parts of it (canonical
>>examples exist)
>
>  I'm afraid that I'm not conversant with MT ship design; what holds for HG
>may not apply there. Power was the main factor in pre-TL 15 HG warships.
>
>
MT, the main concerns were space and weight, with power being (generally)
just below that. MT costs per unit effect were generally comparable with
HG. MT starship combat WAS HG, with merely a different way to get there,
and enough data to use the strikeresque vehicle combat system.

Sensors in MT are relatively cheap; due to a different jump-fuel
calculation than all other editions (5 times J-drive volume), jump fuel ran
10-35% of hull, rather than 10-60 (J1 to J6 figures shown). Jump and
Maneuver percentages were the same.

Comparing priates in MT allows much more viability (with the sensor rule
extensions in WBH), detection is fairly easy at ranges out to about 100Mm
(100kkm), and goes down radically from there, assuming no stealth. Small
(400t) pirates can have a good chance of evading detection, can carry
enough cargo and weapons to be a threat, and dedicated "Long-Legs" can be
built as EF's (Escort, Fast) 2j6 performance takes 77% of hull volume (7%
for J6, and 2x 35% for 2 j6 fuel) , can operate on 12 pc per 3 weeks, and
requires small staterooms, few weapons, and no cargo, and one week
layovers. Adding 1G adds 3%. Crew-stations are based upon required control
points. (yes, I'm getting to the point) In one game, some legitimate
"starmercs" built some 2j4 EF's on 400 Td Needle AF hulls (match the patrol
cutter). They replaced the barbettes with cargo space, went to bunks rather
than SR's, and a good sensor suite,and 6G. They were able to outrun or
outgun almosty everything, and could jump in, wait, and still jump out.

In MT, due to the much lower jump fuel requirements, pirates can jump in
and still be able to jump out even with relatively high jump numbers. If
they can capture a ship on an in-system route (there would be in-system
trade and travel, and while some would use jump, most wouldn't), the parts
value and potential cargos can be sold elsewhere. Add a stop by a GG for
frontier refuel, and they can be anywhere within 8 Pc in two weeks.

MT made pirates viable by rules mechanics, then created a background where
they could and would flourish. I felt that this is important to understand
when MT sources come up.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:48:55 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Margesi/Rhylanor

Simon Early wrote:

> If we believe Pocket Empires, there is no way 900 people could "afford" a class A
> starport.

Remember that the population in the UPP is only
the _permanent_ population.  The transient population
could be orders of magnitude higher.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:50:58 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

Anson Betts wrote:

> Just make it up as you go :)
>

I have a complete inability to make up names for things
and people as an gaming sessions goes.  Its so pathetic.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 17:54:37 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Just for the record, the CT rules also state that a ship that is lying doggo
can escape detection until something like 100,000 miles (don't have the
books with me, but I remember it from my long discussions on the subject
with Hans.)

Remember, that when we are discussing piracy, we are *not* talking about
Class A, B or even C starports...we are talking about Class D and E
starports.

douglas

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!
- -----Original Message-----
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Friday, October 16, 1998 4:54 PM
Subject: Re: Piracy


>At 14:11 16/10/98 EDT, DustyLV769@aol.com wrote:
>
>>As the rules are now written (T4/T5/GT), piracy does appear to be
dead...the
>>DSR is the primary culprit for this.  It might be accurate...but is it
fun?
>>As far as I know, there was only one reference to sensors in CT:  a
mil-spec
>>sensor could detect a vessel out to 2LS, and any sensor can track a target
>>once detected to 3LS.  This kind of blows the "SDB's will see you at once
and
>>respond immedialtly) argument out of the water (source: The Traveller
Book)
>>Note this does not give an ID of the contact...thats a transponder issue
>>(which is somewhere I'M not willing to go <G>)  So how do those SDB's know
>you
>>are a pirate until you actually attack?  Most merchants will not risk
getting
>>hurt...it's not thier cargo, they got insurance, etc...they would likely
just
>>give it up.
>
>2LS is still 33 dia for the biggest possible size A world, so you don't
>need a whole lot of CT SDBs to get that effect.
>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:14:30 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

steve daniels wrote:
> 
> Anson Betts wrote:
> 
> > Just make it up as you go :)
> >
> 
> I have a complete inability to make up names for things
> and people as an gaming sessions goes.  Its so pathetic.
> 
> Bloo

In that case, make lists of names for people, places, and things between
game sessions, when you have plenty of time to think, and have it
ready-to-hand when you run your game.  During the session, just use the
next (or most appropriate-sounding) name on the list, jot down the
association, and cross it out.  (Don't let the players _see_ you using
the list, though!  ;-)

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:33:19 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Douglas Glatz wrote:
> 
> Just for the record, the CT rules also state that a ship that is lying doggo
> can escape detection until something like 100,000 miles (don't have the
> books with me, but I remember it from my long discussions on the subject
> with Hans.)
> 
Book 2, page 33.  It also states that "ships in orbit around a world and
also maintaining complete silence cannot be detected at distances
greater than 10,000 miles."  (ibid, page 33.)

> Remember, that when we are discussing piracy, we are *not* talking about
> Class A, B or even C starports...we are talking about Class D and E
> starports.
> 
If you use the LBB encounter table, we _are_ talking about Class A and B
(and, to a lesser extent, C) starports.  [From Book 2, page 36] On a 2d
roll of 12, you encounter a pirate.  DMs are as follows:  Class A port,
+6; Class B port, +4; Class C port, +2; Class D port, +1; Class E port,
- -2; Class X port, -4.  In other words, you have a 13.9% chance of
encountering a pirate at a Class A [roll 8 exactly; 5/36 chance] or
Class B [roll 6 exactly; 5/36 chance] starport, an 8.3% chance [roll 10
exactly; 3/36 chance] at a Class C starport, a 5.6% chance [roll 11
exactly; 2/36 chance] at a Class D starport, and no chance at all at a
Class E or Class X starport.  Pretty ugly for the well-developed worlds,
eh?  Especially when you consider that you have a 41.7% chance [8+ on
2d] of the pirate being a Type C cruiser!

> douglas
> 
<<snip>>
> >

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 21:45:55 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Sensors and piracy

How hard is it to blind IR sensors?

If you took your shipboard lasers (from a long way out... beyond the usual
weapon ranges) and played them over the regions where the enemy IR sensors
are, wouldn't you heat up those sensors some?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 22:21:14 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: Taint of the Week

>This could solve the problem of 'taint of the week' when dealing
>with many of the UWP's in Traveller. Few of the planets may
>actually have an endemic taint, but a localized one around the
>centers of population.

Actually, it should be quite common for an atmosphere to have an endemic
taint. The kind of taint will depend on the atmospheric  composition, which
will depend heavily on the worlds's size, density, and water content. Give
me a week or two and I'll generate some rules for atmospheric composition
and taint, based on my Planetology 101 posts and material in World Tamer's
Handbook.
  

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 21:28:28 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)

On 10/16/98 at 07:18 PM,  Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> said:

>I'd make jump accuracy related to the ships maintainence level, age,
>quallity of charts, and computer power and inversely related to
>distance jumped.  It make sence to make a ships jumping 4 have more
>inaccuracy than a jump 1.  The jump 4 ship has more gravity wells to
>have to figure into their flight path.

>say closest distance = (((JnxJn)/comp number) x 100dias. x chart
>constant x years sence maintainence+1 squared)

>so a j4 merchant with a little maintiance due and a comp 4 and basic
>charts would be... (((4X4)/4) x 100 x 4 x (1+1) squared)= 1600dias.

>a j1 with good charts and maintaince and comp 4  (((1x1)/4 x 100 x 2
>x (1) squared = 50 dais.

So, how far out from the system primary is your j4 merchant going to
come out?  Don't tell me that you aren't going to include the star
into your calculations.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 21:42:55 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Lucan

On 10/16/98 at 04:43 PM,  "Shade" <jwatts@catt.com> said:

>I have always pictured Lucan as the young Roddy McDowall ( protraying
>Augustus ) in Cleopatra.

>Generally, I have also protrayed him as just slightly less sane than
>the average person ( to put it mildly ).  I have him randomly
>shooting generals.  I have characters who have to pay him visits in
>the night to bring messages find him lounging in bed with children. 
>I've had him speak to people who werent there.  I have him come up
>with brilliant military strategy only to bungle it if he personally
>takes command.  

>Simply.... he is Nero, Caligula, Richard III ( Shakespeare's version
>) and Hitler all rolled into one.  

That's my take too.  As for who should play him...young *any* aged
Roddy McDowall would be good.  So would whoever the actor was that
played Caligula in "I Cladius"...he's *somebody*, but I can't
remember who.  Of course, Mike Meyers would fit the part.  Or Jon
Lovits, yeah Jon Lovits would be perfect...chubby, funny, but
capable of playing someone dangerously, strangely, insane.


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:06:53 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Lucan

At 09:42 PM 10/16/98 -0500, you wrote:

>>Simply.... he is Nero, Caligula, Richard III ( Shakespeare's version
>>) and Hitler all rolled into one.  
>
>That's my take too.  As for who should play him...young *any* aged
>Roddy McDowall would be good.  So would whoever the actor was that
>played Caligula in "I Cladius"...he's *somebody*, but I can't
>remember who.  Of course, Mike Meyers would fit the part.  Or Jon
>Lovits, yeah Jon Lovits would be perfect...chubby, funny, but
>capable of playing someone dangerously, strangely, insane.

Jon Lovitz already has experience playing the crazed emperor part...Anyone
remember his performance as "Todd" in _Mom and Dad Save the Universe_?



Kurt Feltenberger
kurt@blazenet.net


------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 22:46:40 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: Archival Materials

At 02:32 pm 10/16/98 +0000, you wrote:
>left out to save cost.  A pocket computer will have a keyed
recharger.  A
>jump drive's power connections will be plainly marked but otherwise
not
>protected.  A car battery is plainly marked (at least when new) but
there is
>nothing like a physical key to prevent you from hooking up your
jumper
>cables backwards.

	*Jumper* cables? A friend I work with recently had the pleasure of
no car, as her (electrical engineer) husband installed a new battery
with the cables swapped, noticed the sparking/smoke from under the
hood when he started it, and put the cables the right way. Didn't
mention it to her until they were driving somewhere and the ABS light
would go out ... "Oh, maybe that explains the sparks under the hood."
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 22:55:51 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: Lucan

At 12:06 am 10/17/98 -0400, you wrote:
>At 09:42 PM 10/16/98 -0500, you wrote:
>
>>>Simply.... he is Nero, Caligula, Richard III ( Shakespeare's
version
>>>) and Hitler all rolled into one.  
>>
>>That's my take too.  As for who should play him...young *any* aged
>>Roddy McDowall would be good.  So would whoever the actor was that
>>played Caligula in "I Cladius"...he's *somebody*, but I can't
>>remember who.  Of course, Mike Meyers would fit the part.  Or Jon
>>Lovits, yeah Jon Lovits would be perfect...chubby, funny, but
>>capable of playing someone dangerously, strangely, insane.
>
>Jon Lovitz already has experience playing the crazed emperor
part...Anyone
>remember his performance as "Todd" in _Mom and Dad Save the
Universe_?

	Mmmm .... Kathy Ireland ....
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

   I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too
   much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:57:27 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)

From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>


>AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPERIAL NAVY IN THE CLASSIC ERA
>===================================================
>
>Main sources: _Fighting Ships_, _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and
_Rebellion_.
>
>NUMBER AND TYPE OF SHIPS
>
>_Rebellion_ p. 27 states that each sector of the Imperium theoretically has
a
>group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships. This number includes combat
vessels
>such as cruisers, carriers, battleships, and _some_ escorts (emphasis
mine).
>It does not include auxiliaries, support ships, and scouts.
>
>The first ambiguity lies in just what kinds of escorts are included in the
1000
>ship figure and what kinds are not. Are the 5,000 T _Sloan_ class escorts
so
>big that they are counted, or is there a class of escorts smaller than a
>light cruiser (30,000 T ships), but bigger than Sloans?



Yes. _Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium_ (FSSI) has several,
including the 10,000 ton ED-15 Escort Destroyer and the 20,000 ton EF-15
Escort Fleet.


>The second ambiguity is whether battleriders are included in the figure or
>not. I would have preferred that they were not, but the one detailed
squadron
>I know of (the 154th Battle Rider Squadron described in SMC) clearly
implies
>that they are.


FSSI implies this too, showing two different flavors of BatRons -- "Typical"
and a "Battle Rider"


[snip]


>Possibly this means that the squadrons are combat vessels _plus_ escorts
and
>that the 125 ship figure includes auxiliaries. This would give us a navy of
>20,000 combat vessels and a like number of auxiliaries.



It says in the _Rebellion Sourcebook_ (RS) explicitly:

"Squadrons consist of two or more ships of the same type and class, plus any
supporting ships which can provide support, escort, or reinforcement.
Supporting ships are usually not involved in the tactical operations of the
squadron and are often ignored when figuring ship totals.

"Large squadrons will have many auxiliary ships; depending on strategic and
tactical needs, they may be refueling ships, troop shuttles, fleet couriers
and courier tenders, command ships, intelligence processing ships,
transports, or repair stations." (RS, pg. 28)

In the FSSI, the Imperial Squadron Organization diagrams seem to indicate
that auxiliaries are considered part of the squadrons. For example, the
"typical" BatRon contains 4 battleships, 1 tanker, 2 transports, 3 scouts,
and 2 auxiliaries (although I am unsure whether the symbols are supposed to
represent individual ships or "elements" of two or more ships).


>However, FS states that CruRons are generally of 4 to 8 ships and the
examples
>in it implies that 8 ship BatRons are the norm. (Also, I seem to remember
>squadrons of non-combat vessels mentioned somewhere, but I can't recall the
>references).



In FSSI, there is a TankRon, which consists of a cruiser, 4 scouts, 2
transports, 2 auxiliaries, and 4 escorts (or an equal ratio of "elements").


>Possibly the 2-squadron fleets and 25-ship squadrons are rare and almost
all
>fleets have 8-10 squadrons with almost all squadrons running to between 8
and
>20 ships (half combat vessels and half escorts). With an average of about 9
>squadrons per fleet and 14 ships per squadron we'll get about 20,000 combat
>vessels and the same number of escorts. This still leave the pure auxiliary
>squadrons like tanker squadrons and patrol squadrons (PatRons ;-)
unaccounted
>for, but it's a start.


A typical squadron looks to be about 12 ships, with TankRons and CruRons
(Carrier) having 17 ships (actually, 10 of the "ships" in a Carrier CruRon
are fighter wings).



[snip]


The biggest problem I am having with this assessment is the sentence "Each
sector of the Imperium *theoretically* [emphasis mine] has a group of fleets
numbering about 1,000 ships."

I find it very vague; what the heck does "theoretically" mean in this
context? If it means "If we divided the number of ships we have by the
number of sectors we have a presence in," then that's even *more* than the
20,000 ships Hans has posited (the Imperium has a presence in 27 Sectors
according to the MT _Imperial Encyclopedia_). Of course, I know Hans likes
to be conservative with his numbers, so ... :-)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 23:17:52 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: High Tech troops

>From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
>Subject: Re: High Tech troops
...
>> Would low-tech planets in the Imperium do this kind of thing?
>> Buy tiny amounts of high-tech gear instead of massive amounts
>> of locally-produced gear? I think in most cases the answer would
>> have to be yes.
>
>Makes it easier to put on a wargame table, anyway.

  What - is there something wrong with using one figure per hull for
divisional actions? :>

...
>the field. Higher TL vehicles *may* be more reliable, though.

  Presumably solid state (and for AG low running temperature) gear is
_much_ more reliable than current turbines - which would themselves
be much more reliable if built with higher TL materials and designs
but well below bleeding edge performance levels; this pronounced
trade-off of performance for cost and maintenance has a lot of uses
as outlined by Mr. Whitchurch.

...
>something else. With no need to bother with long range sensors or life
>support, a grav tank in atmosphere can beat an SDB the same way an SDB can
>beat a  starship.

  Book 4 states that pretty explicitly; grav tanks fade into gunships
somewhere above 14 Dt, and gunboats take over the nomenclature at 200+.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 23:17:57 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Starship crewing levels (was Re: Piracy)

...
><< Do the numbers. Military ships in Traveller do not need that many crew,  >>
>
>This is not necessarily true...I doubt if very many individuals, when
>designing thier vessels, take into account manning for 3 watches (I know I
>usually don't), and there is always casualty replacements (frozen watch
>usually). GT addresses this a little bit, I believe.

  If crew levels under Books 2 and 5 need to be tripled then this is the 
biggest piece of Trav errata yet (AFAIK) and the longest undiscovered :>

  Presumably the crew levels represent a single full shift (and some extra
slop?) with only minimal crew at stations most of the time.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:19:37 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Interstellar trade (Was: Piracy)

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Interstellar trade (Was: Piracy)
...
>The problem as I see it is that pirates are canon so we are left to explaon
>them as best we can with little information.  For the pirate to exist their
>mush be crack for them to hide in.  The random incouter charts make them
...
>2)  Pirates can hide from sensor in system and jump out after they attack
>with a reasonable chance for escape.

  I can buy this one real easy if it's not near the main world, especially
if not a Hi-Pop system.

...
>4)  There are so many merchant ships that the pirates have little trouble
>picking a safe target and the SDB have trouble protecting all of them.

  It appears to be less about numbers of targets than the size of the
danger zones - 100 planetary diameters isn't large enough to stretch
the patrollers past the breaking point in most cases; the outer system
elicits a sharp <twang>, OTOH...

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:19:42 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Intelligence ships (was Re: Pirate Bases)

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: Pirate Bases
...
>you will have no pirates. I realize this creates a security problem for
>the Imperium regarding enemy spy ships - but consider that a spy
>ship would have to be small and furtive, and that anything it finds
>out will take months or more to get to anyone's ears. I'm not sure
>how secret the location of the 83rd CruRon six months ago needs
>to be.

  I've been wondering about this, and I'm currently assuming that the
main role of intelligence ships will be to conduct cruises, collecting
data intended to check the accuracy of or supplement other strategic
estimates. This assumes small, quiet intel ships, but the alternative
of purpose built intruders poking about until forced to jump back to
a sanitized refuelling site is pretty limited without some very weird
logistics arrangements.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 00:19:47 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: mostly piracy

>From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
>Subject: Re: mostly piracy
...
>Gosh. And there was me thinking that big guns and three gees or more of
>maneuverability was a dead giveaway, and that people would be keeping
>records to stop you chaninging the name of your ship, and selling the
>paying passengers into slavery and their baggage and freight as if it was
>your own.

  What have you got against capitalism? :>

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 02:13:19 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: The Imperial fleet and auxiliaries (Re: mostly piracy)

- -----Original Message-----
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>


>>From: DustyLV769@aol.com

>>As for the number of ships the navy can field...nowhere have I ever seen
>>anyone who accounted for the Fleet Resupply units;  where are all the
>tankers,
>>ordinance resupply vessels, repair ships, hospital ships, couriers, etc. ?


[snip]

>>Is there anyone who has any real-world knowledge of the proportion of
>>auxiliaries/non-combatants to combatants today?
>>
>
>Well, a Far Trader makes a decent auxilary, and they cost about MCr 0.3 per
>dton, as opposed to the about MCr 1 per dton a military ship costs.
>
>Personally, I think the 10% maintainence cost we keep kicking around is 1%
>salaries, 2% bureaucracy, 3% actual maintainence and 4% auxilaries and
bases.


Actually, budget figures aren't exactly necessary when answering this
question. It says in the _Rebellion Sourcebook_ that "Each sector of the
Imperium theoretically has a group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships.
This number includes combat vessels ... [but] does not include auxiliaries,
support ships, and scouts." (RS, pg. 27)

Now not getting too much into what "theoretically" means (I think it means
that 1000 = total number IN combat vessels/number of Imperial sectors), you
have a stated figure of about 1,000 combat vessels per sector (regular and
reserve IN, including Colonial fleets) *in addition to* an undetermined
number of system squadrons (SDBs) that are owned by individual worlds.

The number of auxiliaries/non-combatants is irrelevant to the question of
how many combatant ships are available, since we already knoe many combat
ships are available (about 1,000/sector, not counting SDBs).

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 05:54:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: neo@total.net
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

Many hanks to Volker, Tommy, Timothy, Guillem and Jonas for getting this
lexicon off the ground. Interesting responses, all. We've got German,
Norwegian, Spanish, and Swedish. It would be nice to get some non-European
languages as well, but I suspect there aren't too many of those spoken by
members of this list.

Timothy Collinson said:

>I must confess that this is one reason I haunt old second hand bookshops as
>they are an excellent source of dictionaries and grammar books that serve
>really well in this sort of situation. 
>Besides, a shelf of 50 odd language dictionaries/grammars/phrase books is a
>great conversation starter!  (And you never know what language the
>conversation might be in.)

Sounds like a great writer's resource! I've only just recently started
collecting language dictionaries, exactly for this purpose. One slightly
odd book I've found is _The Concise Dictionary of Twenty-Six Languages in
Simultaneous Translations_, compiled by Peter M. Bergman. It provides
translations for only 1000 words, but in 26 languages.

I'm also collecting lexicons off the Web. Lots of dictionaries out there.
Unfortunately they tend not to include really useful terms such as
"starport" (gosh, why not?), hence my request for translations here.

Best, 

Glenn 

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <neo@total.net>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
    "Sex times Technology equals The Future." -- J.G. Ballard

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #963
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Saturday, October 17 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 964



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))
Re: Roswell jump
Equipment and the future
Names and Naming (was Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon)
Re: Piracy and Fleet Economics
Re: Names and Naming (was Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon) 
Re: Lucan
Re: Piracy and Fleet Economics 
Re: Major Race Status 
Re: Lucan
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon (long)
Re: Roswell jump
Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
Re: Request for Comments 
Re: Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 23:25:19 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))

In mail you write:

>>And (in the Definitive Sensor Rules written to go with FFS2) you can do 
> better
>>by (as you suggest) radiating all heat away from the sensor. However, that
>>only really works if the sensor is only in one direction. If there are 4-6
>>fixed sensor platforms out at 100 diameters, they'll see the pirate as it
>>goes by and enters the 100 diameter sphere...
>>
>
> Very true.  Remote sensors would be a major problem to a pirate.  You'd have
> to design a non radiator ship powered be batteries to fool the sensors if
> they can 'see' your heat radiator.  The best solution is a directed
> (columated) radiator as discribed in the novel "Sun Diver".  The ship was
> cooled by dumping it's heat into a laser.  That laser could then be directed
> into deep space and thus undetectable disposal of the heat if this tech.
> exist in the TU.

It can't exist anywhere. Laser light is *low* (almost *zero*) entropy.
Heat is very high entropy. Thus you *cannot* convert heat to laser
light without creating far more heat than you send away. The trick in
Sundiver isn't allowed by the laws of thermodynamics.

In fact, you have the problem that your *effective* radiator area is
equal to the area of the cone of radiation at the closest point to the
ship. So the narower the emission cone, the smaller the area, and thgus
the higher the radiator temp. 

Thus there are some rather tight limits on how stealthy you can get.

> The problem with remote sensors this widely spaced is time
> lag and syncronization from various locations.  Good computers would be
> required.  The sensors would be very expensive due to the need for high gain
> AND wide area coverage.  You are talking about a system far larger than a
> ship could mount reasonablly due to surface area.  I think the cost and
> maintain costs would rule this out for pourer and lower tech worlds.

Huh? A ship using limited area radiators for stealth will be a
*spotlight* in the IR in the cone it *does* radiate into. That's
because when you limit the radiating area by (say) 50%, the
*temperature* goes up a lot faster. And thus, so does the IR
"brightness" of the ship in those directions.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 23:35:51 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Roswell jump

In mail you write:

>    Check out "The Day After Roswell" by Lt. Colonel Phillip J. Corso.  I
> saw this on the new release shelf at Barnes & Noble a few months ago.
> Personally, I'm waiting for the paperback before I buy it. 
> According to the dust jacket notes, Lt. Col. Corso, formerly of Army
> Intelligence, asserts that a UFO did go down at Roswell in 1947.  The
> government has been studying it and has leaked ideas to think tanks over
> the years.  Ideas that have lead to things like silicon based computer
> chips and fiber optic data transmission.

Only problem is that both of those are firmly based on stuff done
*before* Roswell. Fiber optics is just taking the old idea of "light
pipes" farther. And transistors were discovered *before* Roswell.

The fact is, if an advanced spacraft *did* fall into our hands, we
*couldn't* figure out anything that was more than *one* TL in advance
of what we had at the time. 

If you don't think so, just consider the effect of dropping
spaceraft/aircraft built with current technology back into the 50s.
They wouldn't be able to figure it out!

John W Campbell did a couple of editorials on the topic, both involving
dropping a mid 60s recon drone back into the mid 30s. 

Poul Anderson did an article in the mid 50s going over the problems
we'd have getting alien technology to work even *with* their help. To
start with, the stuff won't be calibrated in volts, watts, meters, etc.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 15:21:43 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Equipment and the future

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, Bruce Johnson wrote:

>Leo Hale wrote:
>
>> My point is that the items you picked nits with are in todays
>> equipment, not necessarily in the equipment from 3000 years into the
>> future.
>
>Unfortunately, those nits are based on very real and unchanging physical
>principles.
>

Remember that these physical principles are theories that we assume are
true, and that we have found no evidence against. Other races may have 
other approches that give other results at certain points ( for example
at singularities) that they can exploit.

>Bruce Johnson

Tommy Grav
- -------------------------------------------------------------
tommy.grav@astro.uio.no     http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/  
Institute of Astrophysics, UiO, No  
IMTU tn++t4+tg+ ru+ge++ !3i jt+au+st+ls hi++dr-so++zh-sy-sw++ 
 

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 07:50:18 -0600
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com>
Subject: Names and Naming (was Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon)

>
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:14:30 -0500
>From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
>Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
>
>In that case, make lists of names for people, places, and things between
>game sessions, when you have plenty of time to think, and have it
>ready-to-hand when you run your game.  During the session, just use the
>next (or most appropriate-sounding) name on the list, jot down the
>association, and cross it out.  (Don't let the players _see_ you using
>the list, though!  ;-)

Newspapers in major cities sometimes run full-page public announcements
that are lists of names, for things like evidence not claimed after the
case is closed or small refund checks due to people with no forwarding
address. I snag these, then mix up first and last names, crossing them off
as I use them.  Works for Solomani, which is what I have in my campaign.

There is also a role-playing aid, "The Everyone Everywhere List", from
Magic and Tactics Unlimited.  It is nothing but name lists, from 35
nationalities or historical periods.  It retails for $5, and worth every
bit of it.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 23:52:10
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Fleet Economics

>From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
>Subject: Re Pirates and MT and Sensors
>
>MT made pirates viable by rules mechanics, then created a background where
>they could and would flourish. I felt that this is important to understand
>when MT sources come up.
>

Far more important for my money is that in MegaTraveller, the things that
made piracy impossible - a strong fleet, a stable Imperium and a
functioning bureaucracy - no longer existed.

The bigger problem I see for merchants in the Shattered Imperium isnt so
much the pirates as the risk of getting signed up as part of a fleet at
meson gun point.

On the flip side, you could stop making bank payments with pretty close to
impunity, if you were outside a Safe.

>From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>

>>Personally, I think the 10% maintainence cost we keep kicking around is 1%
>>salaries, 2% bureaucracy, 3% actual maintainence and 4% auxilaries and
>bases.
>
>
>Actually, budget figures aren't exactly necessary when answering this
>question. It says in the _Rebellion Sourcebook_ that "Each sector of the
>Imperium theoretically has a group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships.
>This number includes combat vessels ... [but] does not include auxiliaries,
>support ships, and scouts." (RS, pg. 27)
>

This might be true, but I want to cast a careful eye over canon, so GMs can
make an informed decision on the bits that dont make sense, or we can tweak
the rules so that they can allow the canonical background.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:36:39 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Names and Naming (was Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon) 

> >In that case, make lists of names for people, places, and things between
> >game sessions, when you have plenty of time to think, and have it
> >ready-to-hand when you run your game.  During the session, just use the
> >next (or most appropriate-sounding) name on the list, jot down the
> >association, and cross it out.  (Don't let the players _see_ you using
> >the list, though!  ;-)
> 
> Newspapers in major cities sometimes run full-page public announcements
> that are lists of names, for things like evidence not claimed after the
> case is closed or small refund checks due to people with no forwarding
> address. I snag these, then mix up first and last names, crossing them off
> as I use them.  Works for Solomani, which is what I have in my campaign.
> 
> There is also a role-playing aid, "The Everyone Everywhere List", from
> Magic and Tactics Unlimited.  It is nothing but name lists, from 35
> nationalities or historical periods.  It retails for $5, and worth every
> bit of it.

I used to use phone books for NPC's names.  A couple baby name books help, 
too.  For place names, it gets a bit trickier; if you use simular place names 
on two close by planets, it takes a bit of the 'alien' feel from them.  For 
instance, I named the shallow ocean east of Ambercrombie, Grendal (the main 
city there) the Steelsheen, since its blue would be greyed a bit when seen 
from orbit.  I won't use 'Steesheen Ocean' any time soon, but I *might* use it 
on some place a few parsecs away, prolly as 'Steelsheen Bay'.

FWIW, my players (both groups of them) are wandering around on Steelsheen 
Ocean on Grendal at the moment, one group as survivers of a low orbital crash, 
the other as the search & rescue team sent out to find them.  Prob is, most of 
them read the TML.  *(

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:45:45 EDT
From: Thendal@aol.com
Subject: Re: Lucan

The one thing that has always fascinated me is how madmen like Lucan can hold
power without someone putting a bullet in them. Especially in the case of
Lucan, where his madness would end the deaths of billions and the decimation
of the Imperium.

I for one would have put a bullet in him first chance I got, even at the
sacrifice of my own life.

Thendal

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 10:46:54 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Fleet Economics 

> >MT made pirates viable by rules mechanics, then created a background where
> >they could and would flourish. I felt that this is important to understand
> >when MT sources come up.
> >
> 
> Far more important for my money is that in MegaTraveller, the things that
> made piracy impossible - a strong fleet, a stable Imperium and a
> functioning bureaucracy - no longer existed.
> 
> The bigger problem I see for merchants in the Shattered Imperium isnt so
> much the pirates as the risk of getting signed up as part of a fleet at
> meson gun point.
> 
> On the flip side, you could stop making bank payments with pretty close to
> impunity, if you were outside a Safe.

Here's my take on it.  Space is *BIG*.  So *BIG* that pirates *can* work if 
they work at it.  IMTU, piracy is *difficult*, but both possible and 
profitable.  So difficult, that except in cases of state-sponsored piracy 
('privateers' or 'commerce raiders'), that 'true' pirates are somewhat rare.  
MTU is Reavers' Deep, circa 1125, after the active phase of the Rebellion, in 
the Black War phase.  Since most of the Deep is non-Imperial, it's been spared 
most of the major fleet actions.

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 11:01:03 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Major Race Status 

> >>Considering how many centuries after roswell it took for the solomani to hit
> >>space, there's reasonable argument for 'yah, a trader crashed here, but it was
> >>reduced to fine unanalysable rubble, so it didn't give us much of a boost...'
> 
> >OK, let's look at history.
> 
> Now I'd hate (that really is a huge understatement) for the Roswell/UFO/X-files 
> conspiracy theories to become canon and I hate that DGP spelt out that the 
> Aslan copied jump drive from the Solomani (I think at the most they should 
> have restricted themselves to subtle hints so that individual referees could 
> chose what they wanted for their own games). But I recognise that there are 
> more than a few really fun senarios here. So.......

Keep in mind that referees are allowed to *ignore* portions of canon when 
putting their games together.  I, for one, ignored the Solomani raids of 1123 
against the Carrillian Assembly (a large polity in Reavers' Deep) because it 
didn't fit my 'take' on the history of the area.

> >The Roswell Incident was in 1947.  Terra was at TL6, about the middle of the 
> >period.  Jump-1 comes availiable at TL9.
> 
> Howsabout this. Large scale radio transmissions began on Earth in the early 
> 1920s and Dingir (the Vilani) provincial capital is about 26-27 ly away....

This would put the timing just about right; I'd assume the signals were picked up a few years earlier by scout ships operating rimward of Dingir.  IIRC, the radio station KDKA started broadcasting at Pittsburg in 1923.  Its signals would hit Dingir in 1950 thereabouts...

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 08:14:36 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Lucan

At 04:43 PM 10/16/98 -0400, you wrote:
>I have always pictured Lucan as the young Roddy McDowall ( protraying
>Augustus ) in Cleopatra.
>
>Generally, I have also protrayed him as just slightly less sane than the
>average person ( to put it mildly ).  I have him randomly shooting
>generals.  I have characters who have to pay him visits in the night to
>bring messages find him lounging in bed with children.  I've had him speak
>to people who werent there.  I have him come up with brilliant military
>strategy only to bungle it if he personally takes command.  

Hmmm.. I've always prefered to portray him as a completely sane, rational
man.  Quite charming, actually.  Sparkling personality.  Then you do
something.  He thinks you're out to get him.  Your family turns up dead,
your fortune is confiscated, and you spend a few very unpleasent days being
tortured for information on the "plot" before being killed.

If Lucan had been an outright madman, no-one in the Moot would have ever
agreed to support his claim to the throne.. nevermind the question of
Varian's death.
- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 08:25:34 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon (long)

At 12:36 AM 10/17/98 +0200, you wrote:
>> Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon (long)
>> > From: neo@total.net
>> >  Perhaps we might ask TMLers who speak languages other than English
>> > to provide translations for the following terms...
>
>And in Swedish it would be...

<snip>

While working on my campaign, I needed to get some Sword Worlder terms.
Since the SW language is described as being derived from Icelandic, I
contacted Iceland's trade rep in the US.  I think it was the weirdest phone
call he had ever had, but he was pleased at the thought of his decendents
controlling an interstellar empire ("ve are Wikings, ya know..").  I also
bought an Icelandic-English dictionary.  Makes for great campaign flavor.

Douglas Berry
Sjolidsforingi, Njosnadeild 
Geimdeild sambandshersins 

(Commander, Special Intelligence Section)
(Confederation Army, Space Division)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 08:29:06 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Roswell jump

At 11:35 PM 10/16/98 PST, you wrote:

>The fact is, if an advanced spacraft *did* fall into our hands, we
>*couldn't* figure out anything that was more than *one* TL in advance
>of what we had at the time. 

In Harry Turtledove's _Worldwar_ series, a race only slightly ahead of our
own invades during WWII.  At one point, British radar technicians have
finally gotten ahold of a Race fighter that had been shot down.  They
eagerly crack the nose to inspect the clearly superior alien rader, and are
mystifed to find flat purple boards with thousands of thin gold lines where
the vacuum tubes should be...
- --

+-------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry    | 
+-------------------------------------+
| "I created the universe; give ME    |
|  the gift certificate!!"            |
|        - Lisa Simpson, Overachiever |
+-------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 17:33:52 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

Joseph R. Dietrich writes:

>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> 
> 
>>AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPERIAL NAVY IN THE CLASSIC ERA
>>===================================================
>>
>>NUMBER AND TYPE OF SHIPS
>>
>>The first ambiguity lies in just what kinds of escorts are included in the
>>1000 ship figure and what kinds are not. Are the 5,000 T _Sloan_ class
>>escorts so big that they are counted, or is there a class of escorts
>>smaller than a light cruiser (30,000 T ships), but bigger than Sloans?
>
>Yes. _Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium_ (FSSI) has several,
>including the 10,000 ton ED-15 Escort Destroyer and the 20,000 ton EF-15
>Escort Fleet.

OK. So perhaps only 20,000+ T escorts are included in the 1000 ship figure. 
 
>>The second ambiguity is whether battleriders are included in the figure or
>>not. I would have preferred that they were not, but the one detailed
>>squadron I know of (the 154th Battle Rider Squadron described in SMC)
>>clearly implies that they are.
> 
>FSSI implies this too, showing two different flavors of BatRons -- "Typical"
>and a "Battle Rider"

One problem I have with that is that a Battle Rider Squadron is really the
equivalent of a CruRon, not a BatRon (The 154th has only ONE battleship-sized
ship (the carrier) but 7 cruiser-sized riders). 

>In the FSSI, the Imperial Squadron Organization diagrams seem to indicate
>that auxiliaries are considered part of the squadrons. For example, the
>"typical" BatRon contains 4 battleships, 1 tanker, 2 transports, 3 scouts,
>and 2 auxiliaries (although I am unsure whether the symbols are supposed to
>represent individual ships or "elements" of two or more ships).

>A typical squadron looks to be about 12 ships, with TankRons and CruRons
>(Carrier) having 17 ships (actually, 10 of the "ships" in a Carrier CruRon
>are fighter wings).

So my hypothetical average squadron fits well with the info in FSSI? 

>The biggest problem I am having with this assessment is the sentence "Each
>sector of the Imperium *theoretically* [emphasis mine] has a group of fleets
>numbering about 1,000 ships."
> 
>I find it very vague; what the heck does "theoretically" mean in this
>context? If it means "If we divided the number of ships we have by the
>number of sectors we have a presence in," then that's even *more* than the
>20,000 ships Hans has posited (the Imperium has a presence in 27 Sectors
>according to the MT _Imperial Encyclopedia_). Of course, I know Hans likes
>to be conservative with his numbers, so ... :-)

If the sentence had said "on the average" rather than "theoretically", then
I would have gone for 27,000 ships. I chose to interpret it as "any sector
with 16 average subsectors will have around 1000 ships). Since a lot of
sectors don't have 16 full Imperial subsectors, you get less than a thousand
ships for sectors like Spinward Marches, Deneb, Trojan Reach, Reft, Corridor,
etc.
 
Joseph R. Dietrich also writes:

>The number of auxiliaries/non-combatants is irrelevant to the question of
>how many combatant ships are available, since we already knoe many combat
>ships are available (about 1,000/sector, not counting SDBs).

It's far from irrelevant if you are discussing the odds a pirate is up
against, since most naval auxiliaries would be perfectly able to make
life miserable for a pirate. (Unless someone does manage to save up for
that 30,000 T surplus cruiser he'd always wanted).
 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:18:21 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
...
>Also, just for fun, I'll have the physics of jump space bleed your
>ship's velocity so it enters realspace at rest with respect to the
>gravity well that kicked you out.

  It can simplify things a lot (like having to work out relative
stellar motions for "only" a sub-sector), and pretty drastically
limits the Scout Ship of Doom maneuver.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:18:38 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
...
>I'd make jump accuracy related to the ships maintainence level, age,
>quallity of charts, and computer power and inversely related to distance
>jumped.  It make sence to make a ships jumping 4 have more inaccuracy than a
>jump 1.  The jump 4 ship has more gravity wells to have to figure into their
>flight path.

  Keep in mind that some of those qualifiers are going to well and truly 
screw the "high efficiency pirate" model. OTOH, not all pirates will even
need jump drives, and fewer with more dispersed merchant traffic insystem.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 12:14:18 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Request for Comments 

> I've just been struck with an idea for another milieu, The Fourth 
> Imperium, or ROM2.
> 
> Starting, oh, about 2000 or so (using the 3I calender), it is the result 
> of vigorous expansion of Terrans to fill in the void left by the 
> Rebellion and Virus.  A couple of conditions.
> 
> 1)  Virus has left the Terrans with a bad taste for high automation.  As 
> such ships typically have higher crew requirements.

IMTU, & IMNSFBHO, high tech without high automation is difficult at best, 
impossible at worst.

> 2)  Psionics are in use, though not common among people.  The 4th Imp 
> makes serious use of 'psi cops' and in military uses.  This is _NOT_ a 
> kinder, gentler Imperium.  Psi is also used for system interfaces, as to 
> help prevent a recurrence of the Virus incident.  

I can see psi cops...

> 3)  The 4I is still expanding beyond the old Solomani Rim sector, using 
> both economic and military aggression.

for a 4I centered on Terra, that would be a given.  However, I doubt if they'd 
get to Regency space by then, what with having to absorb everything in their 
way first.  The absorbtion would take time and effort as well as manpower.
 
> 4)  I'm not sure what to do with the alien races, I'd love some comments 
> on that.

The 4I would probably fight a major war against the K'kree to secure its 
borders and make sure there was nobody invading them in the pursuit of truth, 
justice, and the militant vegetarian way of life.  What they'd do with the 
Hivers is up for grabs; would they trust the Hivers enough to buy tech from 
them, or would they shoot them on sight?

Given the 4I's roots in the Solomani Party, would they stoop to using the 
Aslans for mercenaries?  And what do they do with the Vargr?  Paper-train them?

> 5)  The 4I rules like the 3I, but with a firmer grip, using hand picked 
> governors and viceroys.  The psi cops make this easier.

This would be a given, under the stated conditions.  Although, with distance, 
this firm grip *will* get looser.

> 6)  Not sure what to do about the Zho's.

Considering their position relative to the 4I, they'd be out of the way, 
behind the Regency, which, due to its distance, would probably still be in 
business.

> 7)  The 4I uses high tech, TL 17, but tries to limit subject worlds to 
> no more than TL 12 or so.

I can see the 4I keeping tech down to about TL11 for civilians and outlawing higher tech in non-military hands.  This would include starships as well as weapons & computers.  But if the 4I is against high automation, then TL17 becomes difficult at best.  And would they recover enough in the 850 years since the Virus to achieve TL17?  Assuming their archives survived to allow them relatively quick rebuilding to TL12 or TL14, there's still the needed scientific advancements to get to TL16 & beyond.  My take, given that most surviving planets would devolve to TL6 or less, is that 850 years is *WAY* too short to get to TL17, especially given that high automation is probably outlawed, and that the necessary expertise is restricted due to the TL cap on member worlds.  I could see the 4I as having TL14 under these conditions; after all, they're just reinventing what they've lost over the years.  TL15 is feasible too, even when you discount the infusion of Hiver technology.  The main !
!
!
point is, unless they import tech from the Hivers, they'd be hurting for tech.

The secondary point would be, just *how* hard would they enforce the tech limits in the newly conquered provinces, considering that the further you get from the capital, the harder it is to keep track of what your people are up to.  Not easy, even with psi cops.  'Who shall guard the guardians?' is just as relavant in the 63rd Century as it was in the 1st Century.

And what of the Regency?  You *know* they'd go up against the 4I the instant they run into them.  And after 850 years with a TL15 start, they'd prolly be at least TL18 *or better*.  And keep in mind that eventually the Regency would expand through Corridor into the old 3I space due to population problems.

The main question in my mind would be, would the 4I start in Regency space, or ignite in the Solomani Rim?  My money would be on the Regency.

Keven
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:17:53 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Charles Prevatte writes:

>Assumting the the planet is 5000 mile in diameter.  Then 100 dias. is a
>sphere 505,000 miles in diameter.  Surface area = 4 pi r squared. r =
>252,500 miles.  Surface area = 801,184,666,481.7 square miles. 801 billion
>square miles and you say you can actively scan this area with 4-8 vessels
>looking for a 100 meter object?  Even with 8 ships that 100 billion square
>miles.  What exactly are you using to scan this area?

I'm using the Traveller sensor rules. If you think I'm misinterpreting them,
then show me where I'm going wrong. If you think they are unrealistic, then
get Marc Miller to change them. But until then, accept them as basic truths.
Otherwise we are discussing two different things, never a very productive
thing to do.

Charles Prevatte also wrote:

>>>10% of the cost of the ships would pay for maintainence and maybe crew
>>>saleries but I doubt that.
>>
>>That's what the rules say, and as far as I am concerned, they are shooting
>>high. Annual maintenance comes to 1% of the annual maintenance budget, and
>>crew salaries comes to about 2.5%. There remains 96.5% to pay for the
>>support structure.
>>
> 
>I think you mean 6.5%.  10% - 3.5% = 6.5%

No I mean 1% and 2.5% of the budget. The total amount of money available each
year, not the full cost of the ships. 100% -3.5% = 96.5%.
 
>>>What about ammo, bases, training, pentions, supply ships, ect.
>>
>>All included in the figure according to the rules.
> 
>So a war ship cost the same to maintain in peace time as in full combat
>conditions?  That does not make sense.

It's a simplification to allow _TCS_ and _Striker_ players to ignore more
detailed logistics problems. That's propably why the figure is so high.
Propably a peacetime navy costs a lot less to maintain, but most TCS and
Striker scenarios involve belligerents, so this is ignored.

>I'm sorry I was not more explicit. 100 dias. is the Minimum limit.  What is
>the limit of navagational error?
Practically none according to the rules. Check the description of a typical
jump in _Imperial Encyclopedia_ if you have that. If a ship "aims" for a
spot inside a jump limit it is simply precipitated out at the limit with no
ill effects.

>How much breathing room does the ship have? Do they jump in at 110 dias? 
>200 dias?  If they give themselves some slop then they will not be at the
>100 diameter shell when they first arrive.

They don't, but even if they did, it would also increase the odds that they
would appear somewhere far from where the pirate was lurking. The odds the
pirate is trying to beat is the chance that he can chase down, disable, and
match vectors with the victim, transfer the cargo, and jump out before an
SDB can get within shooting range.
 
>As for the pirate, he can hide nearly anywhere as lomg as he can beat the
>SDB to the prize.

And match vectors with it. Don't forget that. If the victim arrives at 200
diameters (which it dosen't) and he is lurking at the 200 diameter limit,
then the odds are very great that he is lurking at a different spot on the
200 diameter limit. If he is lurking at the 100 diameter limit (which he
can't under the present sensor rules) then he will be intercepting at 3G
outward and the victim is going inward at 1G. Once he passes close enough to
the victim to disable it, they will pass each other and he will have to
decellerate and chase the victim dowm. Meanwhile a patrol ship is bulleting
out from the mainworld at 3G too.

>The 1 AU statement was that he could enter the system behind and object
>like a moon and coast in quitely on Delta V.

How long will the approach take him? Every minute he spends catching one
victim costs money.

>To find him running silent you have to search everywhere he could be. His
>course could pass close to known arrival points

Known arrival points are either a random spot at the 100 diameter limit or
a specific spot on the 100 diameter limit. In the first case his chance of
lurking close to the arrival spot is low and in the secod case it would be
ordinary prudence for a system patrol to be stationed at the spot.

>and he could grab a target of opportunity.

Again, you're not doing the math. What are the odds of getting an opportunity
in the first place?

>If he was expecting a particullar target he could plan his course to put him
>in the best posible intercept position based on the slop factor I mention
>before.

Non-existent slop factor.
 
>The problem as I see it is that pirates are canon so we are left to explain
>them as best we can with little information.

That's also the problem as I see it. Except that we have quite a lot of
information that has to be fitted into it.

>For the pirate to exist their mush be crack for them to hide in.

Quite true. But what's the use of creating that crack by violating other
parts of the canon?

>The random incouter charts make them seem fairly common as far as pirates
>can be common.

If pirates was so common as the encounter tables suggested, then they would
cost the _private_ sector enough money that it would be worth their while to
fund their own patrol ships (which, incidentally, they do, canonically).

>So it they do exit how do they exits?  I see several posibilities.
> 
>1)  The number of military ships are low compared to the area they must
>patrol.

Necessitates changing another part of canon, making that part very much less
plausible.

>Reasonable idea if the tax base could not support that large an IN.

But the rax base can easily support that much and much, much more.

>2)  Pirates can hide from sensor in system and jump out after they attack
>with a reasonable chance for escape.

Works for me (I'm the proponent of the "interdimensional heat sink in space"
to allow much greater stealth. Unfortunately it dosen't work for those who
know more physics than I do, ane they are the ones who wrote the sensor
rules.
 
>3)  The slop facter in jump navagation is large enough to give the pirate a
>window of opertunity.  This slop would also limit the defence advantage of
>convoys as they would be scattered some what it jump.

Changes the canon far more thoroughly than you appear to realize. It's not
just that the jump rules has to be changed, it's also that it takes ships
longer to make a jump. Which means the number of annual jumps goes down.
Which means the economic background changes, making starship travel much
more expensive. 
 
>4)  There are so many merchant ships that the pirates have little trouble
>picking a safe target and the SDB have trouble protecting all of them.

Won't work. A system patrol can control a volume of space sufficient to
contain a HUGE number of ships.
 
>Pirates are canon people.  Instead of arguing the fact that they can not be
>why don't we try to come up with a combination of facters that will explain
>why they can be?

I tried that for a long time. Now I just ignore the discrepancies when I
game. That dosen't mean that I think they don't exist. But go ahead. If
you can come up with something WITHOUT CHANGING OTHER CRUCIAL PARTS OF THE
CANON_ then I for one would be overjoyed. I like pirates too. 
 
>You have to admit that they spice up the TU.

Willingly.
 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #964
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Saturday, October 17 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 965



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Imperial navy
Re: Lucan
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964
Pirates
Re: Planetology 101 part 3
Polyglot Traveller
Jumping from zero planetary diameters (long)
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
Re: Lucan
Re: Starship crewing levels (was Re: Piracy)
Re: The Imperial fleet and auxiliaries (Re: mostly piracy)
Volunteers
Traveller: Rivals of the Third Imperium Webring
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy
Re: Lucan
re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (long)
Re: Pirates

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:27:59 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Imperial navy

Thom Harris writes:

>Hans,
>    Did it ever occur to you that you are using "canon" material to disprove
>"canon" material?

No, Thom, I'm using canon material to prove that the canon contains a
discrepancy. I couldn't do that without the canon. A discrepancy just
means that (at least one) one of the elements involved can't be true.
It dosen't prove which part. Only, I happen to believe that the part
about the Imperium using 1% of it's total production on its military
is highly plausible, while the notion of using a multi-million credit
tool to commit a crime is... less plausible.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:26:54 -0700
From: deadlander@juno.com (Templar Simon)
Subject: Re: Lucan

>I for one would have put a bullet in him first chance I got, even at 
>the>sacrifice of my own life.
>
And I for one would have put a bullet in him at the sacrifice of your
life also.

Capt. Mourn

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 12:45:06 -0400
From: "Shade" <jwatts@catt.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964

> I for one would have put a bullet in him fist chance I got, even at the
sacrifice of my own life


This is why crazed emperors tend to keep a lot of loyal ( ie well-payed (
in whatever they like as payment )) retainers with large weapons around.

Of course.... if can pay them enough, maybe they'll help you... or better
yet, do it for you.

Shade



The problem with religious texts is that the answers
arent in the BACK, either. 

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 12:49:38 -0400
From: "Shade" <jwatts@catt.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964

>Hmmm.. I've always prefered to portray him as a completely sane, rational
>man.  Quite charming, actually.  Sparkling personality.  Then you do
>something.  He thinks you're out to get him.  Your family turns up dead,
>your fortune is confiscated, and you spend a few very unpleasent days
being
>tortured for information on the "plot" before being killed.

Thats funny, I've always protrayed Margaret that way.


>If Lucan had been an outright madman, no-one in the Moot would have ever
>agreed to support his claim to the throne.. nevermind the question of
>Varian's death.

I thought that was a major reason the Moot was dissolved first thing.

Shade



The problem with religious texts is that the answers
arent in the BACK, either. 

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:25:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Pirates

Most "economic analyses of piracy" seem to have the pirates "paying for"
their ship. Isn't it more likely that they acquired the vessel through
mutiny, pressed a few merchant crews for any empty spots, and intend to
only operate it for a single cruise (i.e., under a year)? Avoid annual
maintainance fee, avoid cost of buying ship... sell what you have left to
some third world backwater or Vargr unaligned world and then scatter...

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:18:54 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Planetology 101 part 3

>Alas, the acids rapidly react with metallic ions to form
>nitrates. Nitrates are *very* soluble. In fact *no* nitrate is
>insoluble. So all the nitrates would wind up in solution. Which
>tends to result in water containing *lots* of metal ions.

The anhydrous nitrogen oxides all tend to decompose back into
nitrogen and oxygen. I would not expect them to be sufficiently
abundant to form a great deal of nitric acid and give give *lots*
of metal ions unless some form of life that uses them to store
energy and oxygen is involved.  Although the nitrates are highly
soluble, deposits of their salts do form (e.g. saltpeter,
potassium nitrate) though they aren't the most common of minerals
and probably wouldn't be in any environment.

>Ammonia forms the ammonium ion in water. Which freely decomposes
>into free ammonia, and a hydrogen ion. Ammonium compounds tend
>to be rare for this reason.

Under terrestrial conditions with free oxygen available, ammonia
is easily oxidized to water and nitrogen. But if no oxygen were
present in the atmosphere and ammonia were, the reaction would go
the other way, dissolving the ammonia and possibly giving
ammonium compounds; just as happens in our atmosphere with carbon
dioxide.

>BTW, ammonia water mixtures will give *really* weird weather
>because of the complex phase diagrams involved.

A little wierdness, maybe, but ammonia is unlikely to be more
than about a hundredth as abundant as water.

>Sulfates do form mineral deposits, but sulfides are a lot more
>common. Sulfur is almost as active as oxygen at mineral forming
>temperatures. 
>Sulfur compounds also form the basis of the ecology of deep
>ocean vents and deep rock bacteria.

Sulfur is less abundant than the Big Four, I'm less familiar with
its chemistry, and it tends to get tied up in minerals, so I gave
it less coverage. In oxygen-poor environments, life is likely to
make considerable use of sulfur chemistry; Oxygen poisons it,
though.

 
  

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:18:57 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: Polyglot Traveller

>It occurs to me that TML members speak a wide variety of
>languages, and many of us might find uses for a multilingual
>lexicon of a few Traveller terms. Perhaps we might ask TMLers
>who speak languages other than English to provide translations
>for the following terms...

Someone else put up Spanish, but I'd suggest 

Spaceport      Puerto Espacial
Starport       Puerto Estrellero
Highport       Puerto Alto
Downport       Puerto Bajo
Base           Base   (pronounced more like bah-say)
Company        Compania  (n with a tilde~ over it, i with an accent)
Corporation    Corporacion (i with an accent)
   etc?

Also, words for governmental bodies, ie:

Assembly       Asamblea
Parliament     Parlamento
Legislature    Legislatura
Council        Consejo, Concilio
Bureau         --Oficina
Administration Administracion (i with an accent)
   etc.

  

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 19:00:21 +0100
From: "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (long)

Going through some old disks I found a draft  document  that  was
posted to the TML back in January 1995.  Anyway, I finally got it
finished it and thought it might be of interest.



Jump Drive and the 100 Diameter Limit
=====================================

Here's a thought or two ...

1) The jump drive's  "100  diameter"  safe  jumping  distance  is
   supposed to be due to the gravity from large masses  affecting
   the ability of the jump drive to form a jump field  correctly.
   But gravity will vary with  planetary  density.  According  to
   "From Port to Jump-point" (JTAS 22) this number is a thumbnail
   rule anyway so what's the real rule?

2) In  MT  the  jump  task  is  'Routine'  outside  this   limit,
   'Difficult' between 10 and  100  diameters,  and  'Formidable'
   within 10 diameters.  Each of these are a gap of 4 on the dice
   roll, yet  the  effect  is  described  as  gradual  ("Starship
   Operator's  Manual  Vol  1")  ...  so  does  that   mean   its
   'Difficult+2' at 50 diameters?

I propose that the phrase "100 diameter limit" is merely  a  rule
of thumb provided by ship's pursers to their passengers and  that
seasoned space travellers have a more accurate value for the  MSD
(minimum safe distance) to form a jump point.

First some  boring  math  so  you  can  follow  my  reasoning  if
interested (since "G" is used in the formula below, the  unit  of
"G" is expressed in "gees" to avoid confusion)

    Using the formula

        L=64(M/G)^0.5

    and

        R=8D

    from the original LBB rule books  (where  L  is  distance  in
    mapping units, M is mass in earth masses,  G  is  gravity  in
    gees, R is world radius in mapping units, D is world UPP size
    code) you can deduce that 1 mapping unit  =  62.5  miles  (or
    approx 100 km as stated in the original book).  So to express
    the formula for L in miles ...

        L(in miles)=4000(M/G)^0.5

    or put another way

        G=M/(L/4000)^2

    Not wanting to be too terra-centric lets pick  Vland  as  our
    reference example.  (As an aside the specified mass for Vland
    given in "Aliens Vol 1: Vilani & Vargr" is incorrect -  given
    a diameter of 14,850 km and a density of 1.02 the mass should
    be 1.5661792.)

    So G at 100 diameters is 2.94185e-5 gees.  Remember from your
    high school physics that 1 gee is 9.80665 m/s/s and  you  get
    G=2.88497e-4 m/s/s.

    Now because the the chance of a world being exact  like  that
    is small lets  use  some  pseudo-science  to  pull  a  little
    slight-of-hand.  The  universally  constant  speed  of  light
    c=2.99792458e8 m/s and so G/c is  9.62322e-13  ...  thats  so
    close to 1e-12 that maybe it should be!  Now say  that  space
    stress is measured in units of S or in this case pS (p='pico'
    =1e-12) where 1pS=3.05703e-5 gees.

    So the 1pS  ('one pico ess')  limit  is  the  so-called  "100
    diameter' limit for  Vland.  Recalculating  back  gives  98.1
    diameters.

So what was the point of all that  (apart  from  wearing  out  my
calculator)?  Calculate the 1pS boundary for Terra  and  you  get
91.3 diameters ... not 100.

Definition: Minimum safe distance to initiate Jump is  any  point
            in space where the  gravitational  stress  factor  is
            less than 1pS.

Definition: 1pS is the stress on space by a  gravitational  force
            of 3.05703e-5 gees.

Okay, so now we've dealt with the first point and  can  add  some
colour to individual systems.

                 Sample Minimum Safe Distances

    World   Icy Body   Rocky Body   Molten Core   Heavy Core
    Size    (k=0.32)    (k=0.64)      (k=0.96)     (k=1.45)
    --------------------------------------------------------
      S        6.5         9.1          11.2         13.8
      1       18.3        25.9          31.8         39.0
      2       25.9        36.7          44.9         55.2
      3       31.8        44.9          55.0         67.6
      4       36.7        51.9          63.5         78.1
      5       41.0        58.0          71.0         87.3
      6       44.9        63.5          77.8         95.6
      7       48.5        68.6          84.0        103.3
      8       51.9        73.3          89.8        110.4
      9       55.0        77.8          95.3        117.1
      A       58.0        82.0         100.4        123.4

    MSD in  planetary  diameters  at  1pS  boundary  (incorrectly
    referred to as "100 diameter limit")

    Other Bodies               Size     MSD
    ---------------------------------------
    Small Gas Giant (k=0.20)     60   112.3
    Large Gas Giant (k=0.20)    170   189.0
    Star (Sol)                  865   482.6

    Note that Sol's MSD of 482.6 is equavalent to 4.49 AU (almost
    as far as Jupiter's orbit)!

Repeating this process for the "10 diameter" limit  and  we  find
its actually the 100 pS boundary.  Hey, the numbers  go  up  with
the difficulty!  A geometric progression gives a step of 3.162277
or ...

                Jump Difficulty Table

         Stress Factor      MSD   Difficulty
    -------------------------------------------
          < 1 pS           100%   Routine
         1pS -       3pS    56%   Routine +1
         3pS -      10pS    32%   Routine +2
        10pS -      32pS    18%   Routine +3
        32pS -     100pS    10%   Difficult
       100pS -     316pS     6%   Difficult +1
       316pS -   1,000pS     3%   Difficult +2
     1,000pS -   3,162pS     2%   Difficult +3
     3,162pS -  10,000pS     1%   Formidable
    10,000pS -  31,623pS          Formidable +1
    31,623pS - 100,000pS          Formidable +2

    The MSD column assumes only one distorting object.

So if your players are running for the "100  diameter"  MSD  jump
point while being persued but for feel the need to go early, just
compare their distance with the  table  above  to  determine  the
actual risk at that point.

Another issue:  Are  Lagrange  points  (points  of  gravitational
stability) safe jump points  within  the  1pS  boundary?  No.  In
none of the published Traveller works is  there  any  mention  of
this.  The term  "stress"  is  important,  at  these  points  the
gravitational forces may be in balance but the fabric of space is
still stressed (like the rope in a tug-o-war between  two  evenly
matched teams).  Therefore, even when two or  more  gravitational
sources are balanced their effects are additive.  Compute the  pS
value  of  all  likely  objects  and  add  them  together  before
consulting the Jump Difficulty Table.

     Range Stress Table

     MSD   Stress Factor
    --------------------
    100%       1.000
     95%       1.108
     90%       1.235
     85%       1.384
     80%       1.563
     75%       1.778
     70%       2.041
     65%       2.367
     60%       2.778
     55%       3.306
     50%       4.000
     45%       4.938
     40%       6.250
     35%       8.163
     30%      11.111
     25%      16.000
     20%      25.000
     15%      44.444
     10%     100.000
      5%     400.000

Also note that this space stress does not simply end at 1pS,  but
continues out indefinately getting smaller  and  smaller.  It  is
theoretically possible to be beyond MSD for all objects yet their
combined gravitational pulls to still exert more than 1pS!

    Extended Range Stress Table

        MSD   Stress Factor
       --------------------
       200%       0.250
       190%       0.277
       180%       0.309
       170%       0.346
       160%       0.391
       150%       0.444
       140%       0.510
       130%       0.592
       120%       0.694
       110%       0.826

For example, at 140% MSD the stress factor  is  0.510.  So  if  a
starship were at 140% MSD for one planet and 140% MSD for another
planet, the total stress factor would be 1.100.  This  makes  the
jump task 'Routine+1'.

One final issue: When player characters are  feeling  particulaly
suicidal/desperate/destructive they sometimes wonder  what  would
happen if they tried to jump while still landed in the  starport.
On  a  1  gee  planet  the  stress  factor  at  ground  level  is
32,711.463pS which makes such a task 'Formidable+2'.

... Now you know!



Regards PLST
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/trisen/personal/traveller
"Rome wasn't burned in a day"

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 15:11:26 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

In a message dated 10/16/98 16:12:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
bmac@astro.ucla.edu writes:

<< >As the rules are now written (T4/T5/GT), piracy does appear to be
dead...the
 >DSR is the primary culprit for this.  It might be accurate...but is it fun?
 My apologies...I didn't *mean* to spoil everyone's fun. I do feel that you
 can still use the DSR in a short-range-sensor universe by reducing everyone's
 signatures by about a point; the scaling laws will still work pretty well.
  >>

Please don't take my original posting as criticism...I think the DSR is a
fabulous set of rules.  My players just seem to prefer the CT-style of play
over the Harpoon style.

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 15:21:03 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Lucan

At 08:14 AM 10/17/98 -0700, you wrote:
>At 04:43 PM 10/16/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>I have always pictured Lucan as the young Roddy McDowall ( protraying
>>Augustus ) in Cleopatra.
>>
>>Generally, I have also protrayed him as just slightly less sane than the
>>average person ( to put it mildly ).  I have him randomly shooting
>>generals.  I have characters who have to pay him visits in the night to
>>bring messages find him lounging in bed with children.  I've had him speak
>>to people who werent there.  I have him come up with brilliant military
>>strategy only to bungle it if he personally takes command.  
>
>Hmmm.. I've always prefered to portray him as a completely sane, rational
>man.  Quite charming, actually.  Sparkling personality.  Then you do
>something.  He thinks you're out to get him.  Your family turns up dead,
>your fortune is confiscated, and you spend a few very unpleasent days being
>tortured for information on the "plot" before being killed.
>
>If Lucan had been an outright madman, no-one in the Moot would have ever
>agreed to support his claim to the throne.. nevermind the question of
>Varian's death.

Sounds a lot like Clinton...

Kurt Feltenberger
kurt@blazenet.net


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 15:22:25 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Starship crewing levels (was Re: Piracy)

In a message dated 10/16/98 23:12:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca writes:

<<   If crew levels under Books 2 and 5 need to be tripled then this is the 
 biggest piece of Trav errata yet (AFAIK) and the longest undiscovered :>
 
   Presumably the crew levels represent a single full shift (and some extra
 slop?) with only minimal crew at stations most of the time.
 
         Steven Hudson
  >>

Warships have always been overmanned, for casualty replacements if nothing
else.  I do believe, that as far as merchants are concerned they could get
away with only one fully-manned watch per day, but the more I think about it
(this was not a subject I had considered until I posted my original message)
warships will have to have sufficient crews to man 3 watches.  
YMMV.

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 15:26:22 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: The Imperial fleet and auxiliaries (Re: mostly piracy)

In a message dated 10/17/98 0:20:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
yikes@evansville.net writes:

<< The number of auxiliaries/non-combatants is irrelevant to the question of
 how many combatant ships are available, since we already knoe many combat
 ships are available (about 1,000/sector, not counting SDBs).
  >>

My point was that these 1000 ships had to be paid for out of the TCS
budget...the auxiliaries would also have to be paid for from this money. 

Well, a Far Trader makes a decent auxilary, and they cost about MCr 0.3 per
>dton, as opposed to the about MCr 1 per dton a military ship costs.

I would hate to see a Type A trying to reload the magazines of a Tigress-class
DN...in anything less than 2 years anyway.  :-)

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:39:15 -0600
From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com>
Subject: Volunteers

I need proofreaders (preferably professional or professional quality) who
can look at the Alien Races book with an outsiders' eye. I need people who
can work fast (24 hour turnaround or faaster) on one or more chapters which
we can fax to you and you fax back to us.

I'll need to fax the material to you starting Sunday or Monday, and I will
need it back NLT Tuesday morning.

Please respond ASAP, directly to me at to lkw@io.com and cc:
gdwgames@aol.com (my home address).

Loren Wiseman
    SJ Games

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 20:43:11 +0100
From: "Stuart Ferris" <stuart.ferris@virgin.net>
Subject: Traveller: Rivals of the Third Imperium Webring

Announcing the formation of a new Webring relating to Traveller.

The Traveller: Rivals of the Third Imperium Webring is for Traveller
websites which have information which relates to 'Pocket Empires' or Alien
Races. i.e. Any outside influence that may prove to be a threat to the
Imperium.

If you are interested in joining the Webring please fill out the relevant
form at the following address:-


http://freespace.virgin.net/stuart.ferris/Traveller/Rivals%20of%20the%20Thir
d%20Imperium.htm

Stuart Ferris
stuart.ferris@virgin.net
http://freespace.virgin.net/stuart.ferris/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:04:23 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>>I have found it sufficient to cast a critical eye at the assumptions
>>designed to prove the piracy can't exist (being able to identify
>>before hand which ships are pirate, being able to track them
>>after they leave the system, etc.).

>Gosh. And there was me thinking that big guns and three gees or more of
>maneuverability was a dead giveaway, and that people would be keeping
>records to stop you chaninging the name of your ship, and selling the
>paying passengers into slavery and their baggage and freight as if it was
>your own.

Well, that is based on a host of assumptions about what it takes
to do piracy, how you operate, who you prey on, how ships are
tracked and how easy it is to change identites.  This is a
whole series of threads (and here I was being so good about
avoiding this thread :-)

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:10:02 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>>>I have found it sufficient to cast a critical eye at the assumptions
>>>designed to prove the piracy can't exist (being able to identify
>>>before hand which ships are pirate, being able to track them
>>>after they leave the system, etc.).

>>Gosh. And there was me thinking that big guns and three gees or more of
>>maneuverability was a dead giveaway, and that people would be keeping
>>records to stop you chaninging the name of your ship, and selling the
>>paying passengers into slavery and their baggage and freight as if it was
>>your own.

>Well, that is based on a host of assumptions about what it takes
>to do piracy, how you operate, who you prey on, how ships are
>tracked and how easy it is to change identites.  This is a
>whole series of threads (and here I was being so good about
>avoiding this thread :-)

Of course I do agree that slavery being illegal would mostly
eliminate the slavery part :-)

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 18:11:22 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Lucan

Thendal@aol.com writes:
>The one thing that has always fascinated me is how madmen like Lucan can
>hold
>power without someone putting a bullet in them. Especially in the case of
>Lucan, where his madness would end the deaths of billions and the
>decimation
>of the Imperium.

Hitler, Amin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Nero...

Possibly all those plots (eg. Virushi Plot) were real, as ethical sophont
decided to do for him. Imagine a Lucan who, while mad in other ways, is
not paranoid because most of his entourage really is out to kill him!

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:03:38 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)

Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU> wrote:

>I think I'll be using the System Jump Point Cascade system from JTAS.
>The gravity whorl of the primary screws up jump space for 1000 AU
>in every direction, your J-1 ships can only come out at the J-1 point,
>100d from the biggest gravity source (the system primary). J-2 ships
>can come out at either the J-1 point or the J-2 point (probably the
>biggest gas giant), and so on.

Which JTAS was this in?

>Thoughts?

I like the ideas... I'll probably still allow my players to do the psycho
mad attempts to jump at Lagrange points (stolen from /The Reality
Dysfunction/) in despairation. This will automatically give a risk to
misjumps but will be a way to run within the gravity well of the larger
objects..

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 12:38:52 +1300
From: "Anson Betts" <Lord.High.Executioner@xtra.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (long)

Wow. There are some seriously dedicated people out there...

Cheers,
 Anson

I want to die in my sleep like my grandfather,
not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 19:06:28 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: Pirates

- -----Original Message-----
From: David L. Pulver <dlpulver@kos.net>


>Most "economic analyses of piracy" seem to have the pirates "paying for"
>their ship. Isn't it more likely that they acquired the vessel through
>mutiny, pressed a few merchant crews for any empty spots, and intend to
>only operate it for a single cruise (i.e., under a year)? Avoid annual
>maintainance fee, avoid cost of buying ship... sell what you have left to
>some third world backwater or Vargr unaligned world and then scatter...

I think the economic arguments that are being made are against "career"
piracy in the stable 3rd Imperium settingof Classic and GURPS Traveller, as
portrayed in previous publications (at least, that is what I am arguing
against).

There are several examples in the various incarnations of the Traveller
rules that seem to indicate that piracy is viable as a long-term career. A
couple that spring to mind:

* A player could choose a Pirate career in character generation.
* There is a purpose-built ship (the Corsair) that is good for little but
piracy.
* Pirates seem to be somewhat common in random encounters. Indeed, even
xboats and tugs(!) can be involved in piracy, according to MT's _Imperial
Encyclopedia_ (pg. 91).

Note that even if you steal a ship and do no maintenance at all, you still
have life support, fuel cost, and battle damage repairs to consider. Why not
just hijack the ship and sell it for millions and millions, rather than risk
it by becoming a pirate?

Okay, greed comes to mind, and that is a pretty good reason. But the
economic argument against piracy is only one element of the whole
"anti-piracy" side of the discussion. There is also the "lots of military
resources to deter piracy" argument, the "you can't hide in space at 100
diameters" argument, the "which merchant do you choose to attack" argument,
and the "where do you sell all of this stuff and get your repairs done"
argument as well. When combined, it looks pretty bleak in the stable 3I for
pirates.

This is why (as a sadistic referee) I liked the Rebellion, and Hard Times,
but find the CT and GT settings to be less exciting. Pirates are easier to
justify when the Imperial Navy is trashed all to pieces.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #965
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Sunday, October 18 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 966



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
Apologies, testing.
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: Pirates
Re: Pirates
re: Piracy
re: Cinema Kiwi
re: Pirates
re: Pirate Friendly Rule Changes
Re: Lucan
Piracy
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate)
re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)
Re:Polyglot Traveller
Lucan and the Moot
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
OT: Nostalgia Attack : WH40k III review
Sensors and Piracy
Re: Lucan
Re: Lucan

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 19:06:30 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

Hans Rancke wrote:

>One problem I have with that is that a Battle Rider Squadron is really the
>equivalent of a CruRon, not a BatRon (The 154th has only ONE
battleship-sized
>ship (the carrier) but 7 cruiser-sized riders).



Mmm. I see what you mean. The battle riders in FSSI are all 30,000 tons,
compared to 100,000 tons each for the armored, heavy, strike, and imperial
cruisers. The riders tend to have slightly better armor and big guns (and a
slightly better defensive DM), but the cruisers have scads of missile
batteries and smaller weapons.

Furthermore, the BT-15 tender holds six battle riders, although the squadron
organization diagram for a rider BatRon only shows one tender and four
riders (thus, I am still uncertain if these symbols are supposed to be
individual ships or 'elements' of two or more ships).


>>In the FSSI, the Imperial Squadron Organization diagrams seem to indicate
>>that auxiliaries are considered part of the squadrons. For example, the
>>"typical" BatRon contains 4 battleships, 1 tanker, 2 transports, 3 scouts,
>>and 2 auxiliaries (although I am unsure whether the symbols are supposed
to
>>represent individual ships or "elements" of two or more ships).
>
>>A typical squadron looks to be about 12 ships, with TankRons and CruRons
>>(Carrier) having 17 ships (actually, 10 of the "ships" in a Carrier CruRon
>>are fighter wings).
>
>So my hypothetical average squadron fits well with the info in FSSI?



I would say so, yes.


>>The biggest problem I am having with this assessment is the sentence "Each
>>sector of the Imperium *theoretically* [emphasis mine] has a group of
fleets
>>numbering about 1,000 ships."
>>
>>I find it very vague; ...

>If the sentence had said "on the average" rather than "theoretically", then
>I would have gone for 27,000 ships. I chose to interpret it as "any sector
>with 16 average subsectors will have around 1000 ships


Sounds good to me. Either way, it's a whole hell of a lot of ships. :-)


Hans Ranke also wrote:

>Joseph R. Dietrich also writes:
>
>>The number of auxiliaries/non-combatants is irrelevant to the question of
>>how many combatant ships are available, since we already knoe many combat
>>ships are available (about 1,000/sector, not counting SDBs).
>
>It's far from irrelevant if you are discussing the odds a pirate is up
>against, since most naval auxiliaries would be perfectly able to make
>life miserable for a pirate. (Unless someone does manage to save up for
>that 30,000 T surplus cruiser he'd always wanted).

And DustyLV769@aol.com wrote:

>My point was that these 1000 ships had to be paid for out of the TCS
>budget...the auxiliaries would also have to be paid for from this money.


I interpereted auxiliaries to be non-combat ships, as described on pg. 28 of
the _Rebellion Sourcebook_, but on thinking about it you are probably right.
Even fleet tankers tend to pack a lot of firepower (with some notable
exceptions). I have a hard time seeing a tanker go after a pirate, though.

Anyway, what I was trying to say was that while we can use TCS budget
figures to show that the fleet can be huge, it isn't necessary, because we
are told right out that the fleet is huge. Obviously the auxiliaries have to
be paid out of the budget -- so that means that the budget must be that much
bigger, in order to support *all* the ships of the fleet. As is stands, it
appears that the TCS figures will support the whole fleet anyway, so the
numbers don't have to be adjusted.

This is *not* saying that looking at the TCS figures is useless. Quite the
contrary, IMO.

Of course, I run games in the Rebellion and Hard Times eras, so I don't have
a problem with justifying pirates. :-)

Still, I have found the points brought up during the various piracy threads
_on both sides_ very useful to me in envisioning the structure of space
travel in the Imperium. It would be so kewl to come up with some figures for
the volume of traffic in known space. Do you think if we banged out some
figures and got them printed at a vanity press, they would become canon?
(just kidding).

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 00:48:41 GMT
From: jzeitlin@mail.lanline.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: Apologies, testing.

I've changed ISPs.  A couple of lists I'm a member of had
problems with my subscription.  I'm testing things.  Sorry for
the inconvenience...
- --
Jeff Zeitlin
jzeitlin@mail.cyburban.com

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 14:00:02 +1300
From: "Anson Betts" <Lord.High.Executioner@xtra.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

>
>
>Anson Betts wrote:
>
>> Just make it up as you go :)
>>
>
>I have a complete inability to make up names for things
>and people as an gaming sessions goes.  Its so pathetic.
>
>Bloo

It's not that hard, just look at something. Cabinet Chair Floor Ceiling Ahh!
Cecil von Cabernet. :) I make names up like this all the time. Sure my
players know I'm thinking but sometimes they give good suggestions too.

Cheers,
 Anson

I want to die in my sleep like my grandfather,
not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 21:27:13 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Pirates

At 01:25 PM 10/17/98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Most "economic analyses of piracy" seem to have the pirates "paying for"
>their ship. Isn't it more likely that they acquired the vessel through
>mutiny, pressed a few merchant crews for any empty spots, and intend to
>only operate it for a single cruise (i.e., under a year)? Avoid annual
>maintainance fee, avoid cost of buying ship... sell what you have left to
>some third world backwater or Vargr unaligned world and then scatter...

This was generally the way things worked during the buccaneer period on
Earth.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 19:14:30 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Pirates

>Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:25:12 -0400 (EDT)
>From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>

>Most "economic analyses of piracy" seem to have the pirates "paying for"
>their ship. Isn't it more likely that they acquired the vessel through
>mutiny, pressed a few merchant crews for any empty spots, and intend to
>only operate it for a single cruise (i.e., under a year)? Avoid annual
>maintainance fee, avoid cost of buying ship... sell what you have left to
>some third world backwater or Vargr unaligned world and then scatter...

I think much of it involves merchants engaging in a range of illegal to
legal activities.  (From piracy, to smuggling, to descreet shipping
of legal cargoes, to normal activity).  They aren't that heavily
armed but tend to pick on unarmed ships.  But their probably isn't
just one type of pirate...

[Ooops.  I promised I wasn't going to get into this thread.
"Bad Dave! Bad!]

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 00:34:53 -0400
From: "Walter G. Smith" <smithw@hartwick.edu>
Subject: re: Piracy

Ian Whitchurch wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>How many of those did Austalia pay to build as apposed to just maintaining?

Ummm, all of them. We are friends with the Yanks, but they have this funny
thing about actually getting paid for stuff that is bought off them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We're still waiting for the Aussie's to pay for all those aircraft and
construction equipment we "lent" them back in the 40's. :)

They shouldn't feel bad, though - the only nation that ever paid off a
war debt to the US was Finland. (World War One - on time, and in
cash, btw. Go figure.)

Just another bit of useless trivia... <G>


Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 00:49:37 -0400
From: "Walter G. Smith" <smithw@hartwick.edu>
Subject: re: Cinema Kiwi

Anson Betts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's surprising how few people know that Pocahontus was only 12 when he got
hold of her...
Sick b^$!^rd.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
IIRC, isn't that how old Juliet was when Romeo tried to marry her?

Once upon a time, you weren't a child at age twelve. A population that
needs the women completely as breeders will start them as soon as
they hit menarch. A population that needs soldiers will start them as
soon as they can lift a weapon (especially once technology makes
fully-mature strength less than necessary).

Still working on an idea for a race of humans based on the kids in that
Star Trek episode - the ones who mature about a year a century until
they hit puberty, when they'd age quickly and the  local plague would kill 
them (a result of a botched longevity experiment).

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 01:13:14 -0400
From: "Walter G. Smith" <smithw@hartwick.edu>
Subject: re: Pirates

David L. Pulver wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Most "economic analyses of piracy" seem to have the pirates "paying for"
their ship. Isn't it more likely that they acquired the vessel through
mutiny, pressed a few merchant crews for any empty spots, and intend to
only operate it for a single cruise (i.e., under a year)? Avoid annual
maintainance fee, avoid cost of buying ship... sell what you have left to
some third world backwater or Vargr unaligned world and then scatter...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
While I am certain you will never encounter a full-time pirate captain who 
is worrying about a bank payment, the idea of "paying for" the ship
may be important. 

If piracy with a certain ship pays less than what one would get for
selling the ship, why not just sell it? The corsair cruise needs to pay
some amount of credits more profit than selling the ship would, therefore
the value of the ship is important.

If, IYTU, selling a stolen ship is very difficult, then the value may not
matter. The mutineers may have a nice new _Lurushaar Kilaalum_ class
patrol cruiser on their hands, but can't sell it without getting caught - 
turning corsair might be their only option.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 01:18:58 -0400
From: "Walter G. Smith" <smithw@hartwick.edu>
Subject: re: Pirate Friendly Rule Changes

SD Mooney wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which JTAS was this in?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
IIRC, it was in "Port to Jump Point" in JTAS 22


Walt

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 01:25:55 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Lucan

Here's another good Lucan:

Christopher Plummer as Emperor Commodus in "The Fall of The Roman Empire". He
was a GREAT crazy....

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 22:32:20 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Piracy

I have been thinking about this & well, I had this thought...

Piracy can work in the Traveller Universe if you think about it this way,
pirates are already breaking one law, right?  So you who have said that if
a pirate has 100 MCr then he is a rich man, right?  Wrong, all he has to do
is get a bank to loan him the money to buy his ship & then skip out on the
payments...  In other words, if a pirate can scrap together say 10-20 MCr,
then he could get a ship & start out being a pirate...

Just a quick thought...

Legate Legion, Militant Jewish Terrorist
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

We are Microsoft of Borg.  Your distinctive capabilities will be adapted to
service us.  Resistance is futile.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 98 01:56:34 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)

On 10/17/98 at 07:00 PM,  "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk> said:

>  Other Bodies               Size     MSD
>    ---------------------------------------
>    Small Gas Giant (k=0.20)     60   112.3
>    Large Gas Giant (k=0.20)    170   189.0
>    Star (Sol)                  865   482.6

>    Note that Sol's MSD of 482.6 is equavalent to 4.49 AU (almost
>    as far as Jupiter's orbit)!

Peter this was an interesting article that I will spend more time
thinking tomorrow, but before I go to bed...

Assuming your numbers are correct, it looks like you are either
going to ignore the Stellar MSD or require ships to run out all the
way out to 4.49 AU.  Personally, I'm very much against ignoring the
Star's "jump point" in these discussions, because it makes more
sense to me to jump from a system's star to another system's star,
than from a system's planet to another system's planet.

Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 98 02:12:25 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate)

On 10/17/98 at 03:11 PM,  DustyLV769@aol.com said:

>In a message dated 10/16/98 16:12:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>bmac@astro.ucla.edu writes:

><< >As the rules are now written (T4/T5/GT), piracy does appear to be
><< >dead...the DSR is the primary culprit for this.  It might be
><< >accurate...but is it fun?

> My apologies...I didn't *mean* to spoil everyone's fun. I do feel
> that you can still use the DSR in a short-range-sensor universe by
> reducing everyone's signatures by about a point; the scaling laws
> will still work pretty well.

>Please don't take my original posting as criticism...I think the DSR
>is a fabulous set of rules.  My players just seem to prefer the
>CT-style of play over the Harpoon style.

Yes, they are good rules, but I've complained about the ranges
before, for gaming reasons, too.

Frankly, I'd like the detection ranges of ships to be about twice
the distance at which you can get a lock for beam weapons, a few
hundred thousand km at most.  That gives ships some maneuvering
room, a reason to deploy forward screens of boats or escorts and a
reason to use missiles.  But it also allows ships to lurk near
planets and jump areas to catch the unwary.  I *know* this isn't
realistic, but it's the gaming effect I'd like to see.  

The question, of course, is how *can* detection ranges this short be
explained, and dusty systems won't do for a general explanation.<g>
Any ideas?

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 98 02:18:22 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)

On 10/17/98 at 02:03 PM,  SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com> said:


>>I think I'll be using the System Jump Point Cascade system from JTAS.
>>The gravity whorl of the primary screws up jump space for 1000 AU
>>in every direction, your J-1 ships can only come out at the J-1 point,
>>100d from the biggest gravity source (the system primary). J-2 ships
>>can come out at either the J-1 point or the J-2 point (probably the
>>biggest gas giant), and so on.

>Which JTAS was this in?

One of the last JTAS's before it became part of Challenge. I *think* it's JTAS 22, but I know it's right around there.

Eris,
    I reread that article a few weeks ago. ;->

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 04:40:33 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)

Eris Reddoch wrote:

> Personally, I'm very much against ignoring the
> Star's "jump point" in these discussions, because it makes more
> sense to me to jump from a system's star to another system's star,
> than from a system's planet to another system's planet.

Hold on a sec.  I've barely been paying attention.

Eris, are you saying that in in YTU, the jump limit is 100
diameters of a system's star?

If so, I think I like that very much.

You would ignore planetary jump-limits (i.e., 100d) that were
completely within the stellar jump limit,  but would use them for
planetary jump limits outside the stellar jump limit?

I think I like that too.


Here's a little text picture.  Its the ?? area I'm curious
how you deal with, assuming I've you did mean stellar diamters.


star)--------------------------------)??????????)
star)---- [==Planet A==]- - - - - [==Planet B==]

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:53:41 +0200
From: Guillem Plasencia <guillemp@ciberia.es>
Subject: Re:Polyglot Traveller

> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 13:18:57 -0400
> From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
> Subject: Polyglot Traveller
>
> >It occurs to me that TML members speak a wide variety of
> >languages, and many of us might find uses for a multilingual
> >lexicon of a few Traveller terms. Perhaps we might ask TMLers
> >who speak languages other than English to provide translations
> >for the following terms...
>
> Someone else put up Spanish, but I'd suggest
>
> Starport       Puerto Estrellero

IMHO this sounds really really bad in Spanish.

> Company        Compania  (n with a tilde+AH4- over it, i with an accent)

In fact, it's the "o" the letter with an accent

> Corporation    Corporacion (i with an accent)
>    etc?
>

Again ,"o" is the letter with accent.

> Administration Administracion (i with an accent)
>    etc.

Same again, "o" has the accent.

I don't want to start a flamewar on spelling, as all of you have been very very
kind to overlook my own's in english.

Thank you, and forgive my intrusion, Thad.

Guillem Plasencia
guillemp@ciberia.es

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 09:11:25 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Lucan and the Moot

>
>If Lucan had been an outright madman, no-one in the Moot would have ever
>agreed to support his claim to the throne.. nevermind the question of
>Varian's death.
>- --
The moot never got the chance to support him or reject him: He declared an
instant state of emergency, and barred the moot from meeting for a year. By
then, at least on Capitol Core, he was de facto emperor, even if he was not
de jure emperor. And was able to silence any opposition stupid enough to
show up at the moot.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 09:48:45 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

warlock@imagin.net wrote:

>My point exactly. Even with Dances With Wolves, I'm clueless
>as to what Hollywood sees in Costner.

I sat through /the Postman/ and came out thinking "if only they could have
edited it a bit tighter and cut out thirty minutes of the Kevin rides
heroically on a horse scenes". I think Costner is an okay actor - he just
can't edit his own material and is too indulgent...

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:03:59 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> wrote:

>One problem I have with that is that a Battle Rider Squadron is really the
>equivalent of a CruRon, not a BatRon (The 154th has only ONE battleship-sized
>ship (the carrier) but 7 cruiser-sized riders).

Hans, (under HG) I would disagree with this. The riders should be heavily
armoured and carry top end meson/PA weapons. This should make the squadron
pretty effective against and equivalent BatRon or CruRon in straight
combat. Of course, on an individual basis the BRs are weaker than a full
Battleship.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:21:39 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: OT: Nostalgia Attack : WH40k III review

Many years ago, when I was but a small lad at secondary school, and Striker
was out of print I wanted a space minatures wargame. Then, along came
Warhammer 40k. Which was fun, and lead to some silliness amongst my RPG
group when we wanted to avoid some serious gaming (RQ, CoC, Traveller,
Stormbringer, C2020, 2300 and AD&D back then).

Then Games Workshop decided to drop mainstream gaming and move in the more
niche minatures wargame side of things, charging upwards of £40 GBP for a
game, and letting everything else hang. White Dwarf became a catalogue for
GW and I lost interest, vowing never to enter a Games Workshop again. Over
the years, I focused down on two or three systems (Traveller, C2020 and RQ
back then) and forgot about GW, aside from the odd exclaimation when I saw
kids of 10 or 12 with £50 GBP games stacked  up.

Hitting the fast forward button, sometime earlier this year I got back into
minatures based games when I bought Full Thrust.

And now one of my friends told me that WH40k has just been re-released, but
as well as the boxed set (RRP around £50 GBP) there is a rulesbook sold
separately, like the original. And it was meant to be quite good.

So I took the plunge (disguising myself) and went into the GW in Liverpool
and bought a copy. This lead to an interesting conversation with the
manager about why I didn't come in more often.

Anyway, I got the book home and can report the following -

1) In classical GW style, they've maximised their profits by printing it
softcover with a slip case. For a £25 GBP book that's a bit cheaky, but not
as bad as the IG stuff - at least there's more than 100 pages and they've
heard of typeseting and artwork, plus colour plates. I would have prefered
a hardback.

2) The rules are streamlined, and appear to favour unit level engagements,
not the old skirmish level games.

3) Characters have been reduced in strength reflecting the new focus.

Bear in mind these comments are based on the old 40k hardcover rules from
over ten years ago.

Would I recommend it? I would say yes, but guardedly, as I haven't finished
reading it. But it looks like a fun game, much like the original. If you
want Traveller in space, I'd recommend Striker or possibly Laserburn in
preference. Or ACQ if you're at a smaller level.

Overpriced, but looks like good fun.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:21:09
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Sensors and Piracy

I have been playing around with Bruce's Definitive Sensor Rules.

If we assume Terra is unusual in that it is much less dusty than 'normal',
and that normal is a -1.5 passive and -0.5 active sensor degradation, then
pirates have a sporting chance of solving their tactical problem.

This means that with a minimal level of stealth and aggressive baffling
against a planet with a Sens 14 PEMS, a pirate has a better than sporting
chance at being able to lurk at or about 750 000 km.

Merchant ships basically have to go active, and a cheap AEMS will detect
the pirate at about 160 000km, assuming a marginally competant operator.

Detecting merchant ships running AEMS is a trivially easy task for pirates,
incidentally - the AEMS and lack of stealth, aggressive baffling etc puts
easy detection range at or about 1.6 million km, even with the dusty
conditions.

Now, 160 kkm is entirely too close make intial detection on a pirate,
especially given that weapons ranges should not be affected by dust (you
might think about a -1 dm to damage per 100 000 km of dust or something for
lasers and PAWs).

This might be short enough to message 'Stand and Deliver', intimidate the
merchant into cutting their fire-control AEMS and standing by for boarding.
The next problem is matching velocities and boarding while the system
defenses close in.

The problem is then how do you get enough fuel onto the merchant to allow
it to jump to your haven in the outsystem (dont even think about finding
secret pirate bases in the outsystem of a dusty system) or another nearby
system, or unload enough of the cargo to be worth robbing.

Now, if cargo values are higher, merchants may be carrying large amounts of
cash on board, which could make three-men-in-a-speedboat type piracy viable
(combustion lasers can pack a large one-shot punch into a small volume).

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:32:50 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Lucan

In a message dated 10/17/98 11:43:23 AM Central Daylight Time,
deadlander@juno.com writes:

<< >I for one would have put a bullet in him first chance I got, even at 
 >the sacrifice of my own life. >>

The problem is knowing with absolute certainty that what you would do would be
right... and far too few people do. Especially because the genetic survival
drive is so strong in us.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:32:37 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Lucan

In a message dated 10/17/98 5:24:01 PM Central Daylight Time,
Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca writes:

<< >The one thing that has always fascinated me is how madmen like Lucan can
 >hold power without someone putting a bullet in them. Especially in the case
of
 >Lucan, where his madness would end the deaths of billions and the decimation
 >of the Imperium.
>>

The conflicting thesis is that evil drives out good. That the "good people
were killed quickly enough to forestall any such pre-emptive action." BTW,
there were instances in Imperial history (one gave rise to the right of
assassination) in which the good did stand up and knock off the evil emperor.
I wonder why no one did that with Lucan?

So what is Lucan doing is the Gurps alternate timeline?

Marc

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #966
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Sunday, October 18 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 967



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Imperial navy
Re: MT Starship spreadsheet/HIWG CD
Non Traveller question
Re: Lucan
Re: Pirates
Re: OT: Nostalgia Attack : WH40k III review
re: Pirates
Re: Star Wars Democracy
Re: Lucan 
Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)
Re: Planetology 101 part 3
Re: Lucan
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters
Re: Piracy
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:40:28 -0400
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: Imperial navy

Hans you and I have had these arguments before and we both agree that when
using ALL the canon material it just doesn't seem likely that "pirates"
would be a good career choice.  In my line of work when you have conflicting
"reference material" you go back to the basics and start from there.  So
that is what follows, "The Basics":

When the LBB's were printed we were in the 1097-1110 time frame.  A good bit
of the material came from the Spinward Marches, which seemed to be in a
constant state of war with the Zho's.  There I believe canon pirates would
have PROBABLY worked and possibly had been working for a number of years.
Stability in the Imperium would have dealt a major blow to piracy as
described in the LBB's.  Again I think that we both agree on this point.

To go back and change that era is unrealistic and it seems to have trailed
somewhat into MT time lines so we need to play it as referee's as we see it.
I have in fact changed my writing's to reflect this more stable environment.
Now we are at the Rebellion time line in MT.  With a major force directed at
instability, Piracy has a chance to rear it's ugly head back up.  I still
agree that it wouldn't be at the levels of CT but it certainly would become
a factor.

Coming to TNE with it's myriad of scenario's, I can't get a real good handle
on what's the best course of action here.  Too many options with too little
data to really come to a conclusion.  Obviously if there were pirates, they
would pick on unarmed merchants.   If damaged (either ship) in combat it
would be too get replacement parts.

T4 allows for so many time frames that you could make a case for pirates in
any number of era's and have good justification.

GURPS I'm still working on but basically I believe that it falls into the MT
(read stable Empire) so more than likely the pirate career would be a NO GO.

T5 only Marc can speak for.

My conclusion is that for most of the time line of the 3rd Imperium piracy
WAS there.  There are certainly time frames where it would be pretty stupid
to be a pirate!!  There are also a number of time frames when it could be a
very lucrative profession.  I say let the Game Master decide the fate of his
game and the stability of the Empire and we try really hard to help him/her
with that decision.  I think we should work just as hard in supporting as we
are in tearing down opinions.  Canon is canon is canon.  That doesn't make
it sacred, because in the greater scheme of things it's just REFERENCE
material for a game master to run his/her game with.  You can argue
individual points to death, it isn't going to solve anything.  If you feel
that you need to tear apart my basic assumptions then knock yourself out,
you missed the point of my post and I won't reply.

Thom Harris

- -----Original Message-----
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Saturday, October 17, 1998 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: Imperial navy


>Thom Harris writes:
>
>>Hans,
>>    Did it ever occur to you that you are using "canon" material to
disprove
>>"canon" material?
>
>No, Thom, I'm using canon material to prove that the canon contains a
>discrepancy. I couldn't do that without the canon. A discrepancy just
>means that (at least one) one of the elements involved can't be true.
>It dosen't prove which part. Only, I happen to believe that the part
>about the Imperium using 1% of it's total production on its military
>is highly plausible, while the notion of using a multi-million credit
>tool to commit a crime is... less plausible.
>
>
>      Hans Rancke
>University of Copenhagen
>     rancke@diku.dk
>------------
>        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
>         events based on the individual situation."
>                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 09:24:19 -0400
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: MT Starship spreadsheet/HIWG CD

Bryan, I sent out a money order yesterday for one of the CD's.  Thanks a lot
for making it available partner.

Thom

- -----Original Message-----
From: Kagehira@aol.com <Kagehira@aol.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Cc: pbendal@ibm.net <pbendal@ibm.net>
Date: Wednesday, September 16, 1998 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: MT Starship spreadsheet/HIWG CD


> Yes. And the HIWG material and more are now finally available on a format
>that can contain all the info.
> Yes. Copies are still available.
> An outdated, incomplete list can be found at:
> members.aol.com/kagekiha/traveller
>
> Ordering info:
>
>Bryan Borich
>3890 50th street
>San Diego, CA 92105-3005
>
> Cost is $20 (including shipping and handling). M.O. preferred (visiting
the
>bank usually takes weeks).
>
>Bryan
>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 02:27:24 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Non Traveller question

Since there are a lot of military history buffs etc on the list I thought this might 
be a good place to ask. Does anyone know if the company that made the 
Madsen LMG (Dansk Industri Syndicat I think) still exists?

Thanks.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:20:28 -0400
From: "Shade" <jwatts@catt.com>
Subject: Re: Lucan

>So what is Lucan doing is the Gurps alternate timeline?


I would imagine that he is currently plotting ( whether or not its
effective or not ) to overthrow Strpehon.  I think this has a large part in
his choice to " tour the Imperium ".

I think his " tour " is a polite way to get out fo the court.


Shade


The problem with religious texts is that the answers
arent in the BACK, either. 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:02:05 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Pirates

Hello,
>From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
>Subject: Pirates
>
>Most "economic analyses of piracy" seem to have the pirates "paying for"
>their ship. Isn't it more likely that they acquired the vessel through
>mutiny, pressed a few merchant crews for any empty spots, and intend to
>only operate it for a single cruise (i.e., under a year)? Avoid annual
>maintainance fee, avoid cost of buying ship... sell what you have left to
>some third world backwater or Vargr unaligned world and then scatter...

  The mutineer scenario will likely only supply a fairly low number of
ships per time period; further, a lot of effort has gone into the thesis
that pirates either evolve from merchants or generate spontaneously as
businesses with effectively purely economic motives. Thus the necessity
of economic modelling.

        Yours truly,
                Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:03:39 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: OT: Nostalgia Attack : WH40k III review

>From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
>Subject: OT: Nostalgia Attack : WH40k III review
...
>1) In classical GW style, they've maximised their profits by printing it
>softcover with a slip case. For a £25 GBP book that's a bit cheaky, but not
>as bad as the IG stuff - at least there's more than 100 pages and they've
>heard of typeseting and artwork, plus colour plates. I would have prefered
>a hardback.

  Be careful - I've already heard from one person whose rulebook binding
failed within a couple of days (and there wasn't a photocopier involved...).

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 08:05:20 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: re: Pirates

>From: "Walter G. Smith" <smithw@hartwick.edu>
...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>While I am certain you will never encounter a full-time pirate captain who 
>is worrying about a bank payment, the idea of "paying for" the ship
>may be important. 

  Doesn't that eliminate the concept of the fully-funded "pirate as illicit
business venture" routine?

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 12:00:25 -0400
From: "Eric Freitas" <ericfreitas@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy

>Since there is not a great deal for the government to do that needs doing
>*quickly* that could not have been set up by the original, much smaller,
>forerunner organisation, there is really no problem with slowness of
>communications. No more than the Imperium has to deal with.


Communications speed isn't much of a limitation in the Star Wars world
from what I've seen of the rulebooks.  Real time communication systems
exist that can transmit from one side of the galaxy to the other, and
besides
it only takes a week or two to travel across the entire galaxy as well.  It
doesn't
take years to travel 1000 parsecs, only a day or two.

Eric

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 11:59:56 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Lucan 

> 
> >So what is Lucan doing is the Gurps alternate timeline?
> 
> 
> I would imagine that he is currently plotting ( whether or not its
> effective or not ) to overthrow Strpehon.  I think this has a large part in
> his choice to " tour the Imperium ".
> 
> I think his " tour " is a polite way to get out fo the court.

My take on it is, 'Get out of the Palace and see the Imperium before I have you shot on general principles."

Keven

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 12:55:11 +0100
From: Martin Hardgrave <martin@deira.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: G:T- The way ship points and the way it moves

In message <3624BE8C.9F94F12E@pharmacy.arizona.edu>, Bruce Johnson
<johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> writes
> This lends
>credence to the 'They're tossing out neutrinos' crown of how 'reactionless'
>thrusters work, and you don't want to have bathe half of your ship and cargo
>in an insanely high flux of neutrinos at any given time.

Hmm.  There are currently 10,000,000,000 neutrinos passing through every
square cm of your body every second.  I've not seen any blue glowing
people recently.
- -- 
Martin Hardgrave

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:00:07 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

David L. Pulver writes:

>Most "economic analyses of piracy" seem to have the pirates "paying for"
>their ship.

If it is a privateer or built by subscription or funded by a big criminal
pirate ring, then they do have to "pay" for it. Even if it was stolen, the
pirate activity has to pay more than using it for legitimate business.

>Isn't it more likely that they acquired the vessel through mutiny,

Yes it is, but then you have to ask how often ships suitable for piracy
suffers mutinies and why the mutineers don't just fly to the unaligned
Vargr world and sell the ship in the first place?

And the Traveller canon have several organized pirate gangs complete with
secret bases and logistical support.


DustyLV769@aol.com writes:

>In a message dated 10/17/98 0:20:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>yikes@evansville.net writes:
> 
><< The number of auxiliaries/non-combatants is irrelevant to the question of
>how many combatant ships are available, since we already knoe many combat
>ships are available (about 1,000/sector, not counting SDBs).
>	>>
> 
>My point was that these 1000 ships had to be paid for out of the TCS
>budget...the auxiliaries would also have to be paid for from this money. 

Which is why I have tried to make an estimate of the auxiliaries in an
average fleet. If you think more is needed, I don't mind. There's about
66% left to play with as it is.

However, there is another possibility. The 10% of original cost pa. figure is
specifically said to include logistics. So the auxiliaries could concievably
be paid out of that figure and not separately. I'm not saying it is so. But
it might be.

BTW. I just skipped over several of David's posts without responding to
them, and I tell you, I'm feeeling mighty proud of myself, mighty proud
indeed. ;-)


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:18:21 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>So a war ship cost the same to maintain in peace time as in full combat
>conditions?  That does not make sence.

  Battle damage is billed separately under TCS; munitions were largely ignored
as not being the biggest deal - some fixes have been suggested.

...
>As for the pirate, he can hide nearly anywhere as lomg as he can beat the
>SDB to the prize.  The 1 AU statement was that he could enter the system
>behind and object like a moon a coast in quitely on Delta V.  To find him
>running silent you have to search everywhere he could be.  His course could
>pass close to known arrival points and he could grab a target of
>oppertunity.  If he was expecting a particullar target he could plan his
>course to put him in the best posible intercept position based on the slop
>facter I mention before.

  To coast in at any speed requires a vector significant enough to interfere
substantially with later maneuvering; a slow approach runs into the "time is
money/lost opportunity" issue. Running a game of Mayday/Triplanetary/B:2 
should illustrate this amply.

  Planning for a specific intercept of course requires that the pirate not
be subject to any negative impacts from new navigation/maintenance rules.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 10:18:26 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>If you use the LBB encounter table, we _are_ talking about Class A and B
>(and, to a lesser extent, C) starports.  [From Book 2, page 36] On a 2d
...
>Class E or Class X starport.  Pretty ugly for the well-developed worlds,
>eh?  Especially when you consider that you have a 41.7% chance [8+ on
>2d] of the pirate being a Type C cruiser!

  You appear to have first edition; second edition CT Book 2 (p.35):
"The suffix P on any ship type can be construed as a pirate; such a ship
will probably attack, or at least try to achieve a position where it can
make th eattempt". These xP encounters occur only at C through X starport
systems.

  In any case the results of these tables need to be considered as game
system artifacts like the assertion that Book 1 proves that the Scout
service utilizes ~16% of the population of the Imperium.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 09:54:50 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)

Umm, based on Sol's average diameter of 864,000 miles, the 100 diameter
limit would be .925 AU.  Just inside Earth's orbit.  A ship leaving Venus
would have to accelerate out to the stellar safe jump line, but one from
Earth could simply boost out to the planetary safe jump line.
- --

+-------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry  dberry@hooked.net |
|    http://www.hooked.net/~dberry    | 
+-------------------------------------+
| "I created the universe; give ME    |
|  the gift certificate!!"            |
|        - Lisa Simpson, Overachiever |
+-------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 05:28:42 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Planetology 101 part 3

In mail you write:

>>Alas, the acids rapidly react with metallic ions to form
>>nitrates. Nitrates are *very* soluble. In fact *no* nitrate is
>>insoluble. So all the nitrates would wind up in solution. Which
>>tends to result in water containing *lots* of metal ions.
>
> The anhydrous nitrogen oxides all tend to decompose back into
> nitrogen and oxygen. I would not expect them to be sufficiently
> abundant to form a great deal of nitric acid and give give *lots*
> of metal ions unless some form of life that uses them to store
> energy and oxygen is involved.  Although the nitrates are highly
> soluble, deposits of their salts do form (e.g. saltpeter,
> potassium nitrate) though they aren't the most common of minerals
> and probably wouldn't be in any environment.

True enough, but look at what the much less corrosive carbonate ion
did! Even *weak* nitric or nitrous acid is stronger than carbonic acid.
Yet we have a *lot* of metal carbonates formed that *aren't* biological
in origin. 

What I expect happens is nitrate ions grab metal ions in silicate and
sulfate/sulfide rocks. Then once they are in solution, they'd react
with the carbonate ions to form carbonate precipitates in the oceans. 

So I'd expect heightened levels of nitrogen oxides to shift the balance
between silicate and carbonate minerals in the upper crust. 

>>Ammonia forms the ammonium ion in water. Which freely decomposes
>>into free ammonia, and a hydrogen ion. Ammonium compounds tend
>>to be rare for this reason.
>
> Under terrestrial conditions with free oxygen available, ammonia
> is easily oxidized to water and nitrogen. But if no oxygen were
> present in the atmosphere and ammonia were, the reaction would go
> the other way, dissolving the ammonia and possibly giving
> ammonium compounds; just as happens in our atmosphere with carbon
> dioxide.

True, though ammonium is *so* soluble that as with nitrates it'd take
*very* unusual circumstances to create ammonium minerals. So it'd tend
to stay in solution until you got the oceans *saturated* (which isn't
easy!). This *would* tend to produce basic oceans however. Which could
have major effects on everything from geology to life.

>>BTW, ammonia water mixtures will give *really* weird weather
>>because of the complex phase diagrams involved.
>
> A little wierdness, maybe, but ammonia is unlikely to be more
> than about a hundredth as abundant as water.

Temperature & pressure changes will vary the *local* percentages in a
solution by *large* amounts. Check out Hal Clement's "Star Light" for
examples of some of the *weird* effects you can get. 

Also, you can get *sudden* drops in local atmosphericv pressure when an
air mass rich in ammonia encounters surface "water" with low ammonia
content. And the reverse will happen if a high ammonia body of liquid
hits the right temp.

Should make for interesting weather.

>>Sulfates do form mineral deposits, but sulfides are a lot more
>>common. Sulfur is almost as active as oxygen at mineral forming
>>temperatures. 
>>Sulfur compounds also form the basis of the ecology of deep
>>ocean vents and deep rock bacteria.
>
> Sulfur is less abundant than the Big Four, I'm less familiar with
> its chemistry, and it tends to get tied up in minerals, so I gave
> it less coverage. In oxygen-poor environments, life is likely to
> make considerable use of sulfur chemistry; Oxygen poisons it,
> though.

The fact that it *does* get tied up in minerals is significant. Like
chlorine it's pretty darn active (even though oxygen and fluorine are
far more active). That's *why* minerals wind up the way they do. 

It pays to consider the electronegativity of various elements. 

F	4.0
O	3.5
N	3.0
Cl	3.0
Br	2.8
C	2.5
S	2.5
I	2.5
Se	2.4
P	2.1
B	2.0
As	2.0
Si	1.8

Those are the non-metals (and a few semimetals) listed in order of
electronegativity. When forming compounds, the elements at the top
"have first choice". Most metals are around 1.0 to 1.8, with the noble
metals being over 2, and the highly reactive alkali metals being 1 or
less. For the metal half of a compound, the *lower* electronegativity
wins.

That's why *all* the fluorine found is in mineral deposits, and why
they tend to be compounds of the least electronegative metals that are
somewhat insoluble (which usually means calcium).

Out in free space, the dust that systems form from will be any possible
compound and a lot of *weird* radicals. Once they start accumulating
into larger masses, they start reacting with each other. And as the
clumps get bigger, they start to retain the heat from decaying
radio-isotopes (more common at the time of system formation). So they
warm up, and the big ones warm up farther.

Get hot enough for liquid hydrogen and you'll get a few polar compounds
in solution and they *may* react a little with each other. liquid
methane is better, but it's still a *polar* solvent, so it's onlt
really going to dissolve organic compounds, and not many of those. 

Once ammonia melts, you've got a *polar* solvent, and inorganic
chemistry starts to really take off. When water melts things really get
moving. 

And when things get big enough that the *mineral* grains settle to the
core (concentrating the heat even more!) and the *minerals* start to
melt, *look out*!

So one of the "tricks" is to consider geochemical processes. Fluorine
though rare is so damned active it'll grab onto whatever it wants. Dito
for oxygen, nitrogen, chlorine, etc. But that works out to be hydrogen.
And on non-gas giants, the hydrogen goes away. Nitogen gets into the
atmosphere because it's so *hard* to make it combine with metals. Most
of the other non-metals cheerfully glom onto metals. 

Which gets us down to why sulfur winds up in minerals rather than the
air. :-)

But a lot of other weird things happen in the deep crust and the
mantle. things that can have major effects on the atmosphere.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 11:21:17 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Lucan

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> So what is Lucan doing is the Gurps alternate timeline?
>

According to the TNS reports, he is off on a 'Grand Tour' of the
Imperium...whether voluntarily, or otherwise has been left unsaid.

BTW, I've never seen Lucan as the raving madman type, but more like a petty
tyrant, a short-sighted, self centered opportunist, elevated far above his
competence to lead the Imperium.

Presuming the whole truth is explained in the Rebellion Sourcebook, Lucan saw
in a hearbeat how to get the throne for himself, and took it. There's little
evidence that he ever really thought about it seriously, or that he was ever
anything but a spoiled royal playboy. He was too far down the line of
succession, in a time of peace and prosperity, for him to have ever been
considered seriously for the throne, or trained for it.

In the beginning, he wasn't a madman, just someone who got to play out his
fantasies of being The Boss, instituting a firm hand on the ship of state...at
that point, most people who opposed him probably figured that after a while,
when he got used to being Emperor, and the immediate crisis was over, he'd
settle down, learn to take direction and advice from his ministers and the
Moot, and turn out to be an indistinguished little Emperor.

He always viewed the rule of the Imperium primarily as to how it affected
_him_ rather than everyone else. Under the pressure, he broke down and went
insane, but that was long after he'd eliminated either by attrition (his best
commanders had to get out there and command) or by direct order ("Damnit,
Admiral! QUIT opposing me on this...you're FIRED!"), and was surrounded by
compliant yes-men.

By then of course, he was delusional, but so well entrenched it would have
taken a plot by his insiders to kill him, much as the abortive attempt to kill Hitler.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:21:05 +0100
From: "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters

Eris wrote:
> Assuming your numbers are correct, it looks like you are either
> going to ignore the Stellar MSD or require ships to run out all
> the way out to 4.49 AU.

You missed the third possibility:  that  you  take  a  marginally
greater risk.  The task rating for jump  (in  my  article)  moves
from 'Routine' to 'Routine+1' at 56% of MSD ... just over 2.5 AU.
Commercial transports and passenger liners probably wouldn't take
any unnecessary risk, but private craft (like Free Traders) might
do so, especially if it can save a few credits in life support.

Exiting jump is another matter, according to cannon  any  attempt
to exit jump within MSD is shifted such that jump exit is at MSD.



> Personally, I'm very much against ignoring the Star's "jump
> point" in these discussions, because it makes more sense to me
> to jump from a system's star to another system's star, than
> from a system's planet to another system's planet.


Quoting from "From Port To Jump-point" (JTAS 22):

    "Many times, the unsafe jump radius is completely within that
    of a larger unsafe jump  radius.  In  the  Terra  (Sol  0207)
    system,  the  orbits  of  Mercury  and  Venus  are  contained
    completely within the 100 diameter limit of the G2 star Sol."

But it also says:

    "Every object within a 1000 diameter sphere of a  given  mass
    defines a jump mass vortex.  For objects outside that region,
    set up another vortex based upon  those  independent  masses.
    For vortices within the same parsec, jump-1 is sufficient  to
    travel between them.  A  jump-1  is  how  ships  travel  from
    Regina/Regina (Lusor) to Gagamshir/Regina (Darida), a  simple
    5000 AU hop, still taking one week."

So, accepting the JTAS article (which was a key  for  mine)  then
you are correct: "you can't ignore the star's MSD", but  you  are
also incorrect: "you _can_ jump from  planet  to  planet  (rather
than star to star)".



Regards PLST
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/trisen/personal/traveller
"Rome wasn't burned in a day"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 14:32:36 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

In a message dated 10/18/98 10:07:51 AM Pacific Daylight Time, rancke@diku.dk
writes:

<< However, there is another possibility. The 10% of original cost pa. figure
is
 specifically said to include logistics. So the auxiliaries could concievably
 be paid out of that figure and not separately. I'm not saying it is so. But
 it might be. >>

This could be true, but I have always assumed that the logistical cost
reflected more reloads and spares, expendible supplies, food, etc.  The ship's
would have to be paid for seperately...but this would be a mostly one-time
expense I guess (as long as you take care of your Replenishment Group).

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:44:54 +0100
From: "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)

You wrote:
> Umm, based on Sol's average diameter of 864,000 miles, the 100
> diameter limit would be .925 AU.  Just inside Earth's orbit.  A
> ship leaving Venus would have to accelerate out to the stellar
> safe jump line, but one from Earth could simply boost out to
> the planetary safe jump line.


I think you skipped a post.  Under the standard rules your  above
statement is correct, I had proposed an alternative based  on  my
interpretation of various sources.  You can find my  proposal  at

http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/trisen/personal/traveller/jump.html



Regards PLST
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/trisen/personal/traveller
"Rome wasn't burned in a day"

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #967
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Sunday, October 18 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 968



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Sensors
Re: Lucan
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (long)
NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!
Re: Polyglot Traveller
Re: Piracy
viable pirate career...
Re: Sensors and Piracy
re: Sensors
Re: Lucan
Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Lucan
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 20:53:48 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Sensors

Eris Reddoch writes:

>Frankly, I'd like the detection ranges of ships to be about twice
>the distance at which you can get a lock for beam weapons, a few
>hundred thousand km at most.  That gives ships some maneuvering
>room, a reason to deploy forward screens of boats or escorts and a
>reason to use missiles.  But it also allows ships to lurk near
>planets and jump areas to catch the unwary.  I *know* this isn't
>realistic, but it's the gaming effect I'd like to see.  

Me too.
 
>The question, of course, is how *can* detection ranges this short be
>explained, and dusty systems won't do for a general explanation.<g>
>Any ideas?

I still think that my "subspace heatsink" is the way to go. A method
linked to thruster technology that allows a ship to use whatever subspace
medium thrusters thrust against as a heat sink. It's a tad contrived, I
admit (a technological device that works for only one thing and can't
be used for anything else), but I think it is a reasonable handwave.
Such a heat sink would be hideously expensive, of course, which would
make warships more expensive -- something I think would be a nice bonus.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:17:28 -0400
From: "Shade" <jwatts@catt.com>
Subject: Re: Lucan

>My take on it is, 'Get out of the Palace and see the Imperium before I
have you shot on general >principles."


Exactly.... either that or part of a plan.


Shade


The problem with religious texts is that the answers
arent in the BACK, either. 

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 21:37:19 +0000
From: "Jens Maskus" <Jens.Maskus@stud.uni-hannover.de>
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (long)

On Sat, 17 Oct 1998 19:00:21 +0100, Peter L.S. Trevor wrote:

>Going through some old disks I found a draft  document  that  was
>posted to the TML back in January 1995.  Anyway, I finally got it
>finished it and thought it might be of interest.
>
>
>
>Jump Drive and the 100 Diameter Limit
>=====================================
>
>Here's a thought or two ...

Very fine work, but put the mass of our sun into the calculation ;-) the 
jumplimits will go up. Now you must travell far more away from a star, depending 
on the stelar mass between 2 and 5 AU! I'm using it.


Jens Maskus

Jens.Maskus@stud.uni-hannover.de

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:49:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!

From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
>
> >Hmmm.. I've always prefered to portray him as a completely sane, rational
> >man.  Quite charming, actually.  Sparkling personality.  Then you do
> >something.  He thinks you're out to get him.  Your family turns up dead,
> >your fortune is confiscated, and you spend a few very unpleasent days being
> >tortured for information on the "plot" before being killed.
> 
> Sounds a lot like Clinton...
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
			
	WHAT THE HELL DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH TRAVELLER!!!!!


	This kind of behavior really pisses me off.  I don't subscribe to
this list to read political commentary of any stripe.  The TML, for all
its arguments, is one place on the planet where people _aren't_ talking
about Monica Lewinsky -- and I'd like to keep it that way!  Didn't your
mother teach you that it's not nice to insult people's politics or
religion?  Frankly, I find the comparison of the President of the United
States to a murderous madman, even a fictitious one, to be deeply
offensive.  I have let countless similar remarks on this topic and others
go unchallenged, but I simply can't take it anymore. 
	I have been continously astounded by the willingness of some
people to insult the beliefs of others on this list.  The above is but the
most recent of egregious examples of this, such as the thread in which a
list member who is also a pacifist was repeatedly called a coward.  This
is utterly inexcusable.  My purpose is neither to defend nor attack any
particular view point or group.  It is to insist that the members of the
TML exercise the same civility and respect for each other in cyberspace
that we would demand of them in real space. 

	THE TML IS A PLACE FOR DISCUSSION OF A HOBBY WE ALL SHARE AND 
LOVE.  PEOPLE WHO CAN'T OR WON'T RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS, POLITICAL, AND 
NATIONAL DIVERSITY OF THE TML'S SUBSCRIBERS SHOULD SIMPLY GO ELSEWHERE.

	Sincerely,

	John Macpherson

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:55:59 -0400
From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller

>> Starport       Puerto Estrellero

>IMHO this sounds really really bad in Spanish.

I'm not too thrilled with it either. What sounds better?

In the Traveller universe, we use different words for ships that
can't jump and those that can: spaceships and starships.
So maybe instead,
"Spaceship" = "Nave espacial"
"Starship" = "Astronave"
and 
"Spaceport" = Puerto espacial"
"Starport" = "Puerto astronaval"?

>> Company        Compania  (n with a tilde+AH4- over it, i with
>an accent)

>In fact, it's the "o" the letter with an accent

But my spanish teacher (a Colombian) just recently corrected my
spelling to match the way I did it...

Corporacion
Administracion

>"o" has the accent.

You're right. My mistake.
 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 02:15:34 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Walter G. Smith wrote:

> Ian Whitchurch wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >How many of those did Austalia pay to build as apposed to just maintaining?
>
> Ummm, all of them. We are friends with the Yanks, but they have this funny
> thing about actually getting paid for stuff that is bought off them.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> We're still waiting for the Aussie's to pay for all those aircraft and
> construction equipment we "lent" them back in the 40's. :)
>
> They shouldn't feel bad, though - the only nation that ever paid off a
> war debt to the US was Finland. (World War One - on time, and in
> cash, btw. Go figure.)

Naw, we just have to Foreclose.

- --
Ave et vale.
Evyn,
Warleader of the Clan MacDude
Solus Stellamilitia Ludus, 1998 Œ

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:23:35 CDT
From: Don McKinney <dmckinne@itds.com>
Subject: viable pirate career...

It was always my belief that the pirates best operating areas were
OUTSIDE Imperial Space - that perhaps the "pirate career" represented 
legitimate merchants within the Imperium, but Corsairs outside it.  
For example, in District 268, you could prey on Trexalon merchants
or Sword Worlds traders, or perhaps the rare Zhodani factor...

Or in Gvurrdon sector, I would have my pick of the various low-tech
Vargr groups, and more Zhodani...


DonM.

- --
==========================================================================
= Donald E. McKinney, Senior CM Specialist             dmckinne@itds.com =
= International Telecommunications Data Systems           (217) 239-8365 =
= 2109 Fox Drive, Champaign, IL                           (217) 351-8250 =
= Winter War XXVI Convention Chairman, Champaign, IL, February 5-7, 1999 =
= dmckinne@prairienet.org or winterwar@prairienet.org     (217) 469-9917 = 
==========================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:11:00 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Sensors and Piracy

It occurs to me that given a couple of facts:

One, piracy will be most likely in backwater systems with limited
defences.

Two, pirates want their prey intact.

We get the following: Pirates _want_ to be detected as such. heave
to and prepare to be boarded, or face destruction. From a firepower
standpoint they have an advantage, as well as maneuver, most likely.
If they can get into range before the target can jump, or help can
arrive, they win.

They way to improve things for pirates is to look for good places to
hunt--worlds that are moons of GGs will have farther 100 diamter
limits, for example (not to mention extra dust, and radiation if
Jupiter is a model). Worlds that are within the 100D limit of the
primary are another likely hunting ground ("The damn Navy has been
talking about improving our sensors and defences for over 75 years,
but we always get the short end of the stick.") 

Actually, in the last case, you'll always drive away from the star
to jump out, and the other way coming in---pirates can appear as
merchants coming to the world, and will onnly give themselves away
when they break.  Anyway, I think it's not impossible under DSR.

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:11:15 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: Sensors

>The question, of course, is how *can* detection ranges this short be
>explained, and dusty systems won't do for a general explanation.<g>
>Any ideas?

There's an implicit assumption that at TL-10 it becomes possible to
build visible-light synthetic-aperture arrays as sensors. If this
isn't possible, sensors will look like they do at TL-9 - seperate
trackers and scanners and a moderate cap on maximum size. Sensors
past the biggest TL-9 could be built but size would go up by x100
for each +0.5 rather than x10 (you're adding more telescopes, which
is less efficient than one big array.)

Also, some people (Hi anthony!) think that confusion with background
objects will begin to dominate - in which case you could just cap the
sensor sensitivity again at about 13.5 or so.

Eris' rapidly-moving stutterwarp ships probably have signatures about -1
and sensitivies -0.5 relative to stationary ships.

Finally, for pirates - and anyone trying to hide - there is the "shadowing"
maneuver; if you can remain at a constant bearing relative to a target -
either heading towards it or away from it, which usually requires that
it isn't accelerating, or constant range and matching its acceleration - 
you should get about a -1 (normal success on a Difficult Pilot roll)
or -2 (outstanding success), because you'll look like a star.

Ian writes
>If we assume Terra is unusual in that it is much less dusty than 'normal'
From an astronomical standpoint, this isn't a terrible assumption;
the amount of dust in other solar systems is unknown. We know how much
our system has, we know how much a handful of young and extra-dusty
systems (Vega, Beta Pictoris, etc.) have - thousands or millions of times
more than our system - and that's all; current techniques can only detect
systems about a thousand times more dusty than ours. In fact, one of the
missions for the interferometer mode of the two Keck telescopes (being
constructed by NASA) is to measure extrasolar zodiacal dust - it'll be
able to see systems about ten times denser than ours.

This dust won't be thick enough to interfere with weapons fire - the
only noticeable effect would be a bright diffuse glow in the local
ecliptic, and a very very bright glow in the IR.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:57:20 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Lucan

In a message dated 10/18/98 11:24:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu writes:

<< BTW, I've never seen Lucan as the raving madman type, but more like a petty
 tyrant, a short-sighted, self centered opportunist, elevated far above his
 competence to lead the Imperium.
  >>

I cuncur...

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 20:02:54 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

In a message dated 10/18/98 2:48:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
dom@cybergoths.u-net.com writes:

<< Hans, (under HG) I would disagree with this. The riders should be heavily
 armoured and carry top end meson/PA weapons. This should make the squadron
 pretty effective against and equivalent BatRon or CruRon in straight
 combat. Of course, on an individual basis the BRs are weaker than a full
 Battleship.
 
 Dom >>

In a knock down drag out, I'll take BR's anyday... Ton for ton they have a lot
more spinal mounts and HG lives and dies by the spinal mount critical hit. Try
taking a Tigress versis a bunch of BR's (so the tonnage is equal. Throw in the
tender so the comparison is fairer, but put her in reserve...). She'll kill a
BR every turn, but the BR's will nibble her to death with a bunch of critical
hits every turn....

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:23:01 GMT
From: thewolkes@earthlink.net
Subject: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Gotta have something for those nuclear dampers to defend against!

Using GUPS High-tech, I found some damage figures for nuclear
warheads, and extrapolated for some larger-yield warheads.  Since
there is no concussion in space, this is 'heat pulse' damage.  Since
it affects a whole side of the ship at once, armor protects at half
value (weak points) and the hull and half of the turrets and half of
the bays are automatically hit.  You can decide any way you like which
ones they are.

Distance	1megaton	10 megaton	100 megaton	
(miles)		(TL9)		(TL10)		(TL 12)

1		12Dx320	12Dx3200	12Dx32,000
2		12Dx80		12Dx800	12Dx8,000
3		12Dx36		12Dx358	12Dx3758
5		12Dx13		12Dx128	12Dx1280
6		12Dx9		12Dx89		12Dx894
7		12Dx7		12Dx66		12Dx657
15		12D		12Dx14		12Dx144
20		10D		12Dx8		12Dx81
30		4D		12Dx4		12Dx36
45		-		12Dx2		12Dx16
70		-		-		12Dx7
100		-		-		-

TL 12 missiles are antimatter missiles and therefore are the sole
preserve of sophisticated galactic navies; you won't see them in the
posession of local fleets.  TL10 missiles are laser-pumped fusion
missiles, and are standard armament in smaller imperiums where TL12 is
not the rule.  TL9 missiles are miniaturised fission-fusion-fission
devices, and are usually only found on independent worlds of TL9.

There's a reason I chose these ranges; they correspond to -29 (2
miles) to -39 (100 miles) - meaning that as a missile approaches, the
bonus to hit it with point defense fire goes from -39 at the furthest
to -29 at the closest.  1 mile is the closest approach, because even
at a relative speed of 1 hex/turn, that last mile will be closed at 10
miles per second.

Because of the low rate of fire of lasers, point-defense gunners must
decide at what range they will engage incoming missiles (for most
missiles, it's 1 mile, but if the enemy is suspected of using nuclear
missiles, a longer range should be chosen.

Likewise, the nuclear missile gunner should secretly choose what range
he's going to set off his missiles.

The further off missiles are engaged, the better the point defense
gunner has to do on his roll.  

range (miles)	must make Point defense by
100			10
70			9
45			8
30			7
20			6
15			5
10			4
7			3
5			2
3			1
2			0

Needless to say, there's no dodge roll for nuclear missiles.

For those who don't want to do the math, here's the required number of
nuclear damper modules to create a defense of the appropriate size:

range (miles)	nuclear damper modules

100			256,000
70			4,000
45			128
30			16
20			4
15			2
10			1

A missile that has been set to detonate at the same range as the
target ship's nuclear damper limit will be safely neutralised on a
simple skill roll by the operator.

What if the missile gunner hides a small number of nuclear missiles in
a salvo of normal missiles?  There are various ways to handle this,
but I personally like the idea of numbering the salvo, having the
missile gunner secretly assign them as either nuclear or conventional,
and allowing the point-defense gunner(s) to fire at them in whatever
order he chooses.  In practice, this kind of tactic should be pretty
effective.  I should expect that Imperial capital ships (50,000 dtons
and up) would put their dampers up at 4,000 so they wouldn't generally
have to worry about nuclear missiles.  One could allow a sensor roll
on the radscanners, but they need to make the sensor roll by 5+ in
order to identify the missile as a nuclear missile, and with range
modifier of -39, a TL 12 command bridge sensor suite will have a -1 to
skill to identify the nuclear missiles, meaning that the sensor
operator must make his roll by 6 or more.  For TL12 basic bridges the
roll must be made by 9 or more.  A roll that succeeds, but does not
make the roll by 5+, could discern that there are nuclear missiles in
the salvo, but not which ones are which.

There are plenty of ways to add complexity to this situation.  The
first one that springs to mind is:

Allow nuclear missiles to attack salvos of missiles.  With no
defensive fire and no dodging, the only way to stop this is for the
offensive gunner to allocate conventional missiles from the salvo to
attack the incoming nuclear missile.  The missiles would have to move
at less than their full-out acceleration for this to be possible.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 16:48:30 -0400
From: John H Bogan Jr <jbogan@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: Lucan

At 08:32 AM 10/18/1998 EDT, you wrote:
>In a message dated 10/17/98 5:24:01 PM Central Daylight Time,
>Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca writes:
>
><< >The one thing that has always fascinated me is how madmen 
> >like Lucan can hold power without someone putting a bullet 
> >in them. Especially in the case of Lucan, where his madness 
> >would end the deaths of billions and the decimation
> >of the Imperium.
>
>The conflicting thesis is that evil drives out good. That 
>the "good people were killed quickly enough to forestall 
>any such pre-emptive action." BTW, there were instances 
>in Imperial history (one gave rise to the right of
>assassination) in which the good did stand up and knock
>off the evil emperor.
>I wonder why no one did that with Lucan?

Because patriotic Imperials understand that the 
Imperium is something bigger, grander, than any
one single Emperor. During the Rebellion, what
forstalled action against Lucan's incompetences
was the fact that there was a dire emergency --
an insurrection spawned by a cold, vicious,
betraying power-grab thinly veiled with some
"democratic" rhetoric -- supposedly for the 
Imperium's one good.

Given Dulinor's action, and with him still fighting,
it's more than a little bit difficult to then
knock off Lucan using the same rhetorical justifications.

Ironic, isn't it? Dulinor is the one who legitimates Lucan.

>So what is Lucan doing is the Gurps alternate timeline?

He and Varian are taking (separate) incognito grand
tours of the Imperium.

JB

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 18:54:22 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

> From: thewolkes@earthlink.net
> 
> Gotta have something for those nuclear dampers to defend against!

<snipers>

> Distance	1megaton	10 megaton	100 megaton	
> (miles)		(TL9)		(TL10)		(TL 12)

Great idea, but we can build 100 Mt nuclear warheads right now...

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 98 22:07:02 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters

On 10/18/98 at 04:40 AM,  steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com> said:

>Eris Reddoch wrote:

>> Personally, I'm very much against ignoring the
>> Star's "jump point" in these discussions, because it makes more
>> sense to me to jump from a system's star to another system's star,
>> than from a system's planet to another system's planet.

>Hold on a sec.  I've barely been paying attention.

>Eris, are you saying that in in YTU, the jump limit is 100 diameters
>of a system's star?

Just about.

IMTU I base the distance on a constant times the ratio of the radius
of the local star (or stars) to the radius of Sol. I *probably*
should use stellar mass rather than the stellar radius, but I don't
(actually I know I should, but I don't like the ranges it gives me).
Anyway, the constant I'm using is 250 (125 diameters).  If the
constant was 200 it would fit the 100 diameters of canon.

The reason I use the star rather than a planet has to do with
the distances and masses involved, and the requirement I have that
the Astrogator *manually* lock onto her target during the Jump Task
regardless of the quality of the jump charts or calculations.  She
can lock onto a star's mass at interstellar ranges (and *that's*
what the J number is all about IMTU), but anything smaller than a
gas giant gets washed out in the star's gravitational shadow.

My way of doing things is only for MTU, of course.  However, for
*any* TU, the star should be a much more "visible" target than a
planet.

>If so, I think I like that very much.

>You would ignore planetary jump-limits (i.e., 100d) that were
>completely within the stellar jump limit, 

I do, for interstellar distances.

> but would use them for planetary jump limits outside the stellar
> jump limit?

I don't, IMTU (I don't allow in system jumping to anything smaller
than a gas giant..it's too small to lock onto), but for an orthodox
TU I would.

>I think I like that too.

>Here's a little text picture.  Its the ?? area I'm curious how you
>deal with, assuming you did mean stellar diamters.


>star)--------------------------------)??????????)
>star)---- [==Planet A==]- - - - - [==Planet B==]

I'm sorry Bloo, but I can't decipher your picture.  

I think you're asking about jumping to planets inside or outside the
stellar jump limit.  I say the ship can only jump to a point at the
star's jump limit, or to the jump limit around an outer system gas
giant.

This means you have to travel from the jump limit in to a planet
further in, or out to a planet further out on maneuver drive.  This
*can* take days, even weeks in some cases, and this is where my way
of doing things seems to most differ from canon.  Of course, I'm a
heretic, so that doesn't bother me too much.  ;-> However...

...the time a ship stays in system between jumps has always been on
the order of 7 to 10 days.  It seems the canon way of describing
this time in system is: 

1.  The first day a ship arrives in system a few hours, at most, from
    the main world, it travels to the main world and docks/lands.

2.  The ship sits in port where it loads/unloads cargo, is serviced,
    and the crew goes adventuring and cargo hunting for the next
    week.
     
3.  After about a week the ship lifts, flies to the jump point and
    jumps for the next system.
 
My way is...

1.  The ship arrives in system anywhere from most of a day's travel
    to a couple of day's travel from the main world.

2.  The ship travels to the main world and docks/lands.

3.  The ship sits in port for 2 to 5 days loading/unloading cargo
    and being serviced while the crew goes adventuring.
    
4.  The ship lifts, spends a day or two travelling to the jump point
    and then jumps to the next system.

I've never found it to be a big problem to cut the time on planet
in half.  Sure a party might still spend a week or more diddling
around a planet, but that's because of adventuring, not because it
takes that long to do the actual work of getting the ship ready to
fly again. 

Making ships (and slow merchants take the longest) spend up to a
couple of days flying each way from jump point to planet opens up
all kinds of interesting possibilities.  I won't mention "the word
that must be avoided", but it does make their existence a little
more viable.


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:09:20 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Legate Legion wrote:
> 
> > From: thewolkes@earthlink.net
> >
> > Gotta have something for those nuclear dampers to defend against!
> 
> <snipers>
> 
> > Distance      1megaton        10 megaton      100 megaton
> > (miles)               (TL9)           (TL10)          (TL 12)
> 
> Great idea, but we can build 100 Mt nuclear warheads right now...

Probably true (I could possibly find out for sure, but, if I then posted
it, I'd have to degauss _all_ of your hard drives [as well as degaussing
your _brains_... ;-)]).

The question is, what size warheads would _fit_ on a standard-sized
missile?  (Let's face it, if you can't put it on target, a _gigaton_
nuke doesn't do enough to justify popping it.)

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:15:40 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

At 06:54 PM 10/18/98 -0700, Legate Legion wrote:
>> From: thewolkes@earthlink.net
>> 
>> Gotta have something for those nuclear dampers to defend against!
>
><snipers>
>
>> Distance	1megaton	10 megaton	100 megaton	
>> (miles)		(TL9)		(TL10)		(TL 12)
>
>Great idea, but we can build 100 Mt nuclear warheads right now...

Yes, but can we put them on a 250mm shell?  That's only ten inches...  the
warhead of a standard missile is a 250mm HEAT explosive device.  (p. 158
and 159)

GURPS Vehicles, p110: a 1 megaton bomb can be fit into a 200mm shell at
TL9.  Since a 200mm shell is 100 KT at TL7, I felt justified in the tech
levels I used.  I used 200mm instead of 250mm because a nuclear warhead is
likelier to have more safeguards on it than a conventional warhead.  IIRC
American nuclear bombs have seven failsafes of various kinds.

If you want to, you can design larger missiles (perhaps fewer to a bay) for
larger warheads.  I did it this way so that the missiles would not be
immediately obvious what kind they were, at least from infrared or visual
sensors.

Oh, and be careful on your replies.  Did you want to send your reply to
anyone except the list?

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 98 22:35:11 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)

On 10/18/98 at 09:54 AM,  dberry@hooked.net said:

>Umm, based on Sol's average diameter of 864,000 miles, the 100
>diameter limit would be .925 AU.  Just inside Earth's orbit.  A ship
>leaving Venus would have to accelerate out to the stellar safe jump
>line, but one from Earth could simply boost out to the planetary safe
>jump line. --

Yep, that's one way to look at it.

Or you could require the ship to travel to the stellar jump limit in order to jump. Different strokes, eh? ;->

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #968
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 19 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 969



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: OT: Lord of the Rings
Re: Sensors
Re: Sensors
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters
Re: Sensors
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)
Re: OT: Nostalgia Attack : WH40k III review
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters
re: Sensors
Re: Polyglot Traveller
Re: Request for Comments
Re: FFS2/DSR analysis of the hiding pirate problem
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate)
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Question regarding Ley Sector
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 98 22:41:37 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters

On 10/18/98 at 07:21 PM,  "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk> said:


>So, accepting the JTAS article (which was a key  for  mine)  then you
>are correct: "you can't ignore the star's MSD", but  you  are also
>incorrect: "you _can_ jump from  planet  to  planet  (rather than
>star to star)".

I didn't say *you* couldn't. I just said *I* didn't.  

As I said the other day, your aritcle is interesting, so was the
JTAS article, it's just not the way I intend to do things.  Remember
I'm a self-confessed heretic. ;->

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:45:33 -0500
From: eldwyn@juno.com
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

Wow, I thought I was the only GM who was pathetic this way....

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:50:58 -0400 steve daniels
<stevedaniels@portcaddo.com> writes:

>
>Anson Betts wrote:
>> Just make it up as you go :)
>>
>I have a complete inability to make up names for things
>and people as an gaming sessions goes.  Its so pathetic.
>
>Bloo
>

MarioC
eldwyn@juno.com

- --Imagine Whirled Peas...


___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 21:15:13 -0500
From: eldwyn@juno.com
Subject: Re: OT: Lord of the Rings

Here, here....


On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:32:48 -0400 steve daniels
<stevedaniels@portcaddo.com> writes:
>
>Costner is _never_ better.
>Than anyone.
>period.
>
>;-)
>
>Bloo
>
>

MarioC
eldwyn@juno.com

- --Imagine Whirled Peas...

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 98 22:51:38 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Sensors

On 10/18/98 at 08:53 PM,  Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> said:

>>The question, of course, is how *can* detection ranges this short be
>>explained, and dusty systems won't do for a general explanation.<g>
>>Any ideas?

>I still think that my "subspace heatsink" is the way to go. A method
>linked to thruster technology that allows a ship to use whatever
>subspace medium thrusters thrust against as a heat sink. It's a tad
>contrived, I admit (a technological device that works for only one
>thing and can't be used for anything else), but I think it is a
>reasonable handwave. Such a heat sink would be hideously expensive,
>of course, which would make warships more expensive -- something I
>think would be a nice bonus.

Ok, here's a task for our physicists.  Can you come up with a
logical sounding "subspace heatsink" that does as little violence to
physical laws as we know them?

Personally, I use slower than light stutterwarp for maneuver in my
games.  This reduces IR signature a great deal, so it's less
important for me, but it is for more conventional maneuver drives.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:03:02 -0500
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: Sensors

>Personally, I use slower than light stutterwarp for maneuver in my
>games.  This reduces IR signature a great deal, so it's less
>important for me, but it is for more conventional maneuver drives.
>

Yes, but while stutterwarp cuts the IR, a grav scanner should pick it up
rather easily.
Might even increase the detection range?

TV

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:32:43 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters

Eris Reddoch wrote:

[good stuff]

Thanks, Eris.  I do like the way you do things.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 98 23:40:11 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Sensors

On 10/18/98 at 11:03 PM,  "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com> said:

>>Personally, I use slower than light stutterwarp for maneuver in my
>>games.  This reduces IR signature a great deal, so it's less
>>important for me, but it is for more conventional maneuver drives.
>>

>Yes, but while stutterwarp cuts the IR, a grav scanner should pick it
>up rather easily.
>Might even increase the detection range?

That depends on the range of the grav scanner, doesn't it?  Bruce's
DSR doesn't address grav scanners and I don't believe FFS2 does
either.  In FFS no ranges are given for densometers.  So, I guess
you can set the range for grav scanners to whatever you'd like.
Personally, I limit the range to a few hundred kilometers for
anything remotely ship sized, long enough for planetary mapping, not
long enough for ship detection.

Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:42:46 EDT
From: GypsyComet@aol.com
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters (much shorter)

"Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk> responds:

>You wrote:
>> Umm, based on Sol's average diameter of 864,000 miles, the 100
>> diameter limit would be .925 AU.  Just inside Earth's orbit.  A
>> ship leaving Venus would have to accelerate out to the stellar
>> safe jump line, but one from Earth could simply boost out to
>> the planetary safe jump line.
>
>
>I think you skipped a post.  Under the standard rules your  above
>statement is correct, I had proposed an alternative based  on  my
>interpretation of various sources.

 <snip>

 One thing that a simple 100dia Stellar limit does is make calculations
easy, however. A table of Stellar Radii (found in Book 6:Scouts and various
Astronomy sources) gives you a number that basically IS the radius in AU
of the Jump Horizon.
 And since a great many worlds in Traveller orbit red main sequence stars,
the stellar Jump Horizon still plays a part (Habitable orbit at 0.2 AU,
Jump Horizon at anywhere from 0.2 to 0.55 AU).

GypsyComet
GypsyComet@aol.com

PS: My apologies to those who hit my webpage in the dozens this past week
looking for the Addaxur material. My primary machine is still in the shop...

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:47:55 -0400
From: Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Nostalgia Attack : WH40k III review

At 10:52 AM 10/18/98 -0500, you wrote:
...
>  Be careful - I've already heard from one person whose rulebook binding
>failed within a couple of days (and there wasn't a photocopier involved...).
> 

Same thing happened to me.  I called Games Workshop's customer support (a
toll-free number the local GW store gave me) and they quizzed me on the
batch number of my copy of the game (it's on the back of the box) and on a
randomly selected word from within the rule book to be sure I actually
owned the thing...  They're sending me a replacement copy when the 2nd
print run is made (next month) and a post-paid sticker to return my
(defective) copy.  It seems much of the first batch (whatever that is) had
various problems, from flakey bindings, to having covers torn to shreds
because they were packed, along with a LOT of plastic figures, etc., into a
too-tiny box...  

I am NOT AT ALL a GW fan, but their customer support impressed me...



Bill Rutherford
worj@topgun.cinecom.com

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:04:11 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters

>From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
>Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters
...
>can lock onto a star's mass at interstellar ranges (and *that's*
>what the J number is all about IMTU), but anything smaller than a
>gas giant gets washed out in the star's gravitational shadow.

  Does that mean that you don't allow jumps to non-stellar hexes?

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:50:28 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

> From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
> >> Gotta have something for those nuclear dampers to defend against!
> >
> ><snipers>
> >
> >> Distance	1megaton	10 megaton	100 megaton	
> >> (miles)		(TL9)		(TL10)		(TL 12)
> >
> >Great idea, but we can build 100 Mt nuclear warheads right now...
> 
> Yes, but can we put them on a 250mm shell?  That's only ten inches... 
the
> warhead of a standard missile is a 250mm HEAT explosive device.  (p. 158
> and 159)

Gee, if a 155mm Shell can fit a 1 Mt Nuclear Device, I do not see why
not...

> GURPS Vehicles, p110: a 1 megaton bomb can be fit into a 200mm shell at
> TL9.  Since a 200mm shell is 100 KT at TL7, I felt justified in the tech
> levels I used.  I used 200mm instead of 250mm because a nuclear warhead
is
> likelier to have more safeguards on it than a conventional warhead.  IIRC
> American nuclear bombs have seven failsafes of various kinds.

True, true, but I just have to say one thing...  These game designers have
most likely never served in the military & do not know current military
tech...

I can fit a 10 Mt Nuclear Device in a brief-case, I think I can fit it in a
250mm Missile tube, at our current TL...  By the time we reach for the
stars Iwould think 100 Mt could be fitted in the same space...

> Oh, and be careful on your replies.  Did you want to send your reply to
> anyone except the list?

<sarcasm> I am on a mailing list?  I thought you were all very nice people
sending me stuff about Traveller?  I never knew I was on a list...  How
does one get on this list, I just bought some used MegaTraveller stuff the
other day, could that be the reason you nice people are emailing me?
</sarcasm>

Legate Legion, Militant Jewish Terrorist
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

We are Microsoft of Borg.  Your distinctive capabilities will be adapted to
service us.  Resistance is futile.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:50:52 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

> From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
> > > Gotta have something for those nuclear dampers to defend against!
> > 
> > <snipers>
> > 
> > > Distance      1megaton        10 megaton      100 megaton
> > > (miles)               (TL9)           (TL10)          (TL 12)
> > 
> > Great idea, but we can build 100 Mt nuclear warheads right now...
> Probably true (I could possibly find out for sure, but, if I then posted
> it, I'd have to degauss _all_ of your hard drives [as well as degaussing
> your _brains_... ;-)]).

It is true...  The Russians have had, durring the cold war that is, 10 100
Mt warheads pointed at Washington DC...

Btw, what would be the effect of MIRVs in GURPs space combat...  Would all
of the warheads hit the same target or would they seek out differant ones?

> The question is, what size warheads would _fit_ on a standard-sized
> missile?  (Let's face it, if you can't put it on target, a _gigaton_
> nuke doesn't do enough to justify popping it.)

Well, the Russians thought so...  Remember in gorund combat, horses, hand
grenades, & nuclear weapons, almost does count...

Legate Legion, Militant Jewish Terrorist
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

We are Microsoft of Borg.  Your distinctive capabilities will be adapted to
service us.  Resistance is futile.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:24:09 +0300 (EET DST)
From: "Mikko V. I. Parviainen" <mvparvia@cc.hut.fi>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 neo@total.net wrote:
> On the TWG list, somebody made reference to an old German-English lexicon
> of Traveller-related words. This got me thinking about ways to make my
> campaign seem more global and polyglot. I'd like to be able to use
> languages other than English for naming things, especially starports and
> corporations. 

Very nice idea!

> 
> It occurs to me that TML members speak a wide variety of languages, and
> many of us might find uses for a multilingual lexicon of a few Traveller
> terms. Perhaps we might ask TMLers who speak languages other than English
> to provide translations for the following terms...
> 

Well.. I have some time at my disposal, so I could try to provide a
not-indo-european translation of these words. B-)
So here goes my 0.02FIM : These terms in Finnish:
(Other Finnish people on the list can correct me )
Still we need those non-European languages...

> Spaceport
Avaruussatama

Usage : for example, 

> Starport
Perhaps "avaruussatama" as well, but "tähtisatama" could work as well.
In my opinion "tähtisatama" is bad, but some people say that they could
use it.

> Highport
> Downport
These are hard. Perhaps "kiertorata-asema" and "maa-asema".

"Space station" is "avaruusasema". 

> Base
Tukikohta.

I would translate "Navy" as "Laivasto" or "Avaruuslaivasto".
(Direct translatri
"Scout" is hard to 

> Company
Yritys.

> Corporation
Yhtiö.

> Also, words for governmental bodies, ie:
> Parliament

Parlamentti.

> Council

Neuvosto.

Somebody could add to sthis list, my governmental english vocabulary is
not very extensive, and I'm too lazy to dig up a dictionary...
I can try to provide Finnish usage examples, if people want. 

- --
Mikko Parviainen
 IMTU tc+ tm++ tn+ ru+ ge++ 3i+ jt-- jd++ pi au st- ls kk hi++ dr++ as+
va+ so- zh+ da++ 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 98 01:53:08 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Jumping from zero planetary diameters

On 10/18/98 at 11:04 PM,  shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson) said:

>>can lock onto a star's mass at interstellar ranges (and *that's*
>>what the J number is all about IMTU), but anything smaller than a
>>gas giant gets washed out in the star's gravitational shadow.

>  Does that mean that you don't allow jumps to non-stellar hexes?

Ok, some more heretical ideas that apply to MTU...

No, not to empty hexes.  If you don't allow ships to jump to empty
hexes you can create choke points and strategic routes through
certain systems.  I think it makes for a more interesting
"geography", or would that be "astrography."  ;->

However there *are* "dark objects" in some non-stellar hexes that
have been (or can be) discovered and used.  Small brown dwarfs,
rouge gas giants and frozen cores are out there in most non-stellar
hexes.  Finding even one is a Staggering Task with an average time
frame of decades, but it can be done.

Within known space, the Imperium for example, many of the discovered
"dark objects" are charted and some even have deep-space refueling
depots established out there.  They form bridges between star mains
allowing the mass of J1 and J2 ships to move from main to
main...although with difficulty.  They also make an interesting
place to send your party, out in the middle of nowhere..in pitch
blackness one little outpost of light with a couple of dozen half
crazy hermits servicing passing ships.

The areas around these dark objects can also be very lonely spots,
especially in less travelled or frontier areas.  This is one place
where ethically challenged individuals might prey on passing fat
traders with little risk of interference from patrol ships.

Finding new "dark objects" is a full-time occupation for a branch of
the Scout Service.  For former scouts, who are adventuring, finding
a new "DOR" (Dark Object Route) can be worth a fortune.
Megacorporations and the Space Navy might want to keep the location
of DOR's to themselves gaining for themselves an advantage in
movement.  So might the crew of a free trader.  Of course, having a
valuable secret also makes you a target for people that want to take
it from you.


Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:36:03 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: re: Sensors

On Sun, 18 Oct 1998, Bruce Alan Macintosh wrote:

>Finally, for pirates - and anyone trying to hide - there is the "shadowing"
>maneuver; if you can remain at a constant bearing relative to a target -
>either heading towards it or away from it, which usually requires that
>it isn't accelerating, or constant range and matching its acceleration - 
>you should get about a -1 (normal success on a Difficult Pilot roll)
>or -2 (outstanding success), because you'll look like a star.

Assuming that the heat is radiated away from the sensor, what temperature
is the ship assumed to have in the DSR ?

>Bruce


Tommy Grav
- -------------------------------------------------------------
tommy.grav@astro.uio.no     http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/  
Institute of Astrophysics, UiO, No  
IMTU tn++t4+tg+ ru+ge++ !3i jt+au+st+ls hi++dr-so++zh-sy-sw++ 
 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:00:20 +0200
From: Guillem Plasencia <guillemp@ciberia.es>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller

> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:55:59 -0400
> From: Thad Coons <Sapience@compuserve.com>
> Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller
>
> >> Starport       Puerto Estrellero
>
> >IMHO this sounds really really bad in Spanish.
>
> I'm not too thrilled with it either. What sounds better?
>
> In the Traveller universe, we use different words for ships that
> can't jump and those that can: spaceships and starships.
> So maybe instead,
> "Spaceship" = "Nave espacial"
> "Starship" = "Astronave"
> and
> "Spaceport" = Puerto espacial"
> "Starport" = "Puerto astronaval"?
>
> >> Company        Compania  (n with a tilde+AH4- over it, i with
> >an accent)
>
> >In fact, it's the "o" the letter with an accent
>
> But my spanish teacher (a Colombian) just recently corrected my
> spelling to match the way I did it...
>

You're absolutely right ! <blushing of shame> I wrote it quite fast, and i didn't went over it for my own faults.

IMHO, it does honour you to look for a second opinion.

Guillem Plasencia
guillemp@ciberia.es

P.S. and also proves you're sharp :
you should never believe anything an "almost" biochemist as i may tell you about Spanish language...not even about
biochemistry :D

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:38:22 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Request for Comments

At 06:47 16/10/98 PDT, you wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>I've just been struck with an idea for another milieu, The Fourth 
>Imperium, or ROM2.
>
Good idea, I have had the same thoughts

>Starting, oh, about 2000 or so (using the 3I calender), it is the result 
>of vigorous expansion of Terrans to fill in the void left by the 
>Rebellion and Virus.  A couple of conditions.

Start a little earlier, about 12-1500
>
>1)  Virus has left the Terrans with a bad taste for high automation.  As 
>such ships typically have higher crew requirements.
>

>
>5)  The 4I rules like the 3I, but with a firmer grip, using hand picked 
>governors and viceroys.  The psi cops make this easier.
>
Good, an imperium.
>
>7)  The 4I uses high tech, TL 17, but tries to limit subject worlds to 
>no more than TL 12 or so.
>
>Anyone, please respond with ideas.
>
How aboiut Tl 16 instead?

>Thanks in advance.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:46:26 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: FFS2/DSR analysis of the hiding pirate problem

If our poor system decides to allocate approximately one active sensor per
30 deg. arc, 
1)being up sun will help the detection,
2)give another means of detecting the pirate.
(And they probab;ly already know where the planet is.
Thus Active sensors will probably do for him anyway.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:15:24 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate)

Ahh  Reality meets fantasy in a fight to the death!  Why not just folow
Bruce's suggestion and rweduce signatures by a point or so if you want to
avoid this problem...Unreal but its your TU?  This does not really solve
the main problem which is that there are inconsistencies between the size
of the imperium, and the the number of boats required to defend a world.
(Of course in other settings this may be different).

I just do not have pirates in most of the imperium, but consider it on the
fringes.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:32:13 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

The radiation effects from these bombs will kill anyliving thing way beyond
these ranges.  (considereing only the HArd gamma and neutron radiation)  I
did some calcs a while back for long range PDM using nuclear arheads.  ( If
you are interested I will send you a copy).  AGainst a minimally armoured
(TNE AV less than 50) vessels the stats are:

Values are in REMS, 500 and you will probably die , over 5000 and you fry.



                   Range in KM
Warhead size 10    20    30    40    50    60    70    80    90    100
100KT       22K   5600   1900  1400  900  600    500   300   300   200 
250KT       56K   14K    4600  3500  2200 1500   1100  900   700   600
500KT       111K  28K    9300  7000  4500 3100   2300  1700  1400  1100 
1MT         222K  55K    25K   14K   8900 6200   4500  3500  2700  2200
5MT         1.1M  278K   123K  69K   44K  31K    23K   17K   14K   11K
10MT        2.2M  556K   247K  139K  89K  62K    45k   35K   27K   22K
25MT        5.6M  1.4M   617K  347K  222K 154K   113K  87K   69K   56K
50MT        11M   2.8M   1.2M  695K  445K 309K   227K 174K   137K  111K
100MT       22M   5.6M   2.5M  1.4M  890K 620K   450K 350K   270K  220K

SUCCESS TABLE           
                   Range in KM
Warhead size 100   200    300   400   500   600   700   800   900   1000
100KT        200   100    0     0     0     0     0     0     0     0 
250KT        600   100    100   0     0     0     0     0     0     0 
500KT        1100  300    100   100   0     0     0     0     0     0  
1MT          2200  600    200   100   100   100   0     0     0     0
5MT          11K   2800   1200  700   400   300   200   200   100   100
10MT         22K   5600   2500  1400  900   600   400   300   300   200
25MT         56K   14K    6200  3500  2200  1500  1100  900   700   500
50MT         111K  28K    12K   6900  4400  3100  2200  1700  1300  1100
100MT        220K  56K    25K   14K   8900  6200  4500  3500  2700  2200


FAILURE TABLE           
                   Range in KM
Warhead size1000 2000  3000   4000  5000  6000  7000  8000  9000  10000
1MT         0    0     0      0     0     0     0     0     0     0
5MT         100  0     0      0     0     0     0     0     0     0
10MT        200  100   0      0     0     0     0     0     0     0
25MT        500  100   100    0     0     0     0     0     0     0
50MT        1100 300   100    100   0     0     0     0     0     0 
100MT       2200 600   200    100   100   100   0     0     0     0

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:42:14 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Question regarding Ley Sector

I'm currently reworking the Luriani in light of Jeff's revised data for the Fornast 
Sector which ment that I have moved the Luriani to the Ley Sector (which 
actually makes them more interesting IMHO). My question is does anyone 
know when the Imperium moved into the Ley Sector? I know that Fornast was 
brought in by around 120. But did Artemesus immediately move on to Ley or 
did he turn his attentions elsewhere?

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 06:48:26 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

At 05:32 PM 10/19/98 +0800, you wrote:
>The radiation effects from these bombs will kill anyliving thing way beyond
>these ranges.  (considereing only the HArd gamma and neutron radiation)  I
>did some calcs a while back for long range PDM using nuclear arheads.  ( If
>you are interested I will send you a copy).  AGainst a minimally armoured
>(TNE AV less than 50) vessels the stats are:
>
>Values are in REMS, 500 and you will probably die , over 5000 and you fry.

A TL10 battlesuit provides a radiation protection factor of 20 (divide
radiation by 20) so we can probably reasonably assume that a starship hull
will have a PF of 100 for civilian ships and 1000 for military, higher for
TL12.  This doesn't invalidate your point, but it does make the radiation
somewhat more survivable.

>                   Range in KM
>Warhead size 10    20    30    40    50    60    70    80    90    100
>100KT       22K   5600   1900  1400  900  600    500   300   300   200 
>250KT       56K   14K    4600  3500  2200 1500   1100  900   700   600
>500KT       111K  28K    9300  7000  4500 3100   2300  1700  1400  1100 
>1MT         222K  55K    25K   14K   8900 6200   4500  3500  2700  2200
>5MT         1.1M  278K   123K  69K   44K  31K    23K   17K   14K   11K
>10MT        2.2M  556K   247K  139K  89K  62K    45k   35K   27K   22K
>25MT        5.6M  1.4M   617K  347K  222K 154K   113K  87K   69K   56K
>50MT        11M   2.8M   1.2M  695K  445K 309K   227K 174K   137K  111K
>100MT       22M   5.6M   2.5M  1.4M  890K 620K   450K 350K   270K  220K

GURPS Space lists the radiation from a 1 megaton space burst at 2000 yards
(~2km) at 6600 rads... many orders of magnitude lower than what you have
listed.  Are you certain of these figures?

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #969
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 19 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 970



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

The Fourth Imperium:  was  Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964
Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)
Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #968
Structure of the Imperium

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 06:02:12 PDT
From: "jim clem" <travmind@hotmail.com>
Subject: The Fourth Imperium:  was  Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964

- ------------------------------

Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 12:14:18 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Request for Comments 

<SNIP>

> 
> 1)  Virus has left the Terrans with a bad taste for high automation.  
As 
> such ships typically have higher crew requirements.

IMTU, & IMNSFBHO, high tech without high automation is difficult at 
best, 
impossible at worst.
==========================

Hmmmmm, now thats something I had not considered.

==========================
> 2)  Psionics are in use, though not common among people.  The 4th Imp 
> makes serious use of 'psi cops' and in military uses.  This is _NOT_ a 
> kinder, gentler Imperium.  Psi is also used for system interfaces, as 
to 
> help prevent a recurrence of the Virus incident.  

I can see psi cops...
===========================

Actually, the psi generally ignore most folk, realizing it to be a waste 
of time to try and watch everyone in sight.  However, if you are a 
person of some importance, you can count on being watched.

===========================
> 3)  The 4I is still expanding beyond the old Solomani Rim sector, 
using 
> both economic and military aggression.

for a 4I centered on Terra, that would be a given.  However, I doubt if 
they'd 
get to Regency space by then, what with having to absorb everything in 
their 
way first.  The absorbtion would take time and effort as well as 
manpower.
===============================

True, though I don't know where the Regency is exactly.  I have'nt 
gotten any TNE stuff yet.

================================
> 4)  I'm not sure what to do with the alien races, I'd love some 
comments 
> on that.

The 4I would probably fight a major war against the K'kree to secure its 
borders and make sure there was nobody invading them in the pursuit of 
truth, 
justice, and the militant vegetarian way of life.  What they'd do with 
the 
Hivers is up for grabs; would they trust the Hivers enough to buy tech 
from 
them, or would they shoot them on sight?
==================================

War with the K'kree is a guarantee.  The Hivers they just don't trust. 
Not enough to shoot on sight, but if they think they have an 
excuse............

==================================
Given the 4I's roots in the Solomani Party, would they stoop to using 
the 
Aslans for mercenaries?  And what do they do with the Vargr?  
Paper-train them?
===================================

The Houses of the 4I do use Aslan and Vargr Mercs.  The Vargr are 
considered cousins of a sort, considering their Terran roots.

====================================
> 5)  The 4I rules like the 3I, but with a firmer grip, using hand 
picked 
> governors and viceroys.  The psi cops make this easier.

This would be a given, under the stated conditions.  Although, with 
distance, 
this firm grip *will* get looser.
=====================================

True.

======================================
> 6)  Not sure what to do about the Zho's.

Considering their position relative to the 4I, they'd be out of the way, 
behind the Regency, which, due to its distance, would probably still be 
in 
business.
=======================================

True again.

=======================================
> 7)  The 4I uses high tech, TL 17, but tries to limit subject worlds to 
> no more than TL 12 or so.

I can see the 4I keeping tech down to about TL11 for civilians and 
outlawing higher tech in non-military hands.  This would include 
starships as well as weapons & computers.  But if the 4I is against high 
automation, then TL17 becomes difficult at best.  And would they recover 
enough in the 850 years since the Virus to achieve TL17?  Assuming their 
archives survived to allow them relatively quick rebuilding to TL12 or 
TL14, there's still the needed scientific advancements to get to TL16 & 
beyond.  My take, given that most surviving planets would devolve to TL6 
or less, is that 850 years is *WAY* too short to get to TL17, especially 
given that high automation is probably outlawed, and that the necessary 
expertise is restricted due to the TL cap on member worlds.  I could see 
the 4I as having TL14 under these conditions; after all, they're just 
reinventing what they've lost over the years.  TL15 is feasible too, 
even when you discount the infusion of Hiver technology.  The main point 
is, unless they import tech from the Hivers, they'd be hurting for tech.

The secondary point would be, just *how* hard would they enforce the 
tech limits in the newly conquered provinces, considering that the 
further you get from the capital, the harder it is to keep track of what 
your people are up to.  Not easy, even with psi cops.  'Who shall guard 
the guardians?' is just as relavant in the 63rd Century as it was in the 
1st Century.

And what of the Regency?  You *know* they'd go up against the 4I the 
instant they run into them.  And after 850 years with a TL15 start, 
they'd prolly be at least TL18 *or better*.  And keep in mind that 
eventually the Regency would expand through Corridor into the old 3I 
space due to population problems.

The main question in my mind would be, would the 4I start in Regency 
space, or ignite in the Solomani Rim?  My money would be on the Regency.

Keven
- - ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Consider me a Terra-phile, must be my upbringing.  I've always wanted to 
see Terra in control.  The Regency will make a good enemy.  Thanks for 
the comments.

Jim

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:43:38 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)

>AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPERIAL NAVY IN THE CLASSIC ERA
>===================================================
>
>Main sources: _Fighting Ships_, _Spinward Marches Campaign_ and _Rebellion_.
>
>NUMBER AND TYPE OF SHIPS
>
>_Rebellion_ p. 27 states that each sector of the Imperium theoretically has a
>group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships. This number includes combat vessels
>such as cruisers, carriers, battleships, and _some_ escorts (emphasis mine).
>It does not include auxiliaries, support ships, and scouts.
>

Now this is posible.  A 1000 ship sector Navy INCLUDING escorts is
reasonable.  What I said was 1000 capital ships alone was not reasonable.
It does not fit the numbers in the histories of the frontier and false wars.
if escort are in the same proportions as wet navy then their will be 200
capital ships and 800 escorts or 250/700 if their are a lot of cruisers.
Cruisers tend to have fewer escorts as they are normaly part of the escort
for larger ships.

>The first ambiguity lies in just what kinds of escorts are included in the 1000
>ship figure and what kinds are not. Are the 5,000 T _Sloan_ class escorts so
>big that they are counted, or is there a class of escorts smaller than a
>light cruiser (30,000 T ships), but bigger than Sloans?
>

I'd say you would have to go by their 'job discription' more than their
title.  Their are 'cruiser' built to act as heavy escorts  and some
destroyers built for direct attack on capital ships.

>One could postulate an escort class of around 10-20,000 T, big enough to mount
>a spinal weapon, but too light to be classed as even a light cruiser. A bit
>inelegant, especially since FS states that escorts are ships of up to 5000 T
>and that the presence of a spinal mount is what distinguishes a cruiser, but
>OTOH, are there really no ships in the 5,000-20,000 T range? And this way we
>can define 'combat vessels' as ships with spinal mounts and auxiliaries as
>ships without. 
>

Most navies have units that pull double duty.  Perhaps they would be called
escort cruisier.  A main line flat top carrier ussually has a pair of
cruisers, 4 DD or DE and maybe a few more ships in it's screen.

>Perhaps escorts in BatRons and CruRons are not counted while escorts organized
>into squadrons of their own (EscRons? ;-) are?
>

I think they would have to be.  More than likely the 'missing ship' are
auxilleries and 'coast guard' ships belonging to well to do planets.  There
would also be armed am armored cargo ships for transport of logistic in war
time and specialty troop ship than are rarely seen.  In the USA the few
remaining troop ships are not on the roles but 'seconded' to the marines for
training.

>The simplest solution is propably to ignore the ',and some escorts' part and
>just consider the presence of a spinal mount the criteria for being part of
>the 1000 ship figure.
>

Then the number of ships is out of line with CT history.  Look at the
production nubers for the two cruisers that have thier own books.  Those
numbers and their sevice dats does not make sence for a 1000 capital ship
navy per sector but does make sence for a 250-300 crusier heavy capitol ship
navy.

>The second ambiguity is whether battleriders are included in the figure or
>not. I would have preferred that they were not, but the one detailed squadron
>I know of (the 154th Battle Rider Squadron described in SMC) clearly implies
>that they are.
>

That's true.  I would not have a problem with that either way.  The numbers
of battle rider deployed in the CT histories are low and would not throw of
the economics either way.
 
>In the following for ease of reference I'm going to use the word 'armada'
>about the sector fleets and reserve the word 'fleet' for the sub-sector-sized
>fleets that the armadas are composed of. Also 'combat vessels' for the ships
>included in the 1000 ship figure and 'auxiliaries' for all the ships that
>isn't.
>
>If the 1000 ships are for a sector with a full sixteen sub-sectors, then the
>average fleet has 1000/16 = 62.5 ships. Since there are 320 regular fleets in
>the Imperium, the total of combat ships for the Imperium would be around
>20,000.
>

Where is 'fleet' defines as the ships of one sector?  I have not seen this.
I have seen 'sector fleet' and 'subsector fleet' both used.  Also I would
think there would be almost as many fleets that were not assigned to patrol
duties as there are those that are assigned or at least a stategic reserve
in core sector.

>Further down it is stated that a regular fleet has between 2 and 10 squadrons
>amounting to a total of between 50 and 200 ships. This would appear to average
>out to 125 ships per fleet with an average of 6 squadrons per fleet and 21
>ships per squadron.
>

Where is squadron size defined?  I missed this too.  The fleets I have seen
discribed were not this large?

>Possibly this means that the squadrons are combat vessels _plus_ escorts and 
>that the 125 ship figure includes auxiliaries. This would give us a navy of
>20,000 combat vessels and a like number of auxiliaries.
>

I would think so and that the auxilleries out number the combat ships in
those squadrons.  That was the pattern in WW2.  This would bring thinks in
line with the 1000 combat ships including escorts sector navy.

>However, FS states that CruRons are generally of 4 to 8 ships and the examples
>in it implies that 8 ship BatRons are the norm. (Also, I seem to remember
>squadrons of non-combat vessels mentioned somewhere, but I can't recall the
>references).
>

2 battle ships and 6 escorts or 1 battle ship 2 cruisers and 5 escorts.
Sounds very reasonable.  If you mean 8 battle ships in on formation this is
not reasonable.  It would leave the formation to vunerable to fast attack ships.

>Possibly the 2-squadron fleets and 25-ship squadrons are rare and almost all
>fleets have 8-10 squadrons with almost all squadrons running to between 8 and
>20 ships (half combat vessels and half escorts). With an average of about 9
>squadrons per fleet and 14 ships per squadron we'll get about 20,000 combat
>vessels and the same number of escorts. This still leave the pure auxiliary
>squadrons like tanker squadrons and patrol squadrons (PatRons ;-) unaccounted
>for, but it's a start.
>
>SIZE AND COST OF A SQUADRON
>
>The 154th Battle Squadron detailed in SMC consists of:
>
>  1 300,000 T _Lurenti_ Class Carrier @ MCr23,056         =  23,056
>  7 20,000 T _Nolikian_ Class Battle Riders @ MCr9,268.25 =  64,878
>200 50 T _Sylean_ Class Heavy Fighters @ MCr105.33        =  21,066
>  7 5,000 T _Sloan_ Class Escorts @ MCr3,334.5            =  23,342 
>  
>A total of MCr132,342 of which MCr109,000 goes to the combat vessels and the
>remaining 17.6% goes to the escorts.
>

A very reasonable mix.  I jump ship escorted by 7 escorts and carring 7
criuser sized attack craft.  Personally I would have removed 2 escorts and
added two jump capable cruisers with thier own fighter capacity but thats
just me.  I like a slightly high average ship mass.

>Obviously this must be one of the cheapest squadrons in the navy. If all the
>20,000 combat ships cost around MCr19,000 (including the cost of its pendant
>auxiliary) then the total cost of the regular Imperial navy would be TCr380.
>This would represent 15% of the Imperium's total military investment, which
>would make the whole shebang cost TCr2,533. Annual maintenance would run to
>TCr254. Divided by the 15 trillion inhabitants of the Imperium that would be
>Cr17 per man.
>

This is not a good squadron to use as it is a battle rider squad.  In CT
battle ridder are uncommon compared to jump warships.  For a jump capable
group to carry equaul firepower it would raise the cost quite a bit.

>If we assume that the ships in FS constitutes a representative sample, then
>we see that the average cruiser/carrier is of 52,714 T and costs MCr31,193.
>If we reduce that to 50,000 T and add the cost of a 5,000 T escort apiece,
>the average cruiser works out at roughly MCr33,000. The three battleships
>average 300,000 T and costs MCr206,106 apiece, which with the escort and a
>little rounding comes to MCr210,000.
>
>Unfortunately, that just isn't enough. Even if we assume that ALL the combat
>ships are battleships, it still only amounts to a total cost of TCr4,200,
>which works out at a military budget of Cr187 per inhabitant of the Imperium.
>If we assume a ratio of battleships to cruisers similar to the one in FS
>(3:7), the the cost falls to TCr1723, or Cr77 per inhabitant.
>
>Of course, we might say that we still haven't accounted for most of the
>auxiliary ships yet. We've included one 5,000 T escort for each combat ship,

Auxiliary ships gernerally equal or outnumber the combet ships at least
historicaly.  The CT battle histories I've read generally delt with the
combat ellements and 'fast raids' of cruiser spuads but simiple logistic
would require massive transport capacity to attack a planet or reload the
missle bays of a cruron of batron.

>but what about the couriers, destroyers, smaller escorts, transports and
>tankers that appear in FS and elsewhere? For example, I happen to believe that
>a navy would have a massive number of couriers, say 20 per fleet, but even

I read in the scouts book the the scout couriers are sumsumed in times of
war into the navy.  I think that this is where they come from and the navy
just barrows what it needs.  This would explain very well why the scouts are
so willing to let people 'barrow' their expensive ships.  The 'owners' are
helping to maintain the 'reserves'.

>6400 couriers only amount to another 1.6 TCr. The same would apply to
>destroyers and the like -- you need a huge number of them to affect the budget
>noticeably. Some of the other auxiliaries like tankers would cost more
>individually -- the milion T _Gorodish_ class fleet tenders mentioned in FS
>might run to MCr400,000 apiece, but how many of those are the average fleet
>likely to have? One? Two? OK, that's another 256 TCr, which is a help, but it
>still leaves a long way to go. Remember that every credit we increase the
>budget with represents another 3000 destroyers (just to pick an example), and
>we know from the recent pirate debate that the Imperium apparently lack the
>small ships to police all its member worlds adequately. So we may push the
>budget up to Cr85/man by use of the smaller fry, but not much more than that.
>

Don't forget the costs of bases in there.  A subsector naval base would cost
at least as much as the ships it was designed to service at one time.  If it
could handle 2 battle ships the dock would cost the same or more than two
battle ships or there abouts.  The support structures would cost as much or
more than the navy.  At least than is how is today.

>There are two more possibilities that I can see. One is that battleriders are
>NOT, after all, included in the 1000 ship figure. If a carrier and half a
>dozen dreadnaught-sized battleriders counted as one ship instead of 6, then

Thats true but FS was CT and in CT battle riders were the exception not the
rule as far as I have seen in the order of battle listed for the false war.

>we could get some really expensive ships. Unfortunately battleriders tend to
>be cruiser-sized. The carrier needed to carry 6 200,000 T battleriders would
>have to be about 2-2.5 million tons and the maximum size of a ship in CT is
>1 million. A 1 million T carrier would only amount to about twice the cost
>of the average battleship (MCr430) and according to FS the 500,000 T
>_Tigress_ class dreadnaught is the largest ship in the Spinward Marches. A
>500,000 T carrier would cost about the same as an average dreadnaught, which
>leaves us back where we started.
>
>The other possibility is that a large number of ships are laid up in
>ordinary. That would require that part of the annual budget was used to

The USA has more ship in mothballs than operating including several carriers
and battle ships.

>maintain these inactive ships, which would make the active part of the navy
>a correspondingly smaller share. If we assume that the wartime budget of the
>Imperium is 1.5 times the peacetime budget (a guesstimate based on the
>various government multipliers in TCS) and that there would be enough ships
>in ordinary to operate on the wartime budget, then there would be about one
>ship in ordinary for each two active ships and about 6% of the budget would
>be spent on maintaning them. If instead we assume that peacetime spending is
>the 3% of GNP that _Striker_ gives and wartime spending would be 15% of GNP

I think using Striker may be a mistake.  It was writen mainly for planetary
combat.  I'm not sure that it's numbers would apply to the navy.  I was
never able to get a copy of Striker of my own so my knowledge of it is
limited.  Are their buggetary numbers in it for the purpose of building and
operation a space navy?  All I ever saw was ground combat.

>then the Imperium could have EIGHT ships in ordinary for each active ship and
>spend 45% of its peacetime budget on maintaining them. That would push the
>military spending up to about Cr150/citizen. Whether you like the idea of an
>Imperial reserve fleet of 160,000 combat vessels is another matter. (There is
>some small support for the notion in the fact that acording to _Arrival
>Vengeance_ ships are still being reactivated in 1123, six years after the
>beginning of the Rebellion, with at least two more years to go before they
>are finished. OTOH it requires an implausibly long view to maintain reserves
>that will take 8 years to activate...)
>
>And in the end, even with the best will in the world it appears that the 
>Imperial navy is only about half the size that it should be (Cr150 would be
>1.5% of the GNP and we were calculating with 3%).
>

Does anyone know the current spending of the USA in the military compared
the the GNP?  1% sound kind of high considering it is the GROSS national
product.

>To those who would suggest that perhaps the Imperium feels so secure that it
>is using even less than the standard 3% peacetime spending I'd like to point
>to the Solomani, Zhodani, and K'Kree and suggest that it is rather implausible
>that the Imperium would feel so secure.
>
>I'd like to finish off by re-emphasizing that all those ships, the 20,000 
>combat vessels, the 20,000 big escorts and the unspecified number of lesser
>ships only represent 15% of the Cr150. Another 15% goes to the subsector
>fleets and the remaining 70% goes to planetary defenses, though admittedly
>6-40% of that (4.2-28% of the total) would go to armies.

Where are these numbers coming from?  I have not seen them and would love to
have this resource to analize.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:11:55 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)

I'm working on the numbers at home, but I thought I'd give a little
preview of the ideas I'm working with. To wit: what a pirate gets
for his troubles.

Let's assume we're using a 400tn _Nishemani_ class corsair, the
classic example pirate ship - probably a refitted armed merchant
or paramilitary ship. It's got a 110tn cargo bay that can, among
other things, hold a 100tn ship. Like a type-S Scout, or a Seeker,
or an X-Boat, or any one of those small craft that are all over an
inhabited system. It also has twenty low berths, so you have
somewhere to put the crews of those craft.

Now, I've got some assumptions about piracy that I'd like to
reiterate, just so critics know my basis and can kibbitz properly.

1. Pirates need to clear out quickly; for most targets, the patrol
will be on the way.

This limits what you can take. Small craft (the big profits). Vehicles. 
Vac suits. Supplies. Passenger valuables. Select items from the 
cargo bay. The contents of the ship's safe. Missiles & sand canisters
(if the target hasn't "given" them to you already).

What you can't take: Ship components. Bulky cargo items. Fuel.
Starship weapons. Valuable things, but you simply don't have the
time to get them.

This will not apply if you've hit the target in an unpatrolled system, and
that's good - you may well have taken a hit or two from a target well-
equipped enough to be in an unpatrolled system alone, you'll need all
the booty you can get.

2. It's very hard to jump away a starship you take.

If the target had fuel, it would have jumped away from you. It's almost
trivial for the crew of the target to lock out their computers long enough
for the patrol to catch up. And if you had to put a couple laser bolts into
their Engineering Compartment to convince them to give up, they're
not going anywhere anyway.

There will be exceptions to this, but I feel they will be rare enough that
we can ignore them for the purposes of this study. The captain who
succeeds at taking and selling a major starship has a right to be proud
of his unusual accomplishment.

3. You can use or sell what you take.

Here are my assumptions on value for items:

- ----------------------------

Starships: 10% of value. Starships are so well documented that it is
expensive to dispose of stolen ones. They may simply be used as
auxiliaries to the "pirate fleet". Few will be taken, as per #2 above.

Small Craft: 25% of value. They are more ubiquitous, and tend not to
be kept track of in interstellar databases as much. (note: one lifeboat
taken will pay all maintenance, life support and salary costs for a
400tn corsair for about three years).

Vehicles: 25% of value, for the same reasons as small craft.

Supplies: Spare parts, tools and life support essentials can be taken.
There is a bit of a handwave here, but I assume that the pirate can use
these to defray some costs of life support and to affect the price of his
annual maintenance. Total up what the target ship spent on life support
for the current trip, and credit the pirate 25% of that towards his life
support expenses only. As for annual maintenance, reduce the cost
to the standard .1% per year - the stolen parts and tools help make
up for the bribes and extra costs, even in a law level zero port, of
getting annual maintenance done on a less than legal starship.

Vac Suits: assume one per crew member of the target, plus two
spares. Each one worth Cr10,000, pirate recoups 25% of that.

Rescue Balls: Assume one per passenger including low berths, 
Cr600 each, pirate recoups 25% of that.

Passenger valuables: Assume, as a minimum average, cash and other
easily convertable valuables on hand equal to the price paid for passage.
These valuables are recouped with no reduction (or the reduction is
included in the average). High passenger Cr10,000, Low passenger
Cr1000, Middle passenger Cr8,000.

Ship's Safe: Ships need to carry cash, they can't remain on-planet
long enough for credit to clear in a crisis - whether it's a fine that needs
to be paid or an opportunity speculative cargo. Figure as an estimated
average, Cr25000 per 100tns of ship. Note that my only real source
for this is the Cr100,000 the _March Harrier_ had on hand at the start
of _The Traveller Adventure_, it may be much higher. This will be in
cash, recouped at 100% of value.

Ship's Locker: Ignored. Assume that items go to replenish equipment
stores on the pirate, the locker is really so varied from ship to ship
that it's hard to come up with an average. We can safely assume that
a pirate ship will run out of storage space, rather than run out of
miscellaneous equipment.

(However, a note: in the AD&D game, the most commonly overlooked
type of treasure is household goods. Those kobolds may have only
had a handful of pennies, but that big iron cookpot is worth a gold piece
or two.)

Cargo: The pirates will have to (very) quickly evaluate the cargo, and
guess what they have time to take. A zero-G cargo handler robot or
exoskeleton would be a very good thing here. Variation is too high
to allow a very useful average value of what can be taken, as one ship
may have two tons of gemstones while another may have nothing but
grain. I decided on allowing the pirates to recoup an average value of
Cr250 per cargo ton of the target (25% of Cr1000 per ton). This allows
some losses for travel, middlemen, and the other expenses of getting
even a valuable cargo to market.

(Note: In AD&D, the second most often ignored type of treasure was
trade goods. <G>)

Passengers: I decided to leave kidnapping for ransom or slavery out of
the equations. There will be exceptions, and I even have some ideas
(for later) that the slow communications time of the Imperium may make
kidnapping for ransom far easier than it is on Earth today, if you are 
patient or ruthless enough.

- ---------------------------

With the above numbers, I've hit a tentative conclusion as to what a
pirate needs to do to keep going: 

A Far or Free Trader will get him about Cr100000. A Fat Trader will get
him about MCr3 and change. Small craft are worth several MCr each.

Not counting the value of the ship, the pirate needs to spend about
MCr1 a year in maintenance, salary and expenses. 

So:

One starship taken in the course of a corsair ship's career will pretty
much amortize the entire value of the pirate ship for five years or
more.

Each small craft taken and popped into the cargo bay will pay
expenses for at least two years, or pay part of the value of the
pirate vessel. 15 lifeboat/launches is all it takes to completely pay
off the current value of a 400tn Corsair, pinnaces and ship's boats are
worth even more.

Ten Free Traders taken in a year will pay all expenses except battle
damage.

One Fat Trader taken will pay all expenses for about three years except
battle damage.

Most battle damage will probably occur in an unpatrolled system,
as the stakes are higher and the target vessel is probably better armed.
Unpatrolled systems are the only systems where a pirate will want to
fight at all - the risks are too high compared to the rewards in a system
where patrol ships are en route to the fight.
Targets taken in unpatrolled systems can almost always be considered
valuable enough to cover cost of damage - unless the damage stops
the pirate from jumping back to base.

Therefore:

Even if a pirate has to hunt for an entire year to bag one Fat Trader,
he's still making reasonable money. I believe this answers some 
arguments that a pirate loses too much money by lying in wait for 
targets, or by having to transit several systems to get from a base 
to a good hunting area.

Income can be far, far higher than just expenses if the pirate hits a few
good targets. This allows there to be enough income potential to make
up for the really bad luck a pirate can have - one missile hit can cost
millions, even if it doesn't kill you. Piracy therefore becomes high-risk,
but very profitable if the risks pan out.

There may be more efficient uses for a starship than piracy, but there are
people who cannot do legal careers for various reasons and ships they'd
not be able to use legally. Combine the two, and you get Corsairs.
 I believe my analyses show that a pirate can make money, if the setting
IYTU allows them to survive and travel.

Please take a look at my assumptions, especially those on the value
of the booty, and comment - these assumptions are critical to the
economic viability of the pirate career.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:51:15 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #968

Sethkimmel@aol.com writes:
 
>In a message dated 10/18/98 2:48:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>dom@cybergoths.u-net.com writes:
> 
><< Hans, (under HG) I would disagree with this. The riders should be heavily
> armoured and carry top end meson/PA weapons. This should make the squadron
> pretty effective against and equivalent BatRon or CruRon in straight
> combat. Of course, on an individual basis the BRs are weaker than a full
> Battleship.
>  
> Dom >>
> 
>In a knock down drag out, I'll take BR's anyday... Ton for ton they have a lot
>more spinal mounts and HG lives and dies by the spinal mount critical hit. Try
>taking a Tigress versis a bunch of BR's (so the tonnage is equal. Throw in the
>tender so the comparison is fairer, but put her in reserve...). She'll kill a
>BR every turn, but the BR's will nibble her to death with a bunch of critical
>hits every turn....

I wasn't talkin ton-for-ton. Is was saying that a Battle Rider Squadron is
strictly speaking a CruRon  (a bunch of cruiser-sized vessels, albeit really
_tough_ cruiser-sized vessels). Would you care to match a squadron of BRs
anainst an equal _number_ of battleships?

Anyway, while I'm not certain how they stack up in combat, a battle rider
squadron is certainly the equivalent of a CruRon rather than a BatRon for
purposes of refuelling. And also when it comes to the price.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:06:28 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Structure of the Imperium

I had an idea about how to explain just what kind of feudal structure the
Imperium is. Note that this is not the way I believe the canon says it is.
I do believe it is almost entirely compatible with canon (with possibly a
few minor exceptions). Anyway, I'd like to hear your opinions (I'd be
especially thrilled to hear Marc's opinion ;-).

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
In theory the structure of the Imperium is very simple: Each star system
constitutes a sovereignty governed in any way its inhabitants see fit. As
members of the Imperium these sovereignties have surrendered certain of
their rights to the Emperor; they agree to let him collect and administer
a certain percentage of their annual production, to obey a number of basic
laws (the Imperial High Laws), to let him tax certain activities, and to
leave foreign relations with non-Imperial states to him. The Emperor turns
over these rights to his vassals in return for fealthy and these vassals in
turn parcel them out to lesser vassals. Each star system thus have two
associated authorities: its own government administering system affairs and
an Imperial noble administering Imperial affairs.

That's the theory. Human nature (and most alien natures too) being what it
is, it is no surprise that in practice exceptions abound. Indeed, it could
be said that the exceptions are the norm.

MULTI-SYSTEM SOVEREIGNTIES: The Imperium frown on multi-system sovereignties,
but quite a number of these exist. In the early days of the Imperium many
pocket empires joined it as a unit. Whenever possible the Imperium tries to
break these up eventually, but a number still exists even today. On occasion
the Imperium has even been obliged to form some of its own to meet
exceptional political problems; the largest and most famous examples are the
Antarean and Solomani Autonomous regions. A more frequent source of multi-
system sovereignties are the planting of colonies by member systems. Imperial
policy favors the granting of full membership to colony worlds that have
grown big enough to make it on their own (which is why some colonies are
deliberately kept much smaller than optimum by their mother worlds), but if
a former colony prefers union with their mother world there is not much the
Imperium can do about it. Mega-corporations and the largest sector-wide
companies constitutes another kind of multi-system sovereignty.

IMPERIAL WORLD LEADERS: The principle of having two different kinds of
leaders, system leaders and Imperial nobles, frequently run afoul of the
pride and ambition of powerful world leaders, especially if they are
hereditary rulers. It often becomes a political necessity to appoint them
Imperial nobles. Thus the Matriarch of Mora is both the head of the Moran
government and the Duchess of Mora Subsector. The reverse can also happen.
An unscrupulous Imperial noble assigned to a young, developing world is in a
very good position to acquire title to vast tracks of land. In some cases he
can end up owning, or at least running, the whole world.

IMPERIALLY OWNED WORLDS: Over the years the Imperium have acquired outright
ownership of a lot of real estate including a number of whole worlds. When
that is the case, the noble assigned to it controls both its internal and
its Imperial affairs.
        
Imperial nobles have two different kinds of fiefs. One is a personal fief
granted to him in order to provide him with a secure income. Money
derived from personal fiefs go into the noble's private accounts and are
theoretically his to spend as he wants (in practice nobles with really
big personal incomes may be expected to contribute some of that wealth
for various semi-official purposes). This kind of fief is sometimes also
called an estate (An Imperial estate to distinguish it from a personal
estate which the noble own in his own right). The size and value of an
Imperial estate can vary tremendously. Not only may the Emperor give purely
symbolic estates to nobles who are rich in their own right and substantial
estates to others who are less well endowed, but a relatively poor estate
granted centuries earlier may have grown in value over the years.

	The other kind of fief is the kind described in the first paragraph
of this article, the power to collect and administer (or in the case of
lesser nobles, to collect and pass on to higher authorities) Imperial taxes.
This is also sometimes called a charge.

It is usually said that each Imperial world has a marquis associated with it.
This is true if the world is of reasonably high tech level and has a
population level of 7 or 8. The Imperial taxes from such a world comes to
something between MCr1000 and MCr100,000. Any world with taxes less than
MCr1000 will propably only rate a baron. A world with taxes higher than
MCr100,000 rates a count. Some worlds are too small to rate even a baron.
Such worlds are usually part of a neighboring fief.
 
Rank            Charge                  Typical estate         Typical value

Knight          -                       -                       -
Banneret        -                       10 square kilometers    MCr5
Baron           Part of world           100 sq km               MCr50
Marquis         One world               1000 sq km              MCr500
Count           Several worlds          10,000 sq km            MCr5,000
Duke            Subsector/sector        100,000 sq km           MCr50,000
Archduke        Domain                  Entire world            MCr500,000
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #970
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 19 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 971



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Major Race Status
Re: Piracy
RE: [GT] Midu Agashaam class Destroyer
Re: Structure of the Imperium
re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #968
Re: Sensors
re: Sensors
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #968
re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))
Re: OT: Nostalgia Attack : WH40k III review
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Question regarding Ley Sector
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Where's Lucan? (my own guesses)
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #968
Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:17:47 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Major Race Status

Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> wrote:


>Why the obvious, silly...Whenever another race discovers one of his
>carefully seeded relic jump drives, and no one _catches_ them doing so,
>Gramps just hops back in time, adds another coyn, and hops forward
>again.


Ah!  Of course.  Slaps forehead.  Silly me.


>Why didn't he just hop back and keep himself from making all his
>children, which caused all that trouble???


Equally easy... wasn't that something to do with an accident with a
contraceptive and a time machine... but it's too awful to go into...

>Believe me, you _don't_ want to know... but for some reason, the number
>'42', a starship in the form of a golden running shoe, and some white
>mice are involved....


Of course, it all becomes clear now.  Never minds GURPS: Discworld, when
are we going to get GURPS: HitchHikers Guide?

tc
"And yes, I *am* 10 digests behind.  I'm working on it."

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:29:54 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: Piracy

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:33:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Piracy
Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:
> If one moves the outgoing surface to 1000 diameters or more life isn't
> hopeless for pirates/raiders; the pirates can almost be guaranteed to see
> the ship departing (even if it's not running its transponder, a
> fully-powered non-masked merchant is a thousand times brighter than a
> lurking pirate, and the pirate can concentrate a whole sensor array on
the
> planet hex), and a  6-G pirate ship will stand a good chance of making an
> intercept on a 1-G  merchant over a big chunk of the departure sphere
> surface.
Considering 1000d from a G2 star is about 4.5 AU, you'll also have about
two
weeks to make your intercept ;).  If the jump limit is more than about 200d
we
find that the jump shadow for the star overwhelms the planetary limit
unless
you're well outside of the life zone.
*****************
sound good to me, I like the murchantzs to have to come in from the
outsystem anyway...enough of an opening for pirates for me.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:40:52 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: RE: [GT] Midu Agashaam class Destroyer

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:46:29 -0500
From: "Andy Akins" <igor@ames.net>
Subject: RE: [GT] Midu Agashaam class Destroyer
First of all, thanks for your comments...I'm new GURPS and GURPS Vehicles,
so errors were bound to happen.
Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com wrote:
> these are meant to be whole modules...5 modules give you DR
> (20,800,000*5/105,00)990 not really much at all..the average damage at 4
> hexes is 15,750 for a meson bay. so 8 hit on your ship unprotected vs 9
> hits protectedif you make it 20 modules you can take 11 average hits and
> you don't get a major damage roll from the first one.  perhaps consider
> leaving it off if you can't give it more DR.
I understand the not enough DR argument, and you're right. But I don't see
why they have to be whole modules. Looking in vehicles, you can build these
to any size - the math still works out. And there are examples of "modules"
that are not integer - Basic Bridge, Low Berths, Vehicle Bays. My
understanding is that these are not actual "tangible" modules, but useful
abstractions. Reducing a module by a given fraction should be allowed in
most cases, with an appropriate adjustment in performance. In particular,
Jump, Maneuver, Meson Screen, Spacedock, Fuel Processor, and so on. If the
rules say you can't do this, or if there is a compelling reason not to,
please let me know.
*****************
well the *number* of modules is integer, the concept is to use whole
numbersss of the modules to simplify the design system.  there is no real
'problem' with using 0.75 of a manuver module, or half a spacedock.  (I
think the jump and F.Pross are whole modules tho)  it just adds an extra
level of complexity.  It still works, in that it remains fully compatible
with vehicles.  It does however make the discription harder to read, and to
check.  also some modules need to be whole numbers for sure..like the
bridegs, sickbay, engineering, etc.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:57:57 +0200
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Structure of the Imperium

>It is usually said that each Imperial world has a marquis associated with it.
>This is true if the world is of reasonably high tech level and has a
>population level of 7 or 8. The Imperial taxes from such a world comes to
>something between MCr1000 and MCr100,000. Any world with taxes less than
>MCr1000 will propably only rate a baron. A world with taxes higher than
>MCr100,000 rates a count. Some worlds are too small to rate even a baron.
>Such worlds are usually part of a neighboring fief.
>
>Rank            Charge                  Typical estate         Typical value
>
>Knight          -                       -                       -
>Banneret        -                       10 square kilometers    MCr5
>Baron           Part of world           100 sq km               MCr50
>Marquis         One world               1000 sq km              MCr500
>Count           Several worlds          10,000 sq km            MCr5,000
>Duke            Subsector/sector        100,000 sq km           MCr50,000
>Archduke        Domain                  Entire world            MCr500,000
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, this is almost exactly the way I play it. My Nobles are also
responsible for the starport territory, the Imperial office there and also
to keep an updated copy of all local laws at the starport. The laws are
sent along with the taxes to the next higher level (subsector) so that
anybody (in theory) can study each Imperial worlds local laws before going
there.

Due to the immense temptation to do fraudelent things with the Imperial
taxes (mainly by downplaying census figures) there are at the Sector level
secret tax aauditioners that are sent to suspected worlds (an interesting
player career). This is also the reason why the Scouts update population
figures and TLs; to asses the taxbase.

All IMTU of course.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 08:59:59 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>The further off missiles are engaged, the better the point defense
>gunner has to do on his roll.  

>range (miles)   must make Point defense by
>100                     10

Does this mean that the gunner would get the normal +10 for point defence
and have it cancelled out by this factor? Would they use the 0-hex range
modifier of -39? This would mean that a missile coming straight at you a
mere 100 km away is no easier to hit than a fighter flying by and evading
at 5000 km...which seems wrong.

As I have said before in various KKM debates, there's essentially no way 
a space-combat-capable laser can miss a missile-sized target inside of a
thousand km or so (whether it's dodging or not...)

Something I don't like about G:T's space combat system at a general level
is that the range table (which modifies to-hit rolls) goes as the log of
range - which means it changes rapidly at very short ranges (see thewolkes
post - there's a big difference between 100 miles and 2 miles) and very 
slowly at long ranges. This is almost the exact opposite of what you want - 
the chance of hitting a non-evading target is linear with range and an
evading target goes as range^4 power, staying near unity for a while and
then dropping like a rock. BL did a pretty good job of modelling this
with its -1 DM/3 hexes...

A general G:T missile question: Can missiles "dodge" point defence fire? 
My instinctive answer would be no...but the rules are silent.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:54:02 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #968

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I wasn't talkin ton-for-ton. Is was saying that a Battle Rider Squadron is
strictly speaking a CruRon  (a bunch of cruiser-sized vessels, albeit really
_tough_ cruiser-sized vessels). Would you care to match a squadron of BRs
anainst an equal _number_ of battleships?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think I'd take on ten battle riders with ten battleships. TL15 battleships
can take a lot of damage, and tend to be maxed out on armor and
agility anyway. Of course, each one out-tons each battlerider by about
ten to one or so.

Ton for ton, even if you count the battle tender, the Battle Rider squadron
is scarier due the the larger number of spinal mounts.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Anyway, while I'm not certain how they stack up in combat, a battle rider
squadron is certainly the equivalent of a CruRon rather than a BatRon for
purposes of refuelling. And also when it comes to the price.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think Battle Rider squadrons end up costing more on a ton-for-ton
basis than Battleships. You need more computers, as much or more
MCr4/ton jump drives (you've got to move battle riders, and the tender,
and enough fuel to push everything). You do get a bit more bang for
your buck, and some nice flexibility at the expense of being able to
easily run like hell when overmatched.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:04:32 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Sensors

>>Yes, but while stutterwarp cuts the IR, a grav scanner should pick it
>>up rather easily.

>That depends on the range of the grav scanner, doesn't it?  Bruce's
>DSR doesn't address grav scanners and I don't believe FFS2 does
>either.

There are some grav scanner rules in FFS2 addenda. They're adjusted to
make grav sensors quite short ranged against thruster-plate powered
ships. Back-of-the-envelope I would think ranges against stutterwarp
ships could be similar - I could make a handwaving technobabble case for
it going either way.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:13:07 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: Sensors

>Assuming that the heat is radiated away from the sensor, what temperature
>is the ship assumed to have in the DSR ?

This is sort of a fuzzy question. Hulls with no masking have a temperature
of 300K (room temperature). Hulls with additional IR masking have their hull
cooled down to 100-250 K - with the exact level being set to "whatever it 
takes to make the hull less bright than the spillover from the radiators"
(there's always some spillover, even if the radiators are pointed away.)
My sensor model really only did the basic non-masked case; the masked 
case numbers are fairly rough - enough to show me that some masking was
possible without spending weeks trying to balance radiator heat and hull
heat. 

A complication is that hull heat comes out mostly in the mid-to-far IR while
radiator heat comes out in the near IR; they're detected in somewhat
different ways with different scaling factors. What I really should have done
was have seperate "passive near IR" and "passive far IR" signatures - but
life was already complicated enough with passive vis and passive IR, so I
used radiator waste heat for passive near IR and assumed that you always
refrigerate the hull enough to keep it negligible. THe rarely-used 
"minimum signature level" (based on 1 kW/m2) is supposed to represent
hull radiation as well...

A perfect set of sensor rules would have seperate radar, LIDAR, 
reflected visible, emitted visible, emitted NIR, reflected NIR, and
emitted MIR signatures (in addition to grav and neutrino) signatures, but
it would be a serious pain.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:17:16 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #968

>Would you care to match a squadron of BRs
>anainst an equal _number_ of battleships?

In High Guard, probably yes. A single big spinal mount hit kills anything 
(you're pretty much guaranteed a "fuel tanks shattered" with a J spinal
or bigger). The BR's are one point harder to hit than the BB's, so they'll
get spinal mount hits more often. The BB's have more secondary armament so
they'll do better at "whittling" away armament with missile hits to try and
push the BR's spinal below J...whether this will work or not depends on the
exact designs, but it will at least be a close fight.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:28:10 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

At 08:59 AM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>The further off missiles are engaged, the better the point defense
>>gunner has to do on his roll.  
>
>>range (miles)   must make Point defense by
>>100                     10
>
>Does this mean that the gunner would get the normal +10 for point defence
>and have it cancelled out by this factor? Would they use the 0-hex range
>modifier of -39? This would mean that a missile coming straight at you a
>mere 100 km away is no easier to hit than a fighter flying by and evading
>at 5000 km...which seems wrong.

If you look at the speed/range table, the -39 value is for about 5,000
miles.  The -29 value would be about 100 miles.  Yes, this is fudged some.
I admit it... if you don't like the fudge, engage all missiles with no
penalty.  A good section of the guessing game goes away, and nuclear
gunners will set their missiles to explode at a range appropriate to what
kind of nuclear dampers their targets are likely to be carrying.

>As I have said before in various KKM debates, there's essentially no way 
>a space-combat-capable laser can miss a missile-sized target inside of a
>thousand km or so (whether it's dodging or not...)

So basically any laser-equipped ship is immune to (conventional) missile fire?

>Something I don't like about G:T's space combat system at a general level
>is that the range table (which modifies to-hit rolls) goes as the log of
>range - which means it changes rapidly at very short ranges (see thewolkes
>post - there's a big difference between 100 miles and 2 miles) and very 
>slowly at long ranges. This is almost the exact opposite of what you want - 
>the chance of hitting a non-evading target is linear with range and an
>evading target goes as range^4 power, staying near unity for a while and
>then dropping like a rock. BL did a pretty good job of modelling this
>with its -1 DM/3 hexes...

Why do you want a linear chance?  The size of the critter in your field of
view drops off sharply, as the inverse of the square of its length (which
is what they use).  Evasion is part of the dodge roll.

>A general G:T missile question: Can missiles "dodge" point defence fire? 
>My instinctive answer would be no...but the rules are silent.

Actually, they're not:

page 168, paragraph 7, last sentence: "Ramming craft cannot Dodge
point-defense fire."

They just didn't put it in the point-defense section, which they should
have.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:28:04 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

In a message dated 10/18/98 7:12:06 PM Central Daylight Time,
Sethkimmel@aol.com writes:

<< individual basis the BRs are weaker than a full Battleship. >>

Technically, Riders are trying to be cheap capital ships... The definition of
Capital ship is a big ship that can kill anything, but can only be killed by
another capital ship. Everything else better run and hide.

I just saw a piece on WWII capital ships and it said that it was several years
into WWII before it was clear that airplanes from carriers could kill a
Capital ship. Then, of course, the whole set of definitions changed, and the
old terminology became obsolete (though people still used it).

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 09:21:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))

Leonard Erickson writes:

> Huh? A ship using limited area radiators for stealth will be a
> *spotlight* in the IR in the cone it *does* radiate into. That's
> because when you limit the radiating area by (say) 50%, the
> *temperature* goes up a lot faster. And thus, so does the IR
> "brightness" of the ship in those directions.
Bah...if you look at the rules for black globe generators, you discover that
they absorb all energy and suck it in to their capacitors, and don't emit any
heat -- with the net effect that they violate the second law of thermodynamics.
Any ship with a black globe could have virtually perfect EM cloaking by playing
games with emissions and flicker rates (and still manuever, of course).

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 23:17:53 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Nostalgia Attack : WH40k III review

 shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson) wrote:

>>1) In classical GW style, they've maximised their profits by printing it
>>softcover with a slip case. For a £25 GBP book that's a bit cheaky, but not
>>as bad as the IG stuff - at least there's more than 100 pages and they've
>>heard of typeseting and artwork, plus colour plates. I would have prefered
>>a hardback.
>
>  Be careful - I've already heard from one person whose rulebook binding
>failed within a couple of days (and there wasn't a photocopier involved...).

Same old, same old.

I thought that they got rid of that problem a while back (sort of around
the time they printed Stormbringer / the first 40k etc).

My friend who recommended it just confirmed the same story to me as well.
<sigh>

Apparently the internal text is bound okay but the cover is too flimsy. I'm
contemplating putting a sticky back plastic cover on it, the same as M0
Campaign.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:22:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Legate Legion writes:
> True, true, but I just have to say one thing...  These game designers have
> most likely never served in the military & do not know current military
> tech...
> 
> I can fit a 10 Mt Nuclear Device in a brief-case, I think I can fit it in a
> 250mm Missile tube, at our current TL...  By the time we reach for the
> stars Iwould think 100 Mt could be fitted in the same space...

Wow...we have briefcases which violate the laws of physics?  Ten megatons is
approximately 500 grams of energy, giving a minimum mass (for fusion) of around
100 kilograms (maybe more...don't know exact conversion ratio for LiD), actual
mass is going to be greater.  This is a _hard_ limit for fusion weapons, which
means the upper limit for the missile sizes in GT is about 1 MT.

Briefcase nukes are limited to about 100 kT last I knew -- not that this isn't
quite a lot.  IIRC current strategic missile warheads are all under a megaton.
.  Last I knew suitcase nukes were limited to about 100 kT.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:45:57 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Question regarding Ley Sector

Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:

> I'm currently reworking the Luriani in light of Jeff's revised data for the Fornast
> Sector which ment that I have moved the Luriani to the Ley Sector (which
> actually makes them more interesting IMHO). My question is does anyone
> know when the Imperium moved into the Ley Sector? I know that Fornast was
> brought in by around 120. But did Artemesus immediately move on to Ley or
> did he turn his attentions elsewhere?

I don't know for sure.  I have the Judge's Guild Ley Sector Guidebook,
but it has no details of the kind your looking for.

Milieu 0 Hardcover has Fornast 100% Contacted in 150, with 70% incorporated..

I think you might extrapolate a number from when Gush. was contacted,
since you have to go through Dag., and then add a delay since Cleon
focused on Spinward exploration.  Or use Ilelish to handwave a slower
contact rate.

At Year 0:
Dag:    40% contacted, 10% integrated
Gush:  25% contacted, 10% integrated
Ilel.  5% contacted, 0% integrated
Forn. 10% integrated, 10% integrated


At Year 100:
Dag.  100% contacted, 45% integrated
Gush.  75% contacted, 40% integrated
Ilel.   40% contacted, 20% integrated
Forn. 82% contacted, 45% integrated
(Gush,. 100% contacted in 140)

Looking at the various tables, it looks like there is always
10% contact before any integration, and then integration
is 1-5%.  I'd handwave the rate of contact to be half
that of the Fornast, and the rate of integration 1/4th,
since its trailing and the Lesser Rift is out there.  This makes
it likely that there was 10% contact no later than year 0, giving
a 1% integration at that time.

411 systems in Ley.  1% = 4 systems.

In the Ley sector guidebook, the Imperium only holds 10
subsectors out of 16.  So maybe slow the rate of integration
even more.

Hope this helps.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:35:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:
> Something I don't like about G:T's space combat system at a general level
> is that the range table (which modifies to-hit rolls) goes as the log of
> range - which means it changes rapidly at very short ranges (see thewolkes
> post - there's a big difference between 100 miles and 2 miles) and very 
> slowly at long ranges.
Actually, it changes rapidly at intermediate ranges.  There is no major
difference between 16- to hit and 28- to hit ;).  From 50% chance to hit down
to a 2% chance is only a 10-fold increase in range, and another doubling in
range drops it to zero.

For reference to point defense fire -- if you assume that point defense fire
occurs one second before impact, then we get
Range(hexes) = velocity (hexes/turn)/1200 (seconds/turn), or about 10 miles per
hex of velocity; using standard GURPS rules we add velocity to range.  This
gives a range penalty of around 25 with a vector of 1; with typical TL 10 fire
control (Cx6 software, assume skill 14 gunner) you're 10- to hit.

Accurate way to do PD fire is:
PD fire bonus: +16 (effectively, 1/500 range), use the relative velocity of the
missile as the range.  RoF bonuses only apply if they are for battery bonuses.

Of course, the missile rules wildly overestimate the accuracy of a
remote-guided missile travelling at enormous velocities at a small object...

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:27:43 -0700
From: scharlto@ifsna.com
Subject: Where's Lucan? (my own guesses)

Hi all,

Marc, being somewhat sly and sneaky, has posed the question about what is
Lucan doing in the GURPS alternate Travellerverse.  Based on my reading of
the book, small hints Loren has dropped here and in theTNS entries, and the
overall mind-altering effects of Sudafed, I have come up with a set of
assumptions about the dividing line for the Alternate:

1.  Loren has said that in the GURPSverse, Strephon was away from the
Capital doing exactly what Strephon was doing in the Travellerverse;
inspecting Longbow.  There were some hints from late GDW publications and
from Dave Nilsen that Longbow had a psionic element to it.  I suspect that
Strephon was given a vision of the Travellerverse; his assassination, the
rebellion and the eventual collapse of civilization.

2.  In the GURPSverse, Strephon is working VERY feverishly to avoid the
future he was shown.  He has ordered the death of Dulinor, and I imagine he
told Lucan in very clear terms that he needed to get out and grow up, or
suffer a severe case of jacketed lead poisoning.  I suspect Varian was
ordered away as an insurance policy, just in case history cannot be
manipulated after all.  I would not be suprised to find that Varian is sent
to Margret's domain, either to ensure her loyalty or tom make sure she does
not try to usurp the throne in case Strephon is killed.

3.  I have a feeling that, rather than creating a magic handwave that
states the Cymbeline chips and the Virus research never existed, Strephon
will send orders to the research station ordering all Virus projects to be
terminated, the files wiped and the materials destroyed.  In face, he may
even be scared enough to have the Navy just bomb the station to ensure no
knowledge or samples survive.

4.  In TNE, Strephon saw something else at Longbow; the effects of the
Empress Wave.  Will this still be an issue in the GURPSverse?  I suspect
that it will be (though perhaps not quite as extensive as some hints have
suggested for the future of the TNE universe).  I would bet that the
Zhodani Consulate may suffer some upheaval, and maybe even a civil war.

5.  Strephon also saw how very quickly the Solomani Confederation mobilized
and seized the rimward portions of the Imperium.  This would have to worry
him, and perhaps initiate either a significant military buildup or urge him
to seek a negotiated formal peace with the Solomani.  Either would not be
popular with certain hard-core Solomani Supremicists and hard-line
Imperialists at home.


So, what do you think?  If you were Strephon in 1116, and you were given a
vision of the Imperium's future as seen in TNE, what would you do?  Can
this be a good thing for Strephon; being haunted by visions of a collapse
that in no small measure was due to his own mistakes and poor assumptions?
How much would he have told Varian, or even Lucan?

So, how about it Loren; am I even close?

Steve Charlton

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:01:24 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #968

     John take a pill or something.  Someone made a comment that the
description of Lucan sounds similar to our current president.  SO.  There
was no need for you to go off in a tirade regarding it.  Maybe in his
Traveller universe people her are represented there.  Considering all the
junk e-mail I have had to read on subjects I could care less about, one
more small piece will make no never mind.  The point is to allow everyone
ther say.

Leo




- ------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:49:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!

From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
>
> >Hmmm.. I've always prefered to portray him as a completely sane,
rational
> >man.  Quite charming, actually.  Sparkling personality.  Then you do
> >something.  He thinks you're out to get him.  Your family turns up dead,
> >your fortune is confiscated, and you spend a few very unpleasent days
being
> >tortured for information on the "plot" before being killed.
>
> Sounds a lot like Clinton...
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

     WHAT THE HELL DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH TRAVELLER!!!!!


     This kind of behavior really pisses me off.  I don't subscribe to
this list to read political commentary of any stripe.  The TML, for all
its arguments, is one place on the planet where people _aren't_ talking
about Monica Lewinsky -- and I'd like to keep it that way!  Didn't your
mother teach you that it's not nice to insult people's politics or
religion?  Frankly, I find the comparison of the President of the United
States to a murderous madman, even a fictitious one, to be deeply
offensive.  I have let countless similar remarks on this topic and others
go unchallenged, but I simply can't take it anymore.
     I have been continously astounded by the willingness of some
people to insult the beliefs of others on this list.  The above is but the
most recent of egregious examples of this, such as the thread in which a
list member who is also a pacifist was repeatedly called a coward.  This
is utterly inexcusable.  My purpose is neither to defend nor attack any
particular view point or group.  It is to insist that the members of the
TML exercise the same civility and respect for each other in cyberspace
that we would demand of them in real space.

     THE TML IS A PLACE FOR DISCUSSION OF A HOBBY WE ALL SHARE AND
LOVE.  PEOPLE WHO CAN'T OR WON'T RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS, POLITICAL, AND
NATIONAL DIVERSITY OF THE TML'S SUBSCRIBERS SHOULD SIMPLY GO ELSEWHERE.

     Sincerely,

     John Macpherson
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:12:28 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:11:55 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)
Let's assume we're using a 400tn _Nishemani_ class corsair, the
classic example pirate ship - probably a refitted armed merchant
or paramilitary ship. It's got a 110tn cargo bay that can, among
other things, hold a 100tn ship. Like a type-S Scout, or a Seeker,
or an X-Boat, or any one of those small craft that are all over an
inhabited system. It also has twenty low berths, so you have
somewhere to put the crews of those craft.
*****************8
what do you do with the crews once you capture them?


Now, I've got some assumptions about piracy that I'd like to
reiterate, just so critics know my basis and can kibbitz properly.
1. Pirates need to clear out quickly; for most targets, the patrol
will be on the way.
This limits what you can take. Small craft (the big profits).
**************
DOH <Smacks self in forehead>
I should have thought of that long before.


What you can't take: Ship components. Bulky cargo items. Fuel.
Starship weapons.
***********
OTOH you could take out peices of them...say 10% of the total value of the
laser, with a resale value of 10% of that.  or play it safe and hit unarmed
targets.


2. It's very hard to jump away a starship you take.
If the target had fuel, it would have jumped away from you. It's almost
trivial for the crew of the target to lock out their computers long enough
for the patrol to catch up. And if you had to put a couple laser bolts into
their Engineering Compartment to convince them to give up, they're
not going anywhere anyway.
*************
another thing...like those seeker in the belt, snap them up fast, and jump
out...even at 2MCr resale..not a bad price.


Starships: 10% of value. Starships are so well documented that it is
expensive to dispose of stolen ones. They may simply be used as
auxiliaries to the "pirate fleet". Few will be taken, as per #2 above.
***************
sounds about right.

Small Craft: 25% of value. They are more ubiquitous, and tend not to
be kept track of in interstellar databases as much. (note: one lifeboat
taken will pay all maintenance, life support and salary costs for a
400tn corsair for about three years).
*************
that means it streches a bit farther in GT as LS costs are lower.

Vehicles: 25% of value, for the same reasons as small craft.
**************
load of air/rafts is great!!


Supplies: Spare parts, tools and life support essentials can be taken.
There is a bit of a handwave here, but I assume that the pirate can use
these to defray some costs of life support and to affect the price of his
annual maintenance. Total up what the target ship spent on life support
for the current trip, and credit the pirate 25% of that towards his life
support expenses only. As for annual maintenance, reduce the cost
to the standard .1% per year - the stolen parts and tools help make
up for the bribes and extra costs, even in a law level zero port, of
getting annual maintenance done on a less than legal starship.
***************
Hrm....works ok....and in GT you dont even endanger the crew and passengers
of the target...they just have to eat recycled food until they get to
port....a pirate crew could chose a liner over a merchant just on the basis
of better food :)


Vac Suits: assume one per crew member of the target, plus two
spares. Each one worth Cr10,000, pirate recoups 25% of that.
************
yep


Rescue Balls: Assume one per passenger including low berths,
Cr600 each, pirate recoups 25% of that.
************
I would leave these behind, gives a better rep.


Passenger valuables: Assume, as a minimum average, cash and other
easily convertable valuables on hand equal to the price paid for passage.
These valuables are recouped with no reduction (or the reduction is
included in the average). High passenger Cr10,000, Low passenger
Cr1000, Middle passenger Cr8,000.
************
sounds ok for an average...


Ship's Safe: Ships need to carry cash, they can't remain on-planet
long enough for credit to clear in a crisis - whether it's a fine that
needs
to be paid or an opportunity speculative cargo. Figure as an estimated
average, Cr25000 per 100tns of ship. Note that my only real source
for this is the Cr100,000 the _March Harrier_ had on hand at the start
of _The Traveller Adventure_, it may be much higher. This will be in
cash, recouped at 100% of value.
**************
also sounds ok...if it is a PC ship it may be much more.


Ship's Locker: Ignored.
**********
agreed



Cargo: The pirates will have to (very) quickly evaluate the cargo, and
guess what they have time to take. A zero-G cargo handler robot or
exoskeleton would be a very good thing here. Variation is too high
to allow a very useful average value of what can be taken, as one ship
may have two tons of gemstones while another may have nothing but
grain. I decided on allowing the pirates to recoup an average value of
Cr250 per cargo ton of the target (25% of Cr1000 per ton). This allows
some losses for travel, middlemen, and the other expenses of getting
even a valuable cargo to market.
************8
so a turn to dock, a turn to take the safe/vaccsuits/subcraft and inventory
cargo.  then per pirate (one tone/vehicle in cargo or turret strip one
turret) per turn to transfer....
using GT 20 min turns.

so a pirate with 20 boaders (in an hour) strip 2 turrets, move 4 gcarriers
and 6 airrafts..allong with 2 tons of gems and 6 tons of silver...but wind
up leaving 4 more tons of silver and 50 tons of steel behind because the
patrol is coming.

or they can skip the inventory stem and transfer 40 tons of cargo and wind
up with 250Cr/ton....if they have the time they are better off with an
inventory.



A Far or Free Trader will get him about Cr100000. A Fat Trader will get
him about MCr3 and change. Small craft are worth several MCr each.
*********
does the fat trader include the launch?




Not counting the value of the ship, the pirate needs to spend about
MCr1 a year in maintenance, salary and expenses.



Most battle damage will probably occur in an unpatrolled system,
as the stakes are higher and the target vessel is probably better armed.
*********8
and thus more likely to fight....so many pirates will try to build a
rep...if the ship fights kill everyone on it, if not let them all live and
treat the passengers with extreme curtesy


Unpatrolled systems are the only systems where a pirate will want to
fight at all -
********
agreed


Targets taken in unpatrolled systems can almost always be considered
valuable enough to cover cost of damage - unless the damage stops
the pirate from jumping back to base.
************
also agreed if you take the ship.....but you might not want to do this...if
you don't take the ship, they might decide to chase someone else who is
taking ships....but if they fight take them.  :) 'I am the Dread Pirate
Roberts...There will be No Survivors.'


Therefore:
Even if a pirate has to hunt for an entire year to bag one Fat Trader,
he's still making reasonable money.
**********
sounds better, yeah.


There may be more efficient uses for a starship than piracy, but there are
people who cannot do legal careers for various reasons and ships they'd
not be able to use legally. Combine the two, and you get Corsairs.
 I believe my analyses show that a pirate can make money, if the setting
IYTU allows them to survive and travel.
*************
I will be using GT...simple semi-unforgable transponders...with an on/off
switch.

unscrupulous trader captians can do a little piracy.....if they are armed
and the other ship isn't....very risky tho....but tempting...behind 5-6
payments to the bank, he runs across a ships boat in the outsystem...his
hold is empty...does he take it? will the crew talk?  do they suggest it?
how many payments can he make with 25% of its value?  Can he still sleep at
night?  Does he get nightmares of the pilots face as the airlock door opens
and he begs for his life?  Of course there are people who like that kind of
thing.

Does he move a few subsectors over and start a new route? stick to his old
route, and hope they locals don't connect him to it when he comes back in a
few months?

And once he does it the next time is even more tempting.  until he is found
out, and has to become a full time pirate....'A short life but a merry
one.'


and not one I would chose.
altho I did once run an anti-piracy campaign....the players imitated
merchantmen and captured the pirates.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #971
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 19 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 972



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Where's Lucan? (my own guesses)
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
GT: Robots
Re: The Fourth Imperium: was Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964 
Capital Ships of WWII
SJG and virus
Re: Where's Lucan? (my own guesses)
Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:32:52 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> I just saw a piece on WWII capital ships and it said that it was several years
> into WWII before it was clear that airplanes from carriers could kill a
> Capital ship. Then, of course, the whole set of definitions changed, and the
> old terminology became obsolete (though people still used it).
> 

Ummm, yes, on December 7th, 1941, in fact, it was shown rather
conclusively.

Of course, since Billy Mitchell was essentially court-martialed for
showing that aircraft could kill cap ships in the early 30's, the
definition of 'clear' is somewhat open to interpretation ;-)

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:57:45 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>If you look at the speed/range table, the -39 value is for about 5,000
>miles.  The -29 value would be about 100 miles.  Yes, this is fudged some.

I still can't tell what the draft rules were suggesting should be the 
total modifiers to the to-hit roll for a 100 mile missile - is it
- -39 (0-hex accuracy) + 10 (point defence) = -29, but then you have to make
your roll by 10 points (ie making it the same as 0-hex non-point-defence?)

>So basically any laser-equipped ship is immune to (conventional) missile fire?
Yes. (Interestingly, G:T seems to at least partially reflect this - it looks
to me like military ships will be nearly completely immune (17- to hit on PD)
to conventional missiles (and even civilian ships will be too if they have
more than 1-2 lasers.)

>>Something I don't like about G:T's space combat system at a general level
>>is that the range table (which modifies to-hit rolls) goes as the log of
>>range

>This is almost the exact opposite of what you want -
>>the chance of hitting a non-evading target is linear with range and an
>>evading target goes as range^4 power
>Why do you want a linear chance?  The size of the critter in your field of
>view drops off sharply, as the inverse of the square of its length (which
>is what they use).

Oops - you're right that non-evading targets drop off as range^2. G:T is 
nowhere near this - the to-hit chance seems to use the main range table,
which is -1 point for log(range)/6. 

>Evasion is part of the dodge roll.
This is more of a problem. Evading laser fire works better the further away
you are, since evasion isn't a matter of "jittering so hard the turret can't
track you" (which is impossible), but of "moving the spacecraft out of the
way of the laser pulse in the time it takes to arrive" - evasion only works
when you're at large enough ranges that lightspeed lag is a factor, and then
the distance you can evade goes up as range^2 and hence the size of your
evasion circle goes upas range^4. BL kind of fudged this - there was a flat
- -1 DM (halving your hit chance) for every few hexes, plus a number of DM's
per G for successful G's dedicated to evasion instead of maneuver. G:T's
"slow hit probability dropoff" plus "flat chance to dodge a laser bolt
regardless of range" doesn't model this very well (indicative of the 
problems with trying to use mechanisms developed for people bashing each other
with swords for spaceships shooting each other with laser fire.) 

Anyway, my main point is that it looks to me like hit probabilities drop
off way too gradually. Combined with the very short effective ranges of
laser weapons, the flavour is that small military ships will (nearly) always
hit out to the maximum range of their weapons.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:00:31 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>So basically any laser-equipped ship is immune to (conventional) missile fire?
Basically yes. (Interestingly, G:T hit probabilities seem to reflect this - 
at least for the impact missiles.) A good laser can hit a 100-G-evading 
missile-sized target out to several thousand km nearly all the time. Effective
missiles have to be fragmentation types (that detonate a thousand km out and
spread a large cloud of small fragments) for civilian use (they're
marginal against good PD lasers), chemical explosive lasers, or nuke det-lasers.
(Presumably these will be in future G:T modules.)

(This has been debated ad nauseum on this list and the TTL; I would suggest
anyone who wishes to continue to debate it meet me on the TTL.)

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:04:32 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>Actually, it changes rapidly at intermediate ranges.  There is no major
>difference between 16- to hit and 28- to hit ;).  From 50% chance to hit down
>to a 2% chance is only a 10-fold increase in range, and another doubling in
>range drops it to zero.

This is still too slow - 10-fold increase in range should be either 1/100 ort
1/10000 the hit probability, depending on whether things are accuracy-dominated
or evasion-dominated (with the latter being more common.) Still, it's hard
to get this right with d6 - or even d100, until someone invents logarithmic
dice - so it's a minor point. I'd have to play with it more - it just looks
like too soft a drop-off to me, but I may be wrong.

>using standard GURPS rules we add velocity to range.
Why would one do this? How does the velocity of something in a space combat
situation - especially something that's heading straight towards you - make
it harder to hit? 

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:08:25 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!

In a message dated 10/18/98 12:54:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
john35@wharton.upenn.edu writes:

<< From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
 >
 > >Hmmm.. I've always prefered to portray him as a completely sane, rational
 > >man.  Quite charming, actually.  Sparkling personality.  Then you do
 > >something.  He thinks you're out to get him.  Your family turns up dead,
 > >your fortune is confiscated, and you spend a few very unpleasent days
being
 > >tortured for information on the "plot" before being killed.
 > 
 > Sounds a lot like Clinton...
 	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 			
 	WHAT THE HELL DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH TRAVELLER!!!!!
 
  >>
	THE TML IS A PLACE FOR DISCUSSION OF A HOBBY WE ALL SHARE AND 
LOVE.  PEOPLE WHO CAN'T OR WON'T RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS, POLITICAL, AND 
NATIONAL DIVERSITY OF THE TML'S SUBSCRIBERS SHOULD SIMPLY GO ELSEWHERE.

	Sincerely,

	John Macpherson

At the risk of fanning the flames...

     I personally find this sort of post to be rather offensive to me as a
TML'r.  I don't see where anything terribly offensive was posted by the
previous person.  In fact, there is at least a question of wether or not a
statistically significant number of people involved w/ the Clinton
Administration have passed on in curious circumstances.  As far as Traveller
goes, weren't their similar questions as to the rise of Lucan to the throne of
the Imperium, over the still-twitching body of his brother?

     Traveller is indeed a game, and as such is fictional.  However it, like
everything else in our lives, is shaped by things around us.  In the "Real
World", all is not sweetness and light.  If your personal belief is that King
Richard was a kind-hearted old man, thats fine...even though it doesn't square
with history or reality ( he was a major leader of the Crusades; rape and
pillage, because God is on your side)  But the rest of us are entitled to
present our opinions and thoughts as we see fit, without having to worry about
being shouted down for it.

DustyLV769@aol.com

BTW, I am a log-time Clinton supporter...and I STILL didn't find anything
offensive in Mr. Feltenburgers post!  :-)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:15:50 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

In a message dated 10/18/98 20:17:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
wombat@premier.net writes:

<< > Great idea, but we can build 100 Mt nuclear warheads right now...
 
 Probably true (I could possibly find out for sure, but, if I then posted
 it, I'd have to degauss _all_ of your hard drives [as well as degaussing
 your _brains_... ;-)]).
 
 The question is, what size warheads would _fit_ on a standard-sized
 missile?  (Let's face it, if you can't put it on target, a _gigaton_
 nuke doesn't do enough to justify popping it.) >>

It is true...the Soviet Union announced in the late 1950's (and it was
confirmed by declassified docs after the fall of Communism) that they had
constructed a 100Mt "doomsday" bomb.  I do not believe it was ever test-
detonated though...and certainly was not deployed to any weapons system.

DustyLV769@aol.com  (who's ex-girlfriends dad is a retired nuclear weapons
engineer!  :-)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:16:38 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

In a message dated 10/19/98 1:43:27 PM Central Daylight Time,
johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu writes:

<< 
 Ummm, yes, on December 7th, 1941, in fact, it was shown rather
 conclusively.
  >>

No no no. That was their point. It wasn't clear that in a standup battle with
battleships in the mix that battleships would be defeated by carrier air. PH
was a special case (no war footing, Sunday morning, etc). Midway was a special
case (no real battleships involved; it was carrier versus carrier).

Only later in the war did it bcome clear that battleships were out of the
running.

Marc Miller

------------------------------

Date: 19 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0000
From: lars@orplid.shnet.org (Lars Becker)
Subject: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

Hi Volker,

 > -> Highport
 > No direct translation i can think of

Since Highports are in orbit i would suggest "Orbital-Hafen"

 > -> Downport
 > ditto

and "Erdhafen" for ground based ports.

- - Lars.

------------------------------

Date: 19 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0000
From: lars@orplid.shnet.org (Lars Becker)
Subject: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

Hi Timothy.Collinson,

 > >Spaceport
 >           Systemhafen

This translation is both silly sounding and confusing, because
"Systemhafen" could *also* be used when refering to starports since 
those handle interstellartraffic.

 > >Starport
 >           Raumhafen

"Sternhafen" is a commonly used word in german sci-fi literature.

 > >Highport
 >           tc guess: Hochhafen?

That would be correct but (imo) sounds silly, so i'm not using a direct
translation and prefer "Orbitalhafen".

 > >Downport
 >           tc guess: Tiefhafen?

and "Erdhafen".

 > >Company
 >           Konzernherrschaft

Konzern would be right.  Konzernherrschaft means "a company that rules" and
could be used to describe the political status of a planet which a company
owns.

- - Lars.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:30:38 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Anthony Jackson wrote:

> Legate Legion writes:
>
> > I can fit a 10 Mt Nuclear Device in a brief-case, I think I can fit it in a
> > 250mm Missile tube, at our current TL...  By the time we reach for the
> > stars Iwould think 100 Mt could be fitted in the same space...
>
> Wow...we have briefcases which violate the laws of physics?  Ten megatons is
> approximately 500 grams of energy, giving a minimum mass (for fusion) of around
> 100 kilograms (maybe more...don't know exact conversion ratio for LiD), actual
> mass is going to be greater.  This is a _hard_ limit for fusion weapons, which
> means the upper limit for the missile sizes in GT is about 1 MT.
>
> Briefcase nukes are limited to about 100 kT last I knew -- not that this isn't
> quite a lot.  IIRC current strategic missile warheads are all under a megaton.
> .  Last I knew suitcase nukes were limited to about 100 kT.

I haven't actually seen anything about a nuclear briefcase.  However, I used
to be studying to be a cold warrior and used to know all sorts of things about
nuclear weapons strategy and tactics, especially when a limited nuclear
"warfighting" capability was a topic of discussion in the nuke community.
(Damn Gorbachev! ;-)

Most details, long forgotten.  But . . .
IIRC, you need something like 3-4 feet of tunnel/tube.chamber to get the fired
mass to high enough energy so that it will get the proper reaction.

I think the "Nuclear Briefcase" is actually what was called by the US Army
(although perhaps not officially) the "Nuclear Bullet."

It wasn't a bullet at all but a very large backpack weighing in excess of
120 pounds.  It was awkward to carry, due to its length, but it was
one-man-portable. (120lbs is the same load a fireman carries when
fully rigged up).  And there used to be some in the former West
Germany.

I don't know what the megaton/kiloton yield would be.  Especially
after you subtract the load of the non-reacting components of the
device, which, IIRC, where quite heavy themselves.  Say it was
20 kg or 45lbs of reaction mass.  What would the yield be?

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:32:57 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 08:59:59 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

As I have said before in various KKM debates, there's essentially no way
a space-combat-capable laser can miss a missile-sized target inside of a
thousand km or so (whether it's dodging or not...)
**************
yes, but we want to keep the feel of CT where the missiles were contact
missiles.


A general G:T missile question: Can missiles "dodge" point defence fire?
My instinctive answer would be no...but the rules are silent.
***************
no,  bottom of page 168 ramming craft cannot dodge.  and generaly point
defense will take out a single missile....if the gunner has a decent skill.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:28:58 -0500
From: Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan? (my own guesses)

scharlto@ifsna.com wrote:

> Marc, being somewhat sly and sneaky, has posed the question about what is
> Lucan doing in the GURPS alternate Travellerverse. 

I wonder if Marc knows what Lucan is up to. ;->  Loren are you keeping
Marc up to date with the behind the scenes machinations or are you
planning to surprise him too?

> 1.  Loren has said that in the GURPSverse, Strephon was away from the
> Capital doing exactly what Strephon was doing in the Travellerverse;
> inspecting Longbow.  There were some hints from late GDW publications and
> from Dave Nilsen that Longbow had a psionic element to it.  I suspect that
> Strephon was given a vision of the Travellerverse; his assassination, the
> rebellion and the eventual collapse of civilization.

Maybe, but I don't think so. I think GT has to avoid even the merest
hint of "the rebellion" and "virus" by contract. What I think happened
is that IIS did its job this time and discovered the plot before Dulinor
made it to Capital.

> 2.  In the GURPSverse, Strephon is working VERY feverishly to avoid the
> future he was shown.  He has ordered the death of Dulinor, and I imagine he
> told Lucan in very clear terms that he needed to get out and grow up, or
> suffer a severe case of jacketed lead poisoning.  

Hum...

a. Who says Dulinor is actually dead? Where's the definitive proof that
the ArchDuke was really on that cutter when it was destroyed? Sure, our
suspicions are that Strephon or loyal Internal Security forces destroyed
the cutter, but what if it didn't happen that way. What if Dulinor got
word that his plot was blown, and decided he had better "disappear?" 
Maybe *he* destroyed the cutter to cover his escape. He might be out
there somewhere, on the run, plotting, even trying to get to the Zhodani
for political asylum. Who knows what he might be up to.

b. Maybe Lucan was implicated in the plot, but Uncle Strephon can't
prove anything. Lucan certainly moved fast enough in the MT universe.
Maybe he had been in on it, then double crossed Dulinor...that fits him
if you ask me. Or maybe in *this* universe Lucan changed his mind, lost
his nerve, and spilled the beans on the plot.

> I suspect Varian was ordered away as an insurance policy, just in case history cannot > be manipulated after all.  I would not be suprised to find that Varian is sent
> to Margret's domain, either to ensure her loyalty or tom make sure she does
> not try to usurp the throne in case Strephon is killed.

I agree that the "grand tour" is a cover, but a cover for what...maybe
Varian has been charged with hunting down the renegade Dulinor?  Or
checking out what's happening in Zhodani/Vargr space? Or again who knows
what!

> 3.  I have a feeling that, rather than creating a magic handwave that
> states the Cymbeline chips and the Virus research never existed, Strephon
> will send orders to the research station ordering all Virus projects to be
> terminated, the files wiped and the materials destroyed.  In face, he may
> even be scared enough to have the Navy just bomb the station to ensure no
> knowledge or samples survive.

Again, I don't think SJG can use *anything* connected with Virus, but
I'd be just as happy if they dropped the Cymbeline angle and ditched the
whole Deyo transponder business, as if it never existed.

> 4.  In TNE, Strephon saw something else at Longbow; the effects of the
> Empress Wave.  Will this still be an issue in the GURPSverse?  I suspect
> that it will be (though perhaps not quite as extensive as some hints have
> suggested for the future of the TNE universe).  I would bet that the
> Zhodani Consulate may suffer some upheaval, and maybe even a civil war.

I suspect there will be some sort of upheaval, and it's going to spill
over into the Imperium. The Imperium needs to be shaken not destroyed. I
think it also needs a real frontier, but I don't know where that might
be.  Of course, the area rimward of the Solomani Sphere is still
unexplored territory.
 
> 5.  Strephon also saw how very quickly the Solomani Confederation mobilized
> and seized the rimward portions of the Imperium.  This would have to worry
> him, and perhaps initiate either a significant military buildup or urge him
> to seek a negotiated formal peace with the Solomani.  Either would not be
> popular with certain hard-core Solomani Supremicists and hard-line
> Imperialists at home.

Yep, I wouldn't be surprised to eventually see an attack coming from the
solomani rim. Nor would I be surprised if we just get internal unrest
along the borders of both polities.
 
> So, what do you think?  If you were Strephon in 1116, and you were given a
> vision of the Imperium's future as seen in TNE, what would you do?  Can
> this be a good thing for Strephon; being haunted by visions of a collapse
> that in no small measure was due to his own mistakes and poor assumptions?
> How much would he have told Varian, or even Lucan?

> So, how about it Loren; am I even close?

Come on Steve, you don't expect Loren to tell you either way do you?
;->  The fun is in the speculation.

If Loren and SJG can make the GTverse entertaining enough, they might
even lure me into playing there.

Eris

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:

> >using standard GURPS rules we add velocity to range.
> Why would one do this? How does the velocity of something in a space combat
> situation - especially something that's heading straight towards you - make
> it harder to hit? 

Well, I was just giving canonical rules, not questioning whether they made
sense or not.  Given that it's only a -2, it's not that big a deal.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:43:20 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

At 11:57 AM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>If you look at the speed/range table, the -39 value is for about 5,000
>>miles.  The -29 value would be about 100 miles.  Yes, this is fudged some.
>
>I still can't tell what the draft rules were suggesting should be the 
>total modifiers to the to-hit roll for a 100 mile missile - is it
>-39 (0-hex accuracy) + 10 (point defence) = -29, but then you have to make
>your roll by 10 points (ie making it the same as 0-hex non-point-defence?)

That was the original intent.

>>So basically any laser-equipped ship is immune to (conventional) missile
fire?
>Yes. (Interestingly, G:T seems to at least partially reflect this - it looks
>to me like military ships will be nearly completely immune (17- to hit on PD)
>to conventional missiles (and even civilian ships will be too if they have
>more than 1-2 lasers.)

Remember that there is a -2 modifier for each missile after the first.

>>>Something I don't like about G:T's space combat system at a general level
>>>is that the range table (which modifies to-hit rolls) goes as the log of
>>>range
>
>>This is almost the exact opposite of what you want -
>>>the chance of hitting a non-evading target is linear with range and an
>>>evading target goes as range^4 power
>>Why do you want a linear chance?  The size of the critter in your field of
>>view drops off sharply, as the inverse of the square of its length (which
>>is what they use).
>
>Oops - you're right that non-evading targets drop off as range^2. G:T is 
>nowhere near this - the to-hit chance seems to use the main range table,
>which is -1 point for log(range)/6. 

Try using inverse range^2 instead and see what happens.

>>Evasion is part of the dodge roll.
>This is more of a problem. Evading laser fire works better the further away
>you are, since evasion isn't a matter of "jittering so hard the turret can't
>track you" (which is impossible), but of "moving the spacecraft out of the
>way of the laser pulse in the time it takes to arrive" - evasion only works
>when you're at large enough ranges that lightspeed lag is a factor, and then
>the distance you can evade goes up as range^2 and hence the size of your
>evasion circle goes upas range^4. BL kind of fudged this - there was a flat
>-1 DM (halving your hit chance) for every few hexes, plus a number of DM's
>per G for successful G's dedicated to evasion instead of maneuver. G:T's
>"slow hit probability dropoff" plus "flat chance to dodge a laser bolt
>regardless of range" doesn't model this very well (indicative of the 
>problems with trying to use mechanisms developed for people bashing each
other
>with swords for spaceships shooting each other with laser fire.) 

Personnally, I don't thing laser bolts should be dodgeable at all.  The
lightspeed lag at laser ranges will be minimal... point and shoot.  That's
being realistic.  At some point you have to drop the realism (as I did with
the missiles).  Therefore I allow the dodge, for reasons more of making the
fight more interesting.

>Anyway, my main point is that it looks to me like hit probabilities drop
>off way too gradually. Combined with the very short effective ranges of
>laser weapons, the flavour is that small military ships will (nearly) always
>hit out to the maximum range of their weapons.

Capitol ships will probably be more likely to really be fighting with their
spinal mounts, no?  It's pretty easy to sock on enough armor and/or
sandcasters to invalidate laser fire... so the lasers get used for point
defense and attacking fighters.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:44:53 -0700
From: "Brian Mays" <bmays@genscope.com>
Subject: GT: Robots

The GT Rulebook is rather vague when it comes to what is actually possible
with AI and robotics.  IMTU, I will assume that at TL 12, the "sentient"
option is still not available for robot brains.  "Neural net" is, however.
Since n.n. is available at TL 8, and sentient at (IIRC) TL 10 in G:Robots,
should I just bump both of them up 2 levels for Traveller?  That is, n.n. is
available at TL10, and (intentional) sentience isn't an option until TL 14?

Just curious how others are handling this.

Domo Arigato Mr. Roboto,

Brian

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:28:06 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: The Fourth Imperium: was Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964 

> IMTU, & IMNSFBHO, high tech without high automation is difficult at 
> best, 
> impossible at worst.
> ==========================
> 
> Hmmmmm, now thats something I had not considered.

Didn't think so.  <grin>  You been working on this stuff at 4 AM again, Jim?

> Actually, the psi generally ignore most folk, realizing it to be a waste 
> of time to try and watch everyone in sight.  However, if you are a 
> person of some importance, you can count on being watched.

That would be a given, and simular to what's going on now.  If you're Joe 
Lunchbox, you pretty much get ignored except at tax time unless you decide to 
pick up a weapon and do something like shoot up a post office.
 
> ===========================
> > 3)  The 4I is still expanding beyond the old Solomani Rim sector, 
> using 
> > both economic and military aggression.
> 
> for a 4I centered on Terra, that would be a given.  However, I doubt if 
> they'd 
> get to Regency space by then, what with having to absorb everything in 
> their 
> way first.  The absorbtion would take time and effort as well as 
> manpower.
> ===============================
> 
> True, though I don't know where the Regency is exactly.  I have'nt 
> gotten any TNE stuff yet.

The Regency is the Domain of Deneb; it consists of the Spinward Marches, 
Deneb, Trojan Reaches, and portions of Reft Sectors.  They call it the area 
'behind the Claw.'
 
> War with the K'kree is a guarantee.  The Hivers they just don't trust. 
> Not enough to shoot on sight, but if they think they have an 
> excuse............

That's how I see them.

> ==================================
> Given the 4I's roots in the Solomani Party, would they stoop to using 
> the 
> Aslans for mercenaries?  And what do they do with the Vargr?  
> Paper-train them?
> ===================================
> 
> The Houses of the 4I do use Aslan and Vargr Mercs.  The Vargr are 
> considered cousins of a sort, considering their Terran roots.

Considering the position of the Hierate in relation to the new 4I centered at 
Terra, it looks like they might fight the Aslan Border Wars all over again as 
soon as they start feeling froggy again.  This means head to head in the Dark 
Nebula & Reavers' Deep sectors, as seen by Sollie incursions into RD during 
the Rebellion, only on a bigger scale.  IMTU (Reavers' Deep ca. 1125), the 
first phases of this are already happening in that the Sollies are backing 
pirate gangs, if not actively hiding their flags and acting like pirates, the 
resulting shipping losses are taking their toll on the general overall 
stability of several regimes in the area.

> Consider me a Terra-phile, must be my upbringing.  I've always wanted to 
> see Terra in control.  The Regency will make a good enemy.  Thanks for 
> the comments.

NP.  You gonna cut up a PBEM on this?  <grin>

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:51:59 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Capital Ships of WWII

I would have to say that IMO, the first clear proof that battleships were no
longer a main factor in Naval combat came almost at the end of the war:  the
sortie by the IJN to Okinawa, with the fleet flag on board Yamato.  One BB,
one CA and a number of DD's hit by 3rd Fleet (??) aircraft...only 2-3 DD's
survived.  This occured in April 1945, and there is an excellent book about it
"A Glorious Way To Die"

Can anyone think of anything that occured sooner?  Surigao Strait has just
sprang to mind...

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:57:46 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: SJG and virus

>Maybe, but I don't think so. I think GT has to avoid even the merest
>hint of "the rebellion" and "virus" by contract.

GURPS: Traveller, sidebar, page 5.

"I dreamt of horrors last night....  and over it all, some hideous, bestial
face, all wires and pulleys and gears, swallowing the stars themselves, one
by one, until the sky was completely, totally black....

personal journal of Prince Varian Paulo Alkhalikoi Entry for 133-1116"

evidently the vision was Varian's, rather than Strephon's.

[snip]

>Again, I don't think SJG can use *anything* connected with Virus, but
>I'd be just as happy if they dropped the Cymbeline angle and ditched the
>whole Deyo transponder business, as if it never existed.

There's nothing that says they can't use it at all... in several places in
the book they make mention of it, but only to say that it's not happening.
> 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:15:47 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan? (my own guesses)

In a message dated 10/19/98 2:36:15 PM Central Daylight Time, eris@gulf.net
writes:

<<  
 > So, what do you think?  If you were Strephon in 1116, and you were given a
 > vision of the Imperium's future as seen in TNE, what would you do?  Can
 > this be a good thing for Strephon; being haunted by visions of a collapse
 > that in no small measure was due to his own mistakes and poor assumptions?
 > How much would he have told Varian, or even Lucan?
  >>

Who says Lucan is evil in this universe? Maybe he'll find a cause or a
girlfriend or something and life will turn a different direction.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:33:40 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

In a message dated 10/19/98 12:21:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
CardSharks@aol.com writes:

<< Only later in the war did it bcome clear that battleships were out of the
 running.
 
 Marc Miller >>

I would say later was was week after when the Prince of Wales and the Repulse
were killed by landbased air on Dec. 9th. The torpedo bomber and (not used in
this case) dive bomber were the new queens of the naval battle. This action
proved without a doubt that even a modern battleship couldn't defend herself
without her own aircover...

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #972
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 19 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 973



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Capital Ships of WWII
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Where's Lucan? (my own guesses)
Judge's Guild Products
[none]
re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:45:52 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Capital Ships of WWII

In a message dated 10/19/98 12:58:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
DustyLV769@aol.com writes:

<< Can anyone think of anything that occured sooner?  Surigao Strait has just
 sprang to mind... >>

Yeah; the death of Force Z (Prince of Wales, Repulse) on Dec.9th 1941. Land
based torpedo bombers sank them both within a hour. Force Z was caught without
air cover. Only a couple of planes were shot down. POW had a modern DP
secondary armament, but her first torpedo hit killed the power to the turrets,
and sprang a propeller shaft, which then proceded to flood her engine room
(hence the dead secondary turrets)- cie la guerre'... IMO; this not Pearl was
more illustrative of the vunerability of capital ships to air power. Both
ships were steaming at flank speed, had plenty of searoom to manuever, were at
general quarters, and had their AA guns manned; yet they still couldn't defend
themselves....

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:44:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:
> Yes. (Interestingly, G:T seems to at least partially reflect this - it
> looks to me like military ships will be nearly completely immune (17- to
> hit on PD) to conventional missiles (and even civilian ships will be too if
> they have more than 1-2 lasers.)

Well, there's a limit to how many PD attacks you can do with a particular
weapon system.  It appears to be fairly practical to saturate point defense,
particularly with missile bays.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:53:52 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

At 11:32 AM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:
>CardSharks@aol.com wrote:
>
>> I just saw a piece on WWII capital ships and it said that it was several
>>years into WWII before it was clear that airplanes from carriers could kill 
>>a Capital ship. Then, of course, the whole set of definitions changed, and 
>>the old terminology became obsolete (though people still used it).
>> 
>
>Ummm, yes, on December 7th, 1941, in fact, it was shown rather
>conclusively.

If you tied Mike Tyson up, I could probably beat him up.  While Pearl
proved that warships tied up to a pier and subjected to repaeated attacks
are vulnerable, it was another few years before actual combat expereince
showed that warplanes copuld threaten capital ships effectivly.
- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:14:19 +0200
From: "Jonas Karlsson" <Jonas.Karlsson@baldakinen.umea.se>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

> From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
> How does the velocity of something in a space combat situation -
especially something
> that's heading straight towards you - make it harder to hit?

While I don't know if it's the way it's supposed to work (but I suspect it
it is) I certainly don't add full speed modifiers when a target is heading
straight at/away from the firer (or within a few degrees of that.) (Instead
I modify the range with half the speed, figuring for ease of use that the
firer shoots at about halfway into the 'turn'. Or, just as likely, I ignore
the whole thing and just eyeball it. ;-)

At other angles it's actually a reasonably clever way (given the way the
table is designed) to abstract the fact that if the speed is 1000yps it
doesn't really matter much whether the target is 50 or 100 meters away. And
likewise, if something is 1000 meters away, it doesn't really matter much
whether it moves at 1 yps or 2 yps. It certainly isn't perfect, but it's
easy to use and gives reasonable results. (The table also takes size into
account.)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:37:48 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan? (my own guesses)

From:           	scharlto@ifsna.com
Date sent:      	Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:27:43 -0700

>Hi all,

>Marc, being somewhat sly and sneaky, has posed the question about what is
>Lucan doing in the GURPS alternate Travellerverse.  Based on my reading of
>the book, small hints Loren has dropped here and in theTNS entries, and the
>overall mind-altering effects of Sudafed, I have come up with a set of
>assumptions about the dividing line for the Alternate:

>2.  In the GURPSverse, Strephon is working VERY feverishly to avoid the
>future he was shown.  He has ordered the death of Dulinor, and I imagine he
>told Lucan in very clear terms that he needed to get out and grow up, or
>suffer a severe case of jacketed lead poisoning.  I suspect Varian was
>ordered away as an insurance policy, just in case history cannot be
>manipulated after all.  I would not be suprised to find that Varian is sent
>to Margret's domain, either to ensure her loyalty or tom make sure she does
>not try to usurp the throne in case Strephon is killed.

Is Dulinor dead? this is a biggie. If Dulinor is dead did Strephon (away at 
Longbow) order him killed, I think thats unlikely (timeframes all wrong). Its far 
more likely that Imperial security forces acted on initiative.

Varian? Well just what do we actually know about Varian? Not a lot. In MT he 
had the "good" fortune to be killed and become a martyr, but we don't actually 
know a lot about his personality. There is no evidence that he was any better 
than Lucan. Given that the Imperium chose not to train the 3rd in line for the 
throne (utter stupidity),  can't see any reason why the 2nd in line would have 
been either. All we know was that he stole his twin brother's girlfriend and got 
into a shouting match over it. Not a lot to go on really. My take on Varian is 
that he was just as much a spoilt brat as Lucan, just he got killed and thus 
history makes him the noble martyr.

>3.  I have a feeling that, rather than creating a magic handwave that
>states the Cymbeline chips and the Virus research never existed, Strephon
>will send orders to the research station ordering all Virus projects to be
>terminated, the files wiped and the materials destroyed.  In face, he may
>even be scared enough to have the Navy just bomb the station to ensure no
>knowledge or samples survive.

I would be very happy to see the abomination of the Deyo transponder, 
Cymbeline chips and the Virus forever banished to the depths of TNE were they 
belong (no offense guys, I just don't like them).

>4.  In TNE, Strephon saw something else at Longbow; the effects of the
>Empress Wave.  Will this still be an issue in the GURPSverse?  I suspect
>that it will be (though perhaps not quite as extensive as some hints have
>suggested for the future of the TNE universe).  I would bet that the
>Zhodani Consulate may suffer some upheaval, and maybe even a civil war.

Lets get something straight abot Strephon. He may be very noble and 
honourable. But in MT he was clearly shown to be an utter incompetant. He left 
Capital leaving no contingancies for any "accidents". Just what would have 
happened if his clone had had an air/raft crash while he was away? He 
apparently didn't tell anybody he was going. When the rebellion broke out he 
was so guilty striken that he chose not to prove his identity. etc etc etc..... 
Make no mistakes Strephon may have been honourable, but he was an 
honourable fool.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:42:01 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Judge's Guild Products

Anyone know the copyright status of Judge's Guild Traveller products.

I recently came into possession of a lot of them (in mint condition ;-)
and was just curious.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:40:12 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: [none]

>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 10:11:55 -0400
>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)
>
[snip]
>Now, I've got some assumptions about piracy that I'd like to
>reiterate, just so critics know my basis and can kibbitz properly.
>
>1. Pirates need to clear out quickly; for most targets, the patrol
>will be on the way.
>
>This limits what you can take. Small craft (the big profits). Vehicles.
>Vac suits. Supplies. Passenger valuables. Select items from the
>cargo bay. The contents of the ship's safe. Missiles & sand canisters
>(if the target hasn't "given" them to you already).
>
>What you can't take: Ship components. Bulky cargo items. Fuel.
>Starship weapons. Valuable things, but you simply don't have the
>time to get them.

Actually, "Standard" (FF&S Socket) turrets and barbettes could quite
possibly be grabbed, if they aren't slag by the time you get there

>This will not apply if you've hit the target in an unpatrolled system, and
>that's good - you may well have taken a hit or two from a target well-
>equipped enough to be in an unpatrolled system alone, you'll need all
>the booty you can get.
>
>2. It's very hard to jump away a starship you take.
>
[snip]
>
>There will be exceptions to this, but I feel they will be rare enough that
>we can ignore them for the purposes of this study. The captain who
>succeeds at taking and selling a major starship has a right to be proud
>of his unusual accomplishment.

given the ship assumption, no argument here. However 600td craft with a bay
for 200td Type A/A2 std hulls could grab and go.

>3. You can use or sell what you take.
>
>Here are my assumptions on value for items:
>
>- ----------------------------
>
>Starships: 10% of value. Starships are so well documented that it is
>expensive to dispose of stolen ones. They may simply be used as
>auxiliaries to the "pirate fleet". Few will be taken, as per #2 above.

I'd say you'd probably be able to part it out for at least 25%. More work,
but still doable.

>Small Craft: 25% of value. They are more ubiquitous, and tend not to
>be kept track of in interstellar databases as much. (note: one lifeboat
>taken will pay all maintenance, life support and salary costs for a
>400tn corsair for about three years).
>
>Vehicles: 25% of value, for the same reasons as small craft.

Again, if you have the connections, part them out for about 40% of value.

>Supplies: Spare parts, tools and life support essentials can be taken.
>There is a bit of a handwave here, but I assume that the pirate can use
>these to defray some costs of life support and to affect the price of his
>annual maintenance. Total up what the target ship spent on life support
>for the current trip, and credit the pirate 25% of that towards his life
>support expenses only. As for annual maintenance, reduce the cost
>to the standard .1% per year - the stolen parts and tools help make
>up for the bribes and extra costs, even in a law level zero port, of
>getting annual maintenance done on a less than legal starship.

sounds good.

>Vac Suits: assume one per crew member of the target, plus two
>spares. Each one worth Cr10,000, pirate recoups 25% of that.

Any pirate taking away the crew's vacc suits is going to acquire QUITE a
rep, and probably quite a bounty paid by donations from passengers and
crews affected.

>Rescue Balls: Assume one per passenger including low berths,
>Cr600 each, pirate recoups 25% of that.

probably could recoup 50% or more with streetwise tasks.

>Passenger valuables: Assume, as a minimum average, cash and other
>easily convertable valuables on hand equal to the price paid for passage.
>These valuables are recouped with no reduction (or the reduction is
>included in the average). High passenger Cr10,000, Low passenger
>Cr1000, Middle passenger Cr8,000.

sounds good

>Ship's Safe: Ships need to carry cash, they can't remain on-planet
>long enough for credit to clear in a crisis - whether it's a fine that needs
>to be paid or an opportunity speculative cargo. Figure as an estimated
>average, Cr25000 per 100tns of ship. Note that my only real source
>for this is the Cr100,000 the _March Harrier_ had on hand at the start
>of _The Traveller Adventure_, it may be much higher. This will be in
>cash, recouped at 100% of value.

I'd use 3d-3 * 10% of annual maintenance costs, plus a base of roughly
Cr2500 per td of cargo capacity (based upon ammounts in my various
merchantile campaigns).

>Ship's Locker: Ignored. Assume that items go to replenish equipment
>stores on the pirate, the locker is really so varied from ship to ship
>that it's hard to come up with an average. We can safely assume that
>a pirate ship will run out of storage space, rather than run out of
>miscellaneous equipment.
>
>(However, a note: in the AD&D game, the most commonly overlooked
>type of treasure is household goods. Those kobolds may have only
>had a handful of pennies, but that big iron cookpot is worth a gold piece
>or two.)
>
>Cargo: The pirates will have to (very) quickly evaluate the cargo, and
>guess what they have time to take. A zero-G cargo handler robot or
>exoskeleton would be a very good thing here. Variation is too high
>to allow a very useful average value of what can be taken, as one ship
>may have two tons of gemstones while another may have nothing but
>grain. I decided on allowing the pirates to recoup an average value of
>Cr250 per cargo ton of the target (25% of Cr1000 per ton). This allows
>some losses for travel, middlemen, and the other expenses of getting
>even a valuable cargo to market.
>
>(Note: In AD&D, the second most often ignored type of treasure was
>trade goods. <G>)
>
>Passengers: I decided to leave kidnapping for ransom or slavery out of
>the equations. There will be exceptions, and I even have some ideas
>(for later) that the slow communications time of the Imperium may make
>kidnapping for ransom far easier than it is on Earth today, if you are
>patient or ruthless enough.

Kidnapping for any purpose could trigger imperial attentions. Something
pirates would want to avoid.

[snip]
>Most battle damage will probably occur in an unpatrolled system,
>as the stakes are higher and the target vessel is probably better armed.
>Unpatrolled systems are the only systems where a pirate will want to
>fight at all - the risks are too high compared to the rewards in a system
>where patrol ships are en route to the fight.
>Targets taken in unpatrolled systems can almost always be considered
>valuable enough to cover cost of damage - unless the damage stops
>the pirate from jumping back to base.

>Therefore:
>
>Even if a pirate has to hunt for an entire year to bag one Fat Trader,
>he's still making reasonable money. I believe this answers some
>arguments that a pirate loses too much money by lying in wait for
>targets, or by having to transit several systems to get from a base
>to a good hunting area.
>
>Income can be far, far higher than just expenses if the pirate hits a few
>good targets. This allows there to be enough income potential to make
>up for the really bad luck a pirate can have - one missile hit can cost
>millions, even if it doesn't kill you. Piracy therefore becomes high-risk,
>but very profitable if the risks pan out.
>
>There may be more efficient uses for a starship than piracy, but there are
>people who cannot do legal careers for various reasons and ships they'd
>not be able to use legally. Combine the two, and you get Corsairs.
> I believe my analyses show that a pirate can make money, if the setting
>IYTU allows them to survive and travel.
>
>Please take a look at my assumptions, especially those on the value
>of the booty, and comment - these assumptions are critical to the
>economic viability of the pirate career.

aside from the bits about taking spacesuits (which are generally somewhat
personalized, usually worn (no pun intended), and often will have hard to
remove identifications), looks pretty good.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:47:37 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>Personnally, I don't thing laser bolts should be dodgeable at all.  The
>lightspeed lag at laser ranges will be minimal... point and shoot.  That's
>being realistic.  At some point you have to drop the realism (as I did with
>the missiles).  Therefore I allow the dodge, for reasons more of making the
>fight more interesting.

Classical traveller has combat ranges of a lightsecond or two, at which
point lightspeed lag is significant (a 6-G ship can move 480 meters in
four seconds of there-and-back-again time.) I think evading laser fire
is somewhat reasonable; I just don't like GT's interpretation - evading 
should (a) require you to set aside some G's that aren't available for
maneuver, and (b) become more successful at greater ranges.

>Capitol ships will probably be more likely to really be fighting with their
>spinal mounts, no?

I was thinking more of small military ships - escorts, frigates, destroyers. 
On the other hand, it looks like I miscalculated hit probabilities, which seem
(if I'm reading it right) to be quite low...consider a civilian ship:

Gunner     +13
Wpn. acc   +13
Wpn. ROF   + 4
targeting  + 7
 program
Active     + 2
 sensor
          -----
            39

Firing at a 400-ton target (+9 size) at 7 hexes (-43) it hits only on a 3.
At 2 hexes it hits on a 5-. Civilian ships will have to plink away a long
time to hit anything...

Even a military ship (gunner 14, targeting +10) only has an adjusted gunnery
of 44 - vs an 800-ton target at 7 hexes it's only hitting a third of the time.
So the short weapon ranges and low accuracy abotu cancel out. Small-ship
combat only happens at very close ranges - and hence only when one ship
has a big acceleration advantage or both ships are looking for a fight.

In point defence mode, the military ship gets 44 - 39 (0 hex) + 10 (PD) for a
15- ; it usually hits incoming missiles. Because of the way the PD rules
allow multiple shots (each additional missile a single turret enganges is at -2),
having three or four turrets is nearly 100% protection against the same number
of missiles. If there are three missiles, each turret gets one shot at 
15- at one missile, a second at 13- at another, a third at 11- at the third - 
each missile has to survive a 15-, 13- and 11- and hence has little chance of
hitting. (Vs. a civilian ship the shots would be 10-, 8-, and 6- - life is 
a little better for the missile (about a quarter of missiles will get through.)

These are not as high to-hit numbers as I initially thought they were (unless
I'm doing something wrong) - in fact, they seem too low; GURPS lasers must
not be very accurate :-) 


Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:48:49 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))

At 11:25 PM 10/16/98 PST, you wrote:
>In mail you write:
>
>>>And (in the Definitive Sensor Rules written to go with FFS2) you can do 
>> better
>>>by (as you suggest) radiating all heat away from the sensor. However, that
>>>only really works if the sensor is only in one direction. If there are 4-6
>>>fixed sensor platforms out at 100 diameters, they'll see the pirate as it
>>>goes by and enters the 100 diameter sphere...
>>>
>>
>> Very true.  Remote sensors would be a major problem to a pirate.  You'd have
>> to design a non radiator ship powered be batteries to fool the sensors if
>> they can 'see' your heat radiator.  The best solution is a directed
>> (columated) radiator as discribed in the novel "Sun Diver".  The ship was
>> cooled by dumping it's heat into a laser.  That laser could then be directed
>> into deep space and thus undetectable disposal of the heat if this tech.
>> exist in the TU.
>
>It can't exist anywhere. Laser light is *low* (almost *zero*) entropy.
>Heat is very high entropy. Thus you *cannot* convert heat to laser
>light without creating far more heat than you send away. The trick in
>Sundiver isn't allowed by the laws of thermodynamics.
>

UH...heat IS light.  Inferred light.  That is want heat is.  And there are
IR lasers avalable today.  The problem is convertion.  A chemical catalist
laser could in theory convert waste heat to collumated IR.  Also there is
the other question as to how much waste heat a TL12 Fusion reacter has.  If
it's low and the insulation facter is high then there would be no need to
vent heat at all.  The color temperture difference between the hull an space
could be less than 1 degree.

>In fact, you have the problem that your *effective* radiator area is
>equal to the area of the cone of radiation at the closest point to the
>ship. So the narower the emission cone, the smaller the area, and thgus
>the higher the radiator temp. 
>
>Thus there are some rather tight limits on how stealthy you can get.
>

Again it depends on the amount of waste heat.  You need some to warm the
crew spaces to begin with.  If the waste heat is not greater than that there
is no waste heat.

>> The problem with remote sensors this widely spaced is time
>> lag and syncronization from various locations.  Good computers would be
>> required.  The sensors would be very expensive due to the need for high gain
>> AND wide area coverage.  You are talking about a system far larger than a
>> ship could mount reasonablly due to surface area.  I think the cost and
>> maintain costs would rule this out for pourer and lower tech worlds.
>
>Huh? A ship using limited area radiators for stealth will be a
>*spotlight* in the IR in the cone it *does* radiate into. That's
>because when you limit the radiating area by (say) 50%, the
>*temperature* goes up a lot faster. And thus, so does the IR
>"brightness" of the ship in those directions.
>

I ment that your sensor would have to be 'in the arc' and facing in the
right direction so you would need quite a few with good networking to get a
location fix.  You'd need at least three widely separated on all three axis
to narrow it down to a reasonable area.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:48:52 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>>I can not see any cargo with a final sale price of less than 4kcr per ton
>>per jump being suficiently profitable to attact busness.  Companies do not
>>normal support operation with low proffit margins unless the volume of sales
>>is very high.  Like gasoline sales in the US.  VERY high volume but low
>>proffit for the retainer compared to other goods.  It all come down to
>>return on investment.  
>
>Yep. And what I'm trying to figure out is the return on investment in the
>piracy business ... and compare it to something else, like going to another
>state with your stolen ship, and hiring yourself out as a Naval Auxilary.
>

Historically pirates were mutineers and criminals of various stripes.  They
did not run because they were wanted to many places to do so.  They did not
build ships except for privateers which are NOT pirates and were the nature
of this discussion when I first brought it up.  Pirates generally stole
ships, captured and converted ships, or aquired them be mutinee.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:48:55 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>How long will the approach take him? Every minute he spends catching one
>victim costs money.
>

With a high Delta V and cold gas manuvering thruster it would not be a
problem.  As for matching velocities, you can finish that after you disable him.

>>To find him running silent you have to search everywhere he could be. His
>>course could pass close to known arrival points
>
>Known arrival points are either a random spot at the 100 diameter limit or
>a specific spot on the 100 diameter limit. In the first case his chance of
>lurking close to the arrival spot is low and in the secod case it would be
>ordinary prudence for a system patrol to be stationed at the spot.
>

Not necessarily.  Planets move as do solar systems.  The best spot to enter
depends on many things including Delta V and landing point.  IF the pirate
knew these thanks to spies or survelence he could be johnie on the spot.

>>and he could grab a target of opportunity.
>
>Again, you're not doing the math. What are the odds of getting an opportunity
>in the first place?
>

See above.

>>If he was expecting a particullar target he could plan his course to put him
>>in the best posible intercept position based on the slop factor I mention
>>before.
>
>Non-existent slop factor.
>

True, but I did not know that.  Just got my books back from home.  I work on
the road.
 
>>The problem as I see it is that pirates are canon so we are left to explain
>>them as best we can with little information.
>
>That's also the problem as I see it. Except that we have quite a lot of
>information that has to be fitted into it.
>
>>For the pirate to exist their mush be crack for them to hide in.
>
>Quite true. But what's the use of creating that crack by violating other
>parts of the canon?
>

True.

>>The random incouter charts make them seem fairly common as far as pirates
>>can be common.
>
>If pirates was so common as the encounter tables suggested, then they would
>cost the _private_ sector enough money that it would be worth their while to
>fund their own patrol ships (which, incidentally, they do, canonically).
>

I would they spend those credits if it were not needed?  And what would be
the need for armed merchants which are also canan if there were no pirates?

>>So it they do exit how do they exits?  I see several posibilities.
>> 
>>1)  The number of military ships are low compared to the area they must
>>patrol.
>
>Necessitates changing another part of canon, making that part very much less
>plausible.
>

Not really,  From all I have read the number of ship (1000 per sector) is
not all that high.  Once you figure formations you end up with 200 small
squadrons of even less larger squadrons for 400+ worlds.

>>Reasonable idea if the tax base could not support that large an IN.
>
>But the rax base can easily support that much and much, much more.
>

But that depends on your assumtions.  If you ASSUME that the 1% is for ALL
empirial spending you end up with a different story.  Or if you ASSUME that
1% has to include all ground forces, airforces, logistics, and auxilleries
then you end up with a different set of numbers.  These are all assumtions
not canon.  The only canon we have is cross version.  Is there enough canon
in any one version of the TU to figure the budget for that version?  I have
CT and T4.  In T4 you loose military money if you spend it else where.
Maybe they are spending the money in 'inferstructure'.  You can also have
your economy take a down turn due the social problems.  Maybe CT was in a
recession?  Or mabe the Marches where I usually play is a haven for pirates
but no the encounter table is in the basic books not the SM book.

OR mabe the writter goofed and left out some obvious point like the military
ships were 'down' for repairs or R&R 50% of the time like the US military is
with it's planes.  Or maybe the writers did not fully understand the
implications of their material.  A simple error like say the 2LS detection
range only applies to ships with active manuver drives. Or that the military
has 'down time' would help to explain it.  Or maby the cost to maintain
those military ships goes up as they age like the civilian ships?

>>2)  Pirates can hide from sensor in system and jump out after they attack
>>with a reasonable chance for escape.
>
>Works for me (I'm the proponent of the "interdimensional heat sink in space"
>to allow much greater stealth. Unfortunately it dosen't work for those who
>know more physics than I do, ane they are the ones who wrote the sensor
>rules.
>

I like the laser cooling system from the 'sun diver' novel myself.
 
>>3)  The slop facter in jump navagation is large enough to give the pirate a
>>window of opertunity.  This slop would also limit the defence advantage of
>>convoys as they would be scattered some what it jump.
>
>Changes the canon far more thoroughly than you appear to realize. It's not
>just that the jump rules has to be changed, it's also that it takes ships
>longer to make a jump. Which means the number of annual jumps goes down.
>Which means the economic background changes, making starship travel much
>more expensive. 
>

True, it was just an idea and one that does not seem to work in answering
the problems.
 
>>4)  There are so many merchant ships that the pirates have little trouble
>>picking a safe target and the SDB have trouble protecting all of them.
>
>Won't work. A system patrol can control a volume of space sufficient to
>contain a HUGE number of ships.
>

Again maybe the sensor rules are the problem...
 
>>Pirates are canon people.  Instead of arguing the fact that they can not be
>>why don't we try to come up with a combination of facters that will explain
>>why they can be?
>
>I tried that for a long time. Now I just ignore the discrepancies when I
>game. That dosen't mean that I think they don't exist. But go ahead. If
>you can come up with something WITHOUT CHANGING OTHER CRUCIAL PARTS OF THE
>CANON_ then I for one would be overjoyed. I like pirates too. 
>

Looks like I know what I'll be reading ing the 'reading room' for a
while....There has to be simple answer hear somewhere that we are just
overlooking.  The sensor stuff, is it canon of just third party?  if 2LS is
it for a running drive that could explain a lot.  The 'down for repairs'
could deal with the military.  After all 1/12th have to be at a military
base one month our of the year for their overhaul plus the travel time frim
their patrol routes to and from the base...
 
>>You have to admit that they spice up the TU.
>
>Willingly.
>

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:49:01 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

At 11:25 AM 10/17/98 +1300, you wrote:
>At 14:32 16/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:
>
>>At 05:18 PM 10/16/98 +1300, you wrote:
>>>You don't have to search a 1AU sphere, though. All you need to patrol and
>>>search is the 100 dia limit around your homeworld (unless you are using the
>>>stellar 100 dia. border as your jump limit), and this can be readily
>>>covered by 4-8 vessels even if the world has a size of 'A'.
>>>
>>
>>Assumting the the planet is 5000 mile in diameter.  Then 100 dias. is a
>>sphere 505,000 miles in diameter.  Surface area = 4 pi r squared. r =
>>252,500 miles.  Surface area = 801,184,666,481.7 square miles. 801 billion
>>square miles and you say you can actively scan this area with 4-8 vessels
>>looking for a 100 meter object?  Even with 8 ships that 100 billion square
>>miles.  What exactly are you using to scan this area?  Lidar is the best
>>candidate.  As scan rate increases signal return strength decreases by the
>>square of the change plus returned signal strengh is reduce by 4 for each
>>doubling of signal travel distance.  Not to mention propagation delay
>>problems and space junk blind spots.  I find it very hard to believe that
>>any one ship can maitain survelence on 100billion square miles of space and
>>that is just the 100 diameter shell much less all the space beyond it the a
>>pirate could be in.
>
>OK, I'm talking about the TU here, so I'm using Traveller sensors
>(specifically TNE's), but from what I understand these rules understate the
>range of passive sensors massively. Anyway a size A planet runs to a little
>less than 18,000 km which gives 100 dia as 1,800,000 km. This gives 60
>hexes at 30,000 km each. This gives a surface area of about 45,000 hexes. 
>

something wrong here.

surface area of a circle = 4PI X r^2

4PI x 1,800,000,000^2 = 4.07e^19 square meters or 4.07e^16 square km or
1357168026351 hexes of surface area.  Remember it's a sphere not a circle
and you have to do the calculation in units.

1k for example

1^2=1

1000^2=1000000=100k



>A range 16 active EMS has a long range of 64 hexes which is more than 100

Ok, I don't play TNE (I miss the release and have not tried to get the OOP
books sence) so I have to ask...

1) How many hexes can one sensor actively scan in one hour?  Your text above
says that it can be detected at that range but it does not say how long it
takes to scan a sphere 1,800,000 km in diameter.  If memory serves that's 6
ls or 12 ls round trip time for the signal.  Assuming a 1' of arc scan
(unlikely to be that high a resolution at that range) per scan and a 12
second delay that makes a spherical active scan take 432 hours.

2) What kind of signal is this sensor sending out to bounce off of the
target?  Remember for a non collumated emission that power drops by the
inverse square law.  Note that our deep space probes today use a high gain
narrow field antenia to send the data back to us and even then the signal is
way down in the mud.  A spherical pulse is unlikely and one powerfull enough
would do bad things to the planet below's TV sets and any living thing on
the ship.  If the above active sensor is lidar you are stuck with the above
delay times and a much narrower aperture than 1'.  Most lazers dispersion
out at much less that .01'  High speed mirrors and good hardware might give
you 1' per 12 second but I really dought it.

I have no dought that you can resolve a target at that range.  I have a
dought that you can find it to resolve unless picked up on passive sensors
which rely on target signal emmissions that loose strength by the inverse
square law meaning that a marginally stealthy ship at that range would be
producing a detectable signal strength at the recieving sensor so far down
in the mud that it would be all but undectable.  A half hour per attempt the
lock on to a object at that range would be about right if the operater had a
very good idea where to look.


>A range 8 passive EMS has the same chance on a ship running 'cold' at 8
>hexes or an accelerating ship at 32 hexes. IMO while it's nice to be able
>to pick up a ship that's loitering before it starts accelerating it's not
>really necessary for reasons I'll go into later (besides that's what our
>nice big active EMS is for). This gives us a sensor area (cutting through
>the sphere) of 200 and 3200 hexes, respectively. If the patrolling vessels
>look for accelerating vessels we only need 14 to cover the 100 dia limit,
>otherwise we'll need 225. That's ignoring the fact that, IMO, with 14+
>patrol vessels (remember I'm using TNE, and thus HEPlaR. I don't know if
>this applies with thrusters, but I think so) the would-be pirate is very
>likely to have his high signature exhaust pointed towards one of them.
>

1357168026351/3200 = 424115008 that's a lot of ships.  If it took 1 ship a
half hour to scan 3200 hexes and move on it would take one ship  24,207
years to scan  the surface of the jump sphere of a system.  Care to take a
guess at how long it would take to search the entire volume?

Charles L.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #973
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 19 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 974



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Quick question (please do not reply to the list)
Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate)
Re: Piracy
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
Re: Lucan
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Starship crewing levels (was Re: Piracy)
Re: Sensors and piracy
Re: Sensors
Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
Re: Capital Ships of WWII
Re: Sensors
Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
[none]
re: Sensors
Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))
re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: SJG and virus
Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!
[GT] Equipment and ROF question
Re: OT: Nostalgia Attack : WH40k III review

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:49:07 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Quick question (please do not reply to the list)

At 04:28 PM 10/16/98 -0400, you wrote:
>In a quick and simple design system such as GURPS Traveller would you
>rather calculate energy consumption and powerplant output or have it
>included in the cost and mass of the components?
>

Seperate power systems.  It works out better.  You can also have a basic
power unit componet the includes the start up overhead and extra power unit
componets to add to them to avaoid the overhead.  Then you just add the
right number of components for your power needs.  You can also add a back up
system this way or devide the power plant in to two or more small reacters.
Something you can't do in the current system.  I like redundancy in critical
systems.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:49:04 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Pirate-Friendly Rules Modifications (was re: Piracy)

At 09:28 PM 10/16/98 -0500, you wrote:
>On 10/16/98 at 07:18 PM,  Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> said:
>
>>I'd make jump accuracy related to the ships maintainence level, age,
>>quallity of charts, and computer power and inversely related to
>>distance jumped.  It make sence to make a ships jumping 4 have more
>>inaccuracy than a jump 1.  The jump 4 ship has more gravity wells to
>>have to figure into their flight path.
>
>>say closest distance = (((JnxJn)/comp number) x 100dias. x chart
>>constant x years sence maintainence+1 squared)
>
>>so a j4 merchant with a little maintiance due and a comp 4 and basic
>>charts would be... (((4X4)/4) x 100 x 4 x (1+1) squared)= 1600dias.
>
>>a j1 with good charts and maintaince and comp 4  (((1x1)/4 x 100 x 2
>>x (1) squared = 50 dais.
>
>So, how far out from the system primary is your j4 merchant going to
>come out?  Don't tell me that you aren't going to include the star
>into your calculations.
>

No, I've droped the idea as unworkable.  The math just does not make it.
The solar mass is just one of the errors.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:49:12 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate)

>The question, of course, is how *can* detection ranges this short be
>explained, and dusty systems won't do for a general explanation.<g>
>Any ideas?
>

Time.  A r radus increase linearly V volume increase as the cube of r.  It
take time to resolve small object in a large space.  How fast can you scan?

Volume = (4r^3)/3

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:48:58 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 10:32 PM 10/17/98 -0700, you wrote:
>I have been thinking about this & well, I had this thought...
>
>Piracy can work in the Traveller Universe if you think about it this way,
>pirates are already breaking one law, right?  So you who have said that if
>a pirate has 100 MCr then he is a rich man, right?  Wrong, all he has to do
>is get a bank to loan him the money to buy his ship & then skip out on the
>payments...  In other words, if a pirate can scrap together say 10-20 MCr,
>then he could get a ship & start out being a pirate...
>
>Just a quick thought...
>

What's a little fraud to murderers?  Great idea.  Run this sting a few times
under different names and you have a fleet of pirate ships.  A take off on
todays credit thieves using stollen credit infomation to buy cars.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:49:14 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

At 04:03 PM 10/16/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>>by higher TLs they are interferometric arrays, the vis/IR equivalent of a
>>>phased array, with each element coherently detecting incoming radiation and
>>>assembling them into a sensor picture.
>
>>Similar to the computer corrected compound mirror telescopes.  Good idea.
>>Had not thought of that but they are still limited in resolution and
>>detection threshold to that of each individual sensor array.  
>
>>This is not true with phased array radio antenas.  They can directly add to
>>each other without a thresshold except the natural noise threshold which can
>>not be avoided.
>
>>This has to due with the diferences between photons and electrons.  Unless
>>or untill, 'light conducters' with effecencies equal to that of copper wire
>>conducting electricity and capable of maintaining vissual infomation content
>>are invented, it is not posible to directly increase signal strength by
>>addative arrays for light as the signal must be converted to another medium
>>and in that convertion there is a fixed noise threshold set by the
>>converting sensor.  What you would in effect need is multiple mirrors
>>looking at the same immage and somehow able to combine their light images
>>directly onto a single sensor with out and polarization on phase distortion.
>
>It's not strictly true that you can't increase signal to noise by simple
>addition of images from seperate telescopes. For example, if I have 16
>1-m telescopes and each takes a digitized picture of the same piece of the 
>sky, and I add the 16 images together in software, since each has independent
>noise I get an image with 1/sqrt(16)=4 times less noise, or 4 times higher
>signal-to-noise, the same as if I had a single 4-meter telescope. 
>

However the camera thresshold of detection is still the limit.  You will
never see a light source below that threshold no mater how many you use.

>What you don't get is the same resolution as a 4-meter or larger telescope,
>of course, since you're adding the images incoherently. The assumption is 
>that at TL10 and above there are indeed "light conductors" and "light
>amplifiers" that can maintain the phase information of the seperate arrays
>(or that their are electronics fast enough to operate at the frequencies
>corresponding to visible light.)
>
>
>>What does current tech. use to get get arround the limits of apurture size?
>>I know that there are ways to create 'artilicial' apurtures by electronicly.
>>combining the output of many mirrors but the detection threshold is limited
>>to that of the camera used.  This method is normally used to clean up an
>>image not to detect what can not be seen by the individual mirrors.  If
>>thing have gone beyond this I'd love to know about it.
>I'm not quite sure what you mean. Current telescopes can be made with
>big pieces of glass (Gemini, VLT) or segmented mirrors (Keck), usually
>adding up to one big mirror. In principle (see above) you can combine the
>images from several telescopes electronically (or several images from one
>telescope in the same fashion.) This provides more sensitivity that you
>would get from a single image. The tricky part is getting bigger resolution
>than a single dish can provide; most techniques for this ("interferometers")
>use mirrors to shuffle the light around coherently.
>
>>It would be easier to use stealth technique to prevent the reflection 
>>[of visible sunlight] from
>>shining back tward the the target.  The is the way stealth work, some
>>absorbtion and the rest is directed and defused away from the potential
>>reciever.
>
>My intuition is that this would not generally work, since you can't
>guarantee that there won't be a spacecraft on a line-of-sight such
>that it sees the reflection of the sun off of you (in the same fashion
>that bistatic radars are a problem for stealth aircraft.) Even an instant's
>glint would show up, and diffusing it 
>into a wider beam is bad since the sun is so amazingly bright...you also
>have to keep the specular (diffuse) reflection below 99.99%; overall it
>seems to me easier to get a black surface than to do it with mirrors. 
>(A mirrored spacecraft would also run into trouble with reflected 
>starlight - and with radiating heat, since mirrors are (by definition) poor
>radiators.) 
>

Not mirror.  A good black coating and surface angles to defect what is not
absorbed away from your target.

>
>>The best solution is a directed
>>(columated) radiator as discribed in the novel "Sun Diver".  The ship was
>>cooled by dumping it's heat into a laser.
>The laser trick turns out not to work (minor thermodynamic error by
>Brin.) In general, ships will try to collimate their waste heat, but they
>won't be perfect. Extreme IR masking assumes that 99.99% of the waste heat
>goes into collimated beams, which is pretty damn good...
>
>>The problem with remote sensors this widely spaced is time
>>lag and syncronization from various locations.  Good computers would be
>>required.  The sensors would be very expensive due to the need for high gain
>>AND wide area coverage.  You are talking about a system far larger than a
>>ship could mount reasonablly due to surface area. 
>The remote sensors don't need to be that big (see my other post; a PEMS 13.5,
>about 10m2 at TL12, would be quite useful) since the one that detects the
>pirate will be close to it.
>
>>>Let us consider a moderate-population TL-12 world. It's main passive
>>>sensor array might be a PEMS14.5 on an orbital station
>>And this system can scan the entire 100 diameter sphere at that level of
>>resolution in how many hours?  How about behind the planet?  It's moon?
>It scans the whole sky roughly every few hours (implicitly, sensors are 
>scanning the whole sky every 10 minutes or so in a rapid scan perhaps once
>an hour and using the rest of the time for a deep scan of limited pieces
>of the sky.) 
>
>>>About the only trick the pirate can use to make itself harder to detect
>>>in the visible is being on the line of sight to the sun - worth -0.5 to 
>>>signature
>>The other problem is light and IR glare.  The sun would wash out nearly
>>anything that did not have a mirror surface and if you pointed a sensor that
>>could detect that pirate at 100 dias in the dark of space the sun would fry
>>it with the ammount of power it would collect.
>
>The pirate can't stay in front of the sun's disk for very long if it's
>coasting (due to motion of the planet and of sensors orbiting the planet). 
>(And even if it is on the disk, a seperate sun-watching telescope will see
>it's silouhette.) Near the sun, the glare does indeed make it harder to see
>(that's the -0.5 to signature) but not as much as one might think,
>since these are space-based sensors and can be optimized for high contrast
>and include coronagraphs to block out the sun. Still, the sun case isn't
>one I've carefully modelled; perhaps the bonus should be more like -1.
>
>If the pirate uses its engines to stay close to the sun line-of-sight then it 
>will be obvious to other sensor platforms in the system.
>

Cold gas thruster could be used.

>
>DustyLV769 writes
>>As the rules are now written (T4/T5/GT), piracy does appear to be dead...the
>>DSR is the primary culprit for this.  It might be accurate...but is it fun?
>My apologies...I didn't *mean* to spoil everyone's fun. I do feel that you
>can still use the DSR in a short-range-sensor universe by reducing everyone's
>signatures by about a point; the scaling laws will still work pretty well.
>

What are your scan TIMES based on the volume of the sphere you are scaning?
Being able to detect is one thing but if it takes to long.  At long ranges
your angles of resolution becomes a problem so the scan beam must be limited
once limited and time lag kicks in you have finite limits on scan time or do
you propose a scan beam that travels faster than light?  

What is the signal your active sensor puts out?  Light?  Radar?  Meson?  

What is the detection threshold of the sensor?  nLs?  nWs?

How does it distinquish between background noise and beam return?
Polarization?   Carrier wave?  If so what it the frequency?  

What is it's aperture angle for reception at it's rated sensitivity?  Can be
360 degrees and be mounted on anything and you reach molucular limits were
on molicules size is to large to resolve target x and distance y.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:53:50 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Lucan

"Shade" <jwatts@catt.com>
>Subject: Re: Lucan

>>So what is Lucan doing is the Gurps alternate timeline?

>I would imagine that he is currently plotting ( whether or not its
>effective or not ) to overthrow Strpehon.  I think this has a large part in
>his choice to " tour the Imperium ".
>
>I think his " tour " is a polite way to get out fo the court.

I really think of Lucan someone who didn't plan on trying
to become Emperor.  Its just that there he was, suddenly
second in line, in the middle of confusion, with a relatively
modest sense of ethics...

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:

> These are not as high to-hit numbers as I initially thought they were
> (unless I'm doing something wrong) - in fact, they seem too low; GURPS
> lasers must not be very accurate :-) 

Nah, the problem is that GURPS gunners can't use the accuracy (limited to Acc =
skill).  If you let them use the full accuracy of the laser hitting is _not_ a
problem (TL 10 at max range (range -45), Acc 33, Cx6 targeting program, size +8
target (100 td), skill 14, hit on 17-).  This was a deliberate decision in
writing up GT space combat (not one I much like, but deliberate).

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:49:21 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Starship crewing levels (was Re: Piracy)

At 11:17 PM 10/16/98 -0700, you wrote:
>...
>><< Do the numbers. Military ships in Traveller do not need that many crew,  >>
>>
>>This is not necessarily true...I doubt if very many individuals, when
>>designing thier vessels, take into account manning for 3 watches (I know I
>>usually don't), and there is always casualty replacements (frozen watch
>>usually). GT addresses this a little bit, I believe.
>
>  If crew levels under Books 2 and 5 need to be tripled then this is the 
>biggest piece of Trav errata yet (AFAIK) and the longest undiscovered :>
>
>  Presumably the crew levels represent a single full shift (and some extra
>slop?) with only minimal crew at stations most of the time.
>

Well, they only call for one pilot on the scout.  Who's driven when he's
sleeping?  (Grin!)  In truth they do look a little low for combat ships.
Space battles are likely to take a lot of time and while one crew could
fight a 1 hour battle what shape would they be in after 10 hours or 2 days?
Transit time from the gas giant to the main would could be long.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:49:18 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Sensors and piracy

At 09:45 PM 10/16/98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>How hard is it to blind IR sensors?
>
>If you took your shipboard lasers (from a long way out... beyond the usual
>weapon ranges) and played them over the regions where the enemy IR sensors
>are, wouldn't you heat up those sensors some?
>

A lasers beam spreads over great distances.  I typical comercial 1 watt unit
today would cast a circle about 1.5 feet in diameter on the moon.  Far
enough out and your much better ships laser would not have any effect but if
you could target the array you could blind or burn it out at ranges 100s of
times greater than combat distances.  It's the targeting at that range that
is a problem even if the beam is 1 meter in diameter hiting a 10 meter
target with a 1 meter beam at 10^8+ (1ls)  meters is not that easy.  The
angle of resolution on your turret motors at that range could be 10000+
meters.  Did you buy a turet that could resolve 10^-12 degrees of arc while
moving multiton weapons and sensors to measure that arc and computers fast
enough to calculate the 3d vectored velocities in real time as your ship
moves 3000 meters a second and your target 300 meters a second?  People
often forget the scale of space combat.  If you targeted a large enough area
then the energy would be to defused and with the limits on resolution the
sensor could be in a spot you completly skip over.  In the mean time you are
giving them a very good misile target to aim at.  They'll take a while to
get there though.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Sensors

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:
> Also, some people (Hi anthony!) think that confusion with background
> objects will begin to dominate - in which case you could just cap the
> sensor sensitivity again at about 13.5 or so.
Hm..well, there's no real cap to the amount of computer power you could link up
for the purpose, so it sort of depends on what you interpret as the complexity
of the filtering task; probably order 2-3.  As far as phased-array sensors,
though, what is the actual complexity of signal integration?  Somehow I suspect
it's second-order in sensitivity _and_ first-order (or worse) in the number of
sensors, which winds up at 100x weight for +0.5 sensitivity once again.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:11:55 GMT
From: johnl@vnet.net (John Lansford)
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

On Mon, 19 Oct 1998 11:32:52 -0700, you wrote:

>CardSharks@aol.com wrote:
>
>> I just saw a piece on WWII capital ships and it said that it was several years
>> into WWII before it was clear that airplanes from carriers could kill a
>> Capital ship. Then, of course, the whole set of definitions changed, and the
>> old terminology became obsolete (though people still used it).
>> 
>
>Ummm, yes, on December 7th, 1941, in fact, it was shown rather
>conclusively.

Actually, all Pearl Harbor "proved" was that planes could sink
undefended ships sitting at anchor in a harbor. For that matter, the
British already "proved" this at Taranto a year earlier.

The "proof" that planes could sink prepared and ready battleships at
sea came when the Japanese sank Prince of Wales and Repulse.

John Lansford

The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage:
http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:15:22 GMT
From: johnl@vnet.net (John Lansford)
Subject: Re: Capital Ships of WWII

On Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:45:52 EDT, you wrote:

>In a message dated 10/19/98 12:58:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>DustyLV769@aol.com writes:
>
><< Can anyone think of anything that occured sooner?  Surigao Strait has just
> sprang to mind... >>
>
>Yeah; the death of Force Z (Prince of Wales, Repulse) on Dec.9th 1941. Land
>based torpedo bombers sank them both within a hour. Force Z was caught without
>air cover. Only a couple of planes were shot down. POW had a modern DP
>secondary armament, but her first torpedo hit killed the power to the turrets,
>and sprang a propeller shaft, which then proceded to flood her engine room
>(hence the dead secondary turrets)- cie la guerre'... IMO; this not Pearl was
>more illustrative of the vunerability of capital ships to air power.

The British should have known better, too. Off of Crete the Luftwaffe
proved decisively that ships could not adequately defend themselves
from air attack. The RN had several cruisers and destroyers sunk, and
at least one carrier and battleship each were severely damaged by the
land based dive bombers.

John Lansford

The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage:
http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:14:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Sensors

Question about visual/IR sensors....
I was experimenting somewhat with fixing some of the gurps sensor rules, and
ran across a question I was sort of guessing at an answer to...

How does the range at which an object's shape can be resolved, and the range at
which it can be detected as a point of light, compare?  This is assuming
objects which are visible by reflected light, not luminous objects; obviously,
this depends on albedo and brightness, assume earth-normal sunlight and an
albedo of around .2.

Against the ground, these distances are pretty much the same, pending some
major anti-chameleon effect.  In space they're pretty clearly not the same, but
I was wondering what the actual distance was.  Also, how much IR sensors are
improved by not being in atmosphere...

Based on their standard rules for ground spotting, I needed to give a bonus of
at least 200x for space (otherwise normal people can't see stars, which is
probably bad...), but I was wondering if there's any good numbers.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:29:00 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

>>>>
> >Company
 >           Konzernherrschaft

Konzern would be right.  Konzernherrschaft means "a company that
rules" and
could be used to describe the political status of a planet which a
company
owns.
>>>>
"A company that rules" could easily be the description of a megacorp,
especially one of the Vilani Bureau in the 1st Imperium.
- - Joseph

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:30:05 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: [none]

> >1. Pirates need to clear out quickly; for most targets, the patrol
> >will be on the way.
> >
> >This limits what you can take. Small craft (the big profits). Vehicles.
> >Vac suits. Supplies. Passenger valuables. Select items from the
> >cargo bay. The contents of the ship's safe. Missiles & sand canisters
> >(if the target hasn't "given" them to you already).
> >
> >What you can't take: Ship components. Bulky cargo items. Fuel.
> >Starship weapons. Valuable things, but you simply don't have the
> >time to get them.
> 
> given the ship assumption, no argument here. However 600td craft with a bay
> for 200td Type A/A2 std hulls could grab and go.

A Jump-4 'catcher ship' under HG would have only 160 tons of 'unallocated' space for such anemities as a bridge, crew staterooms, weapons, etc.  Remember, just the jump fuel requirements of a 600 dt ship is on the order of 240 dt.  So, your 'catcher ship' might be able to run, but it won't run *far*.

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:35:38 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Sensors

At 09:13 AM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>Assuming that the heat is radiated away from the sensor, what temperature
>>is the ship assumed to have in the DSR ?
>
>This is sort of a fuzzy question. Hulls with no masking have a temperature
>of 300K (room temperature). Hulls with additional IR masking have their hull
>cooled down to 100-250 K - with the exact level being set to "whatever it 
>takes to make the hull less bright than the spillover from the radiators"
>(there's always some spillover, even if the radiators are pointed away.)
>My sensor model really only did the basic non-masked case; the masked 
>case numbers are fairly rough - enough to show me that some masking was
>possible without spending weeks trying to balance radiator heat and hull
>heat. 
>

What about the simple use of an umbrela?  A big one opened between the ship
and the sensor.  The material would be a space normal temperture as niether
side is at room temperture and the nice cold barrier block all sight of the
radiators in the back of the ship.  With than much surface area any small
amount of stray ir that hit it would be defused and reradiated at a much
lower temp.  If the umbrela was radar transparent  (no metal) it would not
add the the sensor aspect of the ship itself.  If it were also transparent
to light in one direction then lidar could not see it OR the ship behind it.
And yes this is posible.  There are materials like that today used in widows.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:35:41 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))

At 09:21 AM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Leonard Erickson writes:
>
>> Huh? A ship using limited area radiators for stealth will be a
>> *spotlight* in the IR in the cone it *does* radiate into. That's
>> because when you limit the radiating area by (say) 50%, the
>> *temperature* goes up a lot faster. And thus, so does the IR
>> "brightness" of the ship in those directions.
>Bah...if you look at the rules for black globe generators, you discover that
>they absorb all energy and suck it in to their capacitors, and don't emit any
>heat -- with the net effect that they violate the second law of thermodynamics.
>Any ship with a black globe could have virtually perfect EM cloaking by playing
>games with emissions and flicker rates (and still manuever, of course).
>

Yeow!  Good point.  The only way to spot it would be star aclussion.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:35:43 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

At 12:00 PM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>So basically any laser-equipped ship is immune to (conventional) missile fire?
>Basically yes. (Interestingly, G:T hit probabilities seem to reflect this - 
>at least for the impact missiles.) A good laser can hit a 100-G-evading 
>missile-sized target out to several thousand km nearly all the time. Effective
>missiles have to be fragmentation types (that detonate a thousand km out and
>spread a large cloud of small fragments) for civilian use (they're
>marginal against good PD lasers), chemical explosive lasers, or nuke
det-lasers.
>(Presumably these will be in future G:T modules.)
>
>(This has been debated ad nauseum on this list and the TTL; I would suggest
>anyone who wishes to continue to debate it meet me on the TTL.)
>

Andhow do I do that?  I do not know how the subscribe to TTL

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:43:30 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: SJG and virus

Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:57:46 -0400,  Fred and Evelyn Wolke
<thewolkes@earthlink.net>

>>Maybe, but I don't think so. I think GT has to avoid even the merest
>>hint of "the rebellion" and "virus" by contract.
>
>GURPS: Traveller, sidebar, page 5.
>
>"I dreamt of horrors last night....  and over it all, some hideous, bestial
>face, all wires and pulleys and gears, swallowing the stars themselves, one
>by one, until the sky was completely, totally black....
>
>personal journal of Prince Varian Paulo Alkhalikoi Entry for 133-1116"
>
>evidently the vision was Varian's, rather than Strephon's.

I don't think that this was a statement of how possible
Virus is or would have been in the GT universe, but rather
a bit of color.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:51:34 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!

> THE TML IS A PLACE FOR DISCUSSION OF A HOBBY WE ALL SHARE AND
>LOVE.  PEOPLE WHO CAN'T OR WON'T RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS, POLITICAL, AND
>NATIONAL DIVERSITY OF THE TML'S SUBSCRIBERS SHOULD SIMPLY GO ELSEWHERE.


With all due respect,

Re-read your own words, especially the part about respect, check the tone
and choice of words in your delivery, etc...  Just because there are posts
that you may not agree with (there certainly are many that I do not), the
TML is about *discussion*, not flaming people or shouting down ideas that do
not coincide with your own.

douglas

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:01:34 -0400
From: "Dan Eveland" <develand@mindspring.com>
Subject: [GT] Equipment and ROF question

Pardon me if these have already been answered.  I was gone for a while and
had to delete 2000+ messages without reading them.

RoF question: Since Gauss rifles have a RoF of 20, then do they go by the
RoF rules for RoF 20 or more in the Compendium II ?

Also, do the ships like the merchant ship or scout ship count against the
40-point disadvantage limit?  I don't think it should.  Also, can a group of
characters pool points for the ship and be co-owners.  Seems easy enough.

Is it just me?  Probably.  Where are the costs and weights for ammo other
than the energy weapon power packs?  I have been using Mercenary costs and
fudging the weight.  I cannot find them anywhere in the book.

By the way, the hardback GURPS Traveller and hardback GURPS Basic rules are
ultimately cool.

Dan

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:55:39 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: OT: Nostalgia Attack : WH40k III review

Bill Rutherford <worj@topgun.cinecom.com> wrote:

>Same thing happened to me.  I called Games Workshop's customer support (a
>toll-free number the local GW store gave me) and they quizzed me on the
>batch number of my copy of the game (it's on the back of the box) and on a
>randomly selected word from within the rule book to be sure I actually
>owned the thing...  They're sending me a replacement copy when the 2nd
>print run is made (next month) and a post-paid sticker to return my
>(defective) copy.  It seems much of the first batch (whatever that is) had
>various problems, from flakey bindings, to having covers torn to shreds
>because they were packed, along with a LOT of plastic figures, etc., into a
>too-tiny box...

The problem is here in the UK too... I'm surprised that there is a packing
issue in the UK as well.

GW have had significant problems with binding before, even though it that
was in the good old days -

Hardbacks which fell apart - Stormbringer 2nd Ed, RuneQuest (Griffin
Island), WH40k, WH 3rd edition and a few others whose names now escape me.

>I am NOT AT ALL a GW fan, but their customer support impressed me...

I hope it has improved - their mail order used to suck badly.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #974
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 19 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 975



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Traveller and the "Splinter Cultures"
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #970
Re: Quick question (please do not reply to the list)
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
GURPS: Traveller Kits
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
re": Capital Ships of WWII
Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!
Re: Where's Lucan?
re: Sensors and waste heat
Re: GURPS: Traveller Kits
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
Re: Sensors and piracy
Re: Sensors and piracy
re: sensors
Re: Traveller and the "Splinter Cultures"
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Sensors and piracy
Re: [GT] Equipment and ROF question
Power Systems in GT
Re: SJG and virus

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:15:31 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

steve daniels wrote:

>I haven't actually seen anything about a nuclear briefcase.  However, I used
>to be studying to be a cold warrior and used to know all sorts of things about
>nuclear weapons strategy and tactics, especially when a limited nuclear
>"warfighting" capability was a topic of discussion in the nuke community.

>It wasn't a bullet at all but a very large backpack weighing in excess of
>120 pounds.  It was awkward to carry, due to its length, but it was
>one-man-portable. (120lbs is the same load a fireman carries when
>fully rigged up).  And there used to be some in the former West
>Germany.

The US designed two nifty `more-bang-for-the-buck' weapons - the Atomic
Demolition Munition, and the Special Atomic Demolition Munition.

The ADM was a large device, with a yield in the 100s of kt to Mt,
designed to be used by the Engineers to, say, level a forest; destroy a
mountain pass, whatever.

The SADM was the pack weapon, for use by special forces. It could take
out a dam or other large, hard target. Yield was 10s of kt, IIRC.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:32:07 GMT
From: jzeitlin@mail.lanline.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Subject: Traveller and the "Splinter Cultures"

I'm assuming that many of the members of the list have read that
part of Gordon R. Dickson's "Childe Cycle" that has been
published (you'll probably recognize them as "The Dorsai
Novels").  This query concerns a connection between them and
Traveller.

The published information on the Solomani seems to suggest that,
at least in the area that eventually became the Solomani
Confederation, it was not unusual for cultural groups to settle
planets, and remain monocultural.  This would potentially allow
the preservation of "ancient tradition" and the development of
the culture with minimal "interference".

This is what also seemed to happen in Dickson's universe - except
that instead of specific _cultures_ being transplanted and
established, he hypothesizes that specific types of personality
would do so - the Dorsai are the archetypical warrior/soldier;
the Exotics are the archetypical mystics, the Friendlies are the
archetypical faithholder, the Newtonians are the archetypical
scientists, the Cetans are the archetypical businessmen, and so
on.  His thesis is that these types needed to develop on their
own, and become "self-sustaining", to eventually breed back
together into "full-spectrum" man - the type of man that
originally came from Earth, only the "next stage of evolution".
Paul Formain/Donal Graeme/Hal Mayne was certainly one of these.

Does anyone feel that this concept has a place in Traveller?  If
so, how, and what would the individual cultures and archetypes
be?  How would they "fit in" to the rest of the Traveller
universe, and where (my guess would be in Solomani space)?  How
would this affect rebuilding after the Collapse?  Etc.?
- --
Jeff Zeitlin
jzeitlin@mail.cyburban.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:22:42 -0700
From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #970

Off topic, but I couldn't let this go by.  :)

> (However, a note: in the AD&D game, the most commonly overlooked
> type of treasure is household goods. Those kobolds may have only
> had a handful of pennies, but that big iron cookpot is worth a 
> gold piece or two.)

I suspect this is because it would drive home to the players the
uncomfortable realization that their "noble adventurers" are really just
racist, heavily-armed burglars and killers.  :/

And to think people used to complain about Traveller characters...

- --------------
Kelly St.Clair
kellys@efn.org

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:25:10 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Quick question (please do not reply to the list)

At 09:49 PM 10/19/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:
>At 04:28 PM 10/16/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>In a quick and simple design system such as GURPS Traveller would you
>>rather calculate energy consumption and powerplant output or have it
>>included in the cost and mass of the components?
>>
>
>Seperate power systems.  It works out better.  You can also have a basic
>power unit componet the includes the start up overhead and extra power unit
>componets to add to them to avaoid the overhead.  Then you just add the
>right number of components for your power needs.  You can also add a back up
>system this way or devide the power plant in to two or more small reacters.
>Something you can't do in the current system.  I like redundancy in critical
>systems.

You certainly can add redundancy in the GURPS system.  You just install two
engineering modules.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:39:32 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>Well, there's a limit to how many PD attacks you can do with a particular
>weapon system.  It appears to be fairly practical to saturate point defense,
>particularly with missile bays.

For the space/cost of a missile bay you can get 50 laser turrets with 150 
lasers total. The 10 turrets/1 bay/1000 tons limit will mean that maxed-out
ships only get 30 lasers per missile bay, which is a little more saturatable.

Also, the text is inconsistent/unclear about how many missiles a bay can 
control (one place implies it has 2 communicators, the other 50 communicators)
and how many gunners it needs (if it has 50 communicators, can it still be run
by only one person?) 

The high-end military will probably be done with GVE2 I suppose (which I 
guess I'll have to buy) - dedicated point-defence lasers with high ROF and
short range vs fully-independent or terminal-homing missiles.

bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:42:15 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: GURPS: Traveller Kits

     This is directed towards Loren W., but anyone who knows the answer
could reply.  I was working with a player last night to create a character,
and they asked me a question I could not find the answer to.  Under the
Marine Special Ops they have an advantage called Fit (5), and another
called Very Fit (10).  Where are these located in the books.  I own a
GRUPS: Basics Third Edition (Actually two) as well as Space, Vehicles,
Martial Arts, Aliens, Ultra Tech, and many more.  I was unable to locate
this advantage, could you please enlighten me as to its location.

Thank you in advance.

Leo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:12:29 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com> wrote:


>Briefcase nukes are limited to about 100 kT last I knew -- not that this isn't
>quite a lot.  IIRC current strategic missile warheads are all under a megaton.
>.  Last I knew suitcase nukes were limited to about 100 kT.

And they are really nasty weapons - just sail your ship into any major
port.....

The really scary thing was being told a story about some of the UK's
warhead designer's lunchtime hobby - designing the highest yield bomb to
fit in a briefcase. Seriously messed up IMO...

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:43:01 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: re": Capital Ships of WWII

DustyLV769@aol.com wrote:

>Can anyone think of anything that occured sooner?  Surigao Strait has just
>sprang to mind...

Bizmark May 1941 *Crippled by air attack, then finished off by battleships*
Repulse and the Prince of Wales. 10 Dec 1941 *Destroyed by air attack*

These both proved that air power (*) was critical to sea control.

(*) okay - they're not carrier/battleship engagements as such, but they
make the point that airpower could destroy capital ships not protected by
their own aircraft.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:43:03 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!

Certainly it's possible that a TU can have a Clinton-esque Lucan.  Did Lucan
smoke cigars? ; )

>      Traveller is indeed a game, and as such is fictional.  However it, like
> everything else in our lives, is shaped by things around us.  In the "Real
> World", all is not sweetness and light.  If your personal belief is that
King
> Richard was a kind-hearted old man, thats fine...even though it doesn't
square

That personal belief would be quite dumb since Richard died in his late 30s
IIRC.
Richard's own contemporaries thought him to be quite ruthless and
unscrupulous.  He's mostly held to be a bad King, a bad son, and a bad
husband, but he was an awesome warrior.

> with history or reality ( he was a major leader of the Crusades; rape and
> pillage, because God is on your side)  But the rest of us are entitled to

That kind of villifies the whole crusading movement, which is your right, of
course...  Others might look to the heroism, chivalry and courage (on all
sides) of the movement.  Certainly the Crusades were manned by an inordinate
amount of penniless adventurers on the make, but there were many who were
quite wealthy and powerful in Europe and had no practical reasons to embark on
such an expensive and arduous expedition...

"Rape and pillage" was synonymous w/ warfare well until (and even during) the
20th century.  The Vilani were always ruthless (using biologicals and nukes,
etc)... i don't see them raping as a matter of course, but i have trouble
envisioning medieval Vilani period.   ; )  I generally try not to judge others
based on modern morality and culture.

Gary

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:43:08 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan?

> Is Dulinor dead? this is a biggie. If Dulinor is dead did Strephon (away at
> Longbow) order him killed, I think thats unlikely (timeframes all wrong).
Its far
> more likely that Imperial security forces acted on initiative.

I think it's fairly likely he's dead.  I'm very skeptical of Dulinor finding
refuge outside of the Imperium and there only in his own domain would Dulinor
be safe... maybe a second Ilelish revolt is brewing... but Hutara has
apparently been gotten to, as well as power being handed to his daughter...
Did Dulinor raise a loyal daughter?  

> >3.  I have a feeling that, rather than creating a magic handwave that
> >states the Cymbeline chips and the Virus research never existed, Strephon
> >will send orders to the research station ordering all Virus projects to be
> >terminated, the files wiped and the materials destroyed.  In face, he may
> >even be scared enough to have the Navy just bomb the station to ensure no
> >knowledge or samples survive.
> 
> I would be very happy to see the abomination of the Deyo transponder,
> Cymbeline chips and the Virus forever banished to the depths of TNE were
they
> belong (no offense guys, I just don't like them).

And I'd prefer Merchants & Mercenaries to stay forever dead & buried w/ all
the other OOP campy '50s-esque "sci-fi" but no offense, either, I just don't
like them.  The original post is much more friendly to us TNE'ers, as well...
Of course, most of the relevant Virus research isn't well under way until the
late 1120s...  

> >4.  In TNE, Strephon saw something else at Longbow; the effects of the
> >Empress Wave.  Will this still be an issue in the GURPSverse?  I suspect
> >that it will be (though perhaps not quite as extensive as some hints have
> >suggested for the future of the TNE universe).  I would bet that the
> >Zhodani Consulate may suffer some upheaval, and maybe even a civil war.
> 
> Lets get something straight abot Strephon. He may be very noble and
> honourable. But in MT he was clearly shown to be an utter incompetant. He
left
> Capital leaving no contingancies for any "accidents". Just what would have
> happened if his clone had had an air/raft crash while he was away? He

"It was one of the few unambiguous examples of the reception of psionic
signals across interstellar distances, and was dramatic enough and connected
to enough other events that it required the emperor's personal attention."
Regency SB, pg 83.

The "other events" would be the Zhodani Core expeditions, and evidence of
space combat along the axis as well as several Longbow stations going
inexplicably silent after the Wave passed over them.  There definately
appeared to be a possible threat to the Imperium.

So yes, the clone *was* the emperor's contingency plan for him being gone.
The fault in Strephon was not seeing how great Dulinor's resentment was and
the drastic action's he'd have taken (and that resulted from his death).  If
he had been there, he'd have died.   
The other, basic, fault was to go to Usdiki instead of Capital on news of the
assassination, but Survival Margin talks of this, as well. : )

His intelligence and security apparatus failed (though it's dubious how they
could've stopped Dulinor anyways).  Dulinor had some awesome planning and
preparation.  It was only the failure to get Lucan and Varian killed that
prevented him from being Emperor...  I think a much better "alternate"
universe (as much as I abhore the concept) would have been for Volante Imprey
to have plugged Lucan and Varian (and maybe Elia) before eating the guard's
SMG bullets.  Dulinor makes him a posthumous hero and then becomes ruler of
the newly stabalized and people-oriented <g> 3I.  *I'd* have arranged for a
company of the Ilelish Guard to pay a visit to Lucan and Varian just after i
pull the trigger.

> apparently didn't tell anybody he was going. When the rebellion broke out he
> was so guilty striken that he chose not to prove his identity. etc etc
etc.....

"...The gravity of this information, combined with uncertainty of the security
of the important Longbow headquarters prevented Strephon from accurately
referring to this journey, (Survival Margin pg 13, TD 15)..."-RSB pg 83.
'That information' would be the EMS/psionic phenomenon,the Zho troubles, the
now silent forward Longbow stations, and the fact that the wavefront would
reach the Imperial border in 1205.

> Make no mistakes Strephon may have been honourable, but he was an
> honourable fool.

The situation blew up out of his control.  The only real fault (aside from not
spotting Dulinor's rather extreme disatisfaction) was not immediately trying
to regain the reigns at Capital, but going to Usdiki and letting Lucan
consolidate his position.


Gary

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:47:43 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: Sensors and waste heat

Charles Prevatte wrote

>>It can't exist anywhere. Laser light is *low* (almost *zero*) entropy.
>>Heat is very high entropy. Thus you *cannot* convert heat to laser
>>light without creating far more heat than you send away. The trick in
>>Sundiver isn't allowed by the laws of thermodynamics.
>>

>UH...heat IS light.  Inferred light.  That is want heat is.  And there are
>IR lasers avalable today.  The problem is convertion.  A chemical catalist
>laser could in theory convert waste heat to collumated IR.

Perhaps a basic thermodynamics text is in order? The readers-digest version
is that if you use 100 watts of waste heat to pump a laser (somehow), you
generate more than 100 watts of heat in the machinery used for the pumping. 
(The details are more complicated, but basically, laser refrigeration doesn't
work. The only good way to get rid of heat is radiate it in an old-fashioned
black-body.)

>Also there is
>the other question as to how much waste heat a TL12 Fusion reacter has.  If
>it's low and the insulation facter is high then there would be no need to
>vent heat at all. 

The assumption in FFS2 is about 10% (a much-debated topic). One should note
that not just waste from the reactor, but heat from all sorts of sources
needs to be radiated. For example, if your 10 MW laser is 20% efficient,
you have 8 MW of misc. heat to get rid of...Or the 10 MW that goes into your
life support, or grav compensators, or computers...

>Again it depends on the amount of waste heat.  You need some to warm the
>crew spaces to begin with.  If the waste heat is not greater than that there
>is no waste heat.
Note that even warming the crew quarters generates a signature; a 300 K
hull is fairly easy to detect against black space. Lurking pirates need to
actively refrigerate and/or insulate their hulls so that the hulls are 50-200K,
and somehow get rid of all the sunlight the (black) hull soaks up, and the
heat that is keeping the crew warm => more waste heat.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller Kits

Leo Hale writes:
>      This is directed towards Loren W., but anyone who knows the answer
> could reply.  I was working with a player last night to create a character,
> and they asked me a question I could not find the answer to.  Under the
> Marine Special Ops they have an advantage called Fit (5), and another
> called Very Fit (10).  Where are these located in the books.  I own a
> GRUPS: Basics Third Edition (Actually two) as well as Space, Vehicles,
> Martial Arts, Aliens, Ultra Tech, and many more.  I was unable to locate
> this advantage, could you please enlighten me as to its location.

Compendium I; not certain of origin.  I think very fit is actually 15, not 10. 
They give bonuses to HT rolls and modify fatigue loss/recovery.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:02:34 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

Charles writes
>>It's not strictly true that you can't increase signal to noise by simple
>>addition of images from seperate telescopes. For example, if I have 16
>>1-m telescopes and each takes a digitized picture of the same piece of the 
>>sky, and I add the 16 images together in software, since each has independent
>>noise I get an image with 1/sqrt(16)=4 times less noise, or 4 times higher
>>signal-to-noise, the same as if I had a single 4-meter telescope. 
>>

>However the camera thresshold of detection is still the limit.  You will
>never see a light source below that threshold no mater how many you use.
This statement is simply not true (in many ways.) As a minor point, noise
in cameras is not the limiting factor in astronomical imaging (and hasn't
been for a while); noise due to random fluctuations in the sky background
dominates. And, no matter what the noise is, if that noise is random you
can improve your signal-to-noise and detection threshold by adding 
multiple images (each with different random noise) together. I *know* this
to be a fact; I do it for a living and add images together on a daily
basis. Whether the images are successive ones taken by one telescope
are multiple ones taken by different telescopes is irrelevant.
When I add four images together I can see things that weren't present in
the single images (in fact, about twice as faint as the limit for the
previous images.) 

>Not mirror.  A good black coating and surface angles to defect what is not
>absorbed away from your target.
It's hard to get a black coating that doesn't have some diffuse reflection - 
ie some fraction of the light gets scattered in all directions no matter
what the angle of reflection is. This kind of stealthing works much better
in radar where diffuse reflection isn't an issue. 

>What are your scan TIMES based on the volume of the sphere you are scaning?
TL8 Passive-light sensors can be visualized as taking a series of pictures
every ten seconds or so, each picture being about 10 degrees on a side,
with perhaps an 8192x8192 pixel detector with 4 arcsecond pixels. It scans
the whole sky about once per hour. Remember, a passive scan isn't scanning
volume but the 2-d projected image of the sky...

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:05:39 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Sensors and piracy

>As far as phased-array sensors,
>though, what is the actual complexity of signal integration?  Somehow I suspect
>it's second-order in sensitivity _and_ first-order (or worse) in the number of
>sensors, which winds up at 100x weight for +0.5 sensitivity once again.

It's probably second-order in number of elements, but doesn't care about 
sensitivity (you don't process every photon, but time-average over a bunch of
photons, in your electronics rather than in the computer.) SO big sensor 
arrays have to make their individual elements bigger as well as adding more
elements (ie a x100 bigger sensor has ten times as many elements, each ten
times as big with ten times as much computer power per element...)

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:12:30 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Sensors and piracy

Charles writes

>A lasers beam spreads over great distances.  I typical comercial 1 watt unit
>today would cast a circle about 1.5 feet in diameter on the moon.

God knows where you got this number from; to make a 1.5' circle on the
moon you'd need a diffraction-limited 800-meter telescope to launch the laser.
Perhaps 1.5 miles is closer to the mark? 

>It's the targeting at that range that
>is a problem even if the beam is 1 meter in diameter hiting a 10 meter
>target with a 1 meter beam at 10^8+ (1ls)  meters is not that easy.
Actually, targeting stationary/constant-velocity objects is pretty easy
(see various earlier discussions in the archives.) 

>Did you buy a turet that could resolve 10^-12 degrees of arc while
>moving multiton weapons and sensors 

10 meters at 10^8 meters is only 6x10^-6 degrees of arc, but that's a nit.
The trick to getting such accuracies is not to track the whole turret to
those precisions but to move the turret for coarse aiming and do fine aiming
with a smaller precision steering mirror in your laser. If you have a boresighted
sensor looking along the same light path (with a beamsplitter or moving mirror
to switch between the laser and the sensor) you can track the target 
"closed-loop". Similar systems (ie the closed-loop tip/tilt tracking system 
for a big modern telescope) already achieve 10^-6 degree tracking accuracy.
The hard part about hitting targets with lasers isn't the inherent accuracy,
it's lightspeed lag and dodging.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:15:22 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: sensors

>What about the simple use of an umbrela?  A big one opened between the ship
>and the sensor. 
This isn't a bad trick, although it has to be shiny on its sun-facing
side (otherwise it heats up), and so only protects from one direction...
and of course it still has to be pretty black on its target-facing side. 

Deployed umbrella-type shields are probably worth about an additional -0.5 or
so to IR signature. Their visible signature will be calculated normally 
depending on the material you make them out of (so, if they're military
ultrablack, they'll be pretty expensive.)

Outside of the 60 degree arc the umbrella is protecting against, add 1.5 to
visible light signature. (Maybe 1.0)

bruce

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:16:09 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller and the "Splinter Cultures"

The draft Traveller board game (done in 1975-76) before there ever was role-
playing had several cultures in it. You could see the prototypical Aslan,
Vargr, Hivers (three different hives), Centaurs, and a human mercenary Dorsai
planet.

Marc Miller

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:18:28 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@hex.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

- --=====================_6824118==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


At 06:15 PM 10/19/98 , Matt Clonfero wrote:
>steve daniels wrote:
>
>>I haven't actually seen anything about a nuclear briefcase.  However, I used
>>to be studying to be a cold warrior and used to know all sorts of things
about
>>nuclear weapons strategy and tactics, especially when a limited nuclear
>>"warfighting" capability was a topic of discussion in the nuke community.
>
>>It wasn't a bullet at all but a very large backpack weighing in excess of
>>120 pounds.  It was awkward to carry, due to its length, but it was
>>one-man-portable. (120lbs is the same load a fireman carries when
>>fully rigged up).  And there used to be some in the former West
>>Germany.
>
>The US designed two nifty `more-bang-for-the-buck' weapons - the Atomic
>Demolition Munition, and the Special Atomic Demolition Munition.
>
>The ADM was a large device, with a yield in the 100s of kt to Mt,
>designed to be used by the Engineers to, say, level a forest; destroy a
>mountain pass, whatever.
>
>The SADM was the pack weapon, for use by special forces. It could take
>out a dam or other large, hard target. Yield was 10s of kt, IIRC.

Matt,

But do not forget the US Army's version of the Polish Nuclear Hand
Grenade...The "Davy Crocket" a nuclear tipped bazooka, with only one small
minor issue. The firer was in the primary blast radius, he could not get out of
it either, ie the rocket/motor did not have the fuel/power to deliver the
warhead out far enough.<G> 
Sinbad Sam
"Black Curtain" Rod Holder...
AI Virus inferior races(Aslan, Humaniti, Kkree, Droyne) Interfacer
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
sinbad@ignore.hex.net

- --=====================_6824118==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html><div>At 06:15 PM 10/19/98 , Matt Clonfero wrote:</div>
<div>&gt;steve daniels wrote:</div>
<div>&gt;</div>
<div>&gt;&gt;I haven't actually seen anything about a nuclear
briefcase.&nbsp; However, I used</div>
<div>&gt;&gt;to be studying to be a cold warrior and used to know all
sorts of things about</div>
<div>&gt;&gt;nuclear weapons strategy and tactics, especially when a
limited nuclear</div>
<div>&gt;&gt;&quot;warfighting&quot; capability was a topic of discussion
in the nuke community.</div>
<div>&gt;</div>
<div>&gt;&gt;It wasn't a bullet at all but a very large backpack weighing
in excess of</div>
<div>&gt;&gt;120 pounds.&nbsp; It was awkward to carry, due to its
length, but it was</div>
<div>&gt;&gt;one-man-portable. (120lbs is the same load a fireman carries
when</div>
<div>&gt;&gt;fully rigged up).&nbsp; And there used to be some in the
former West</div>
<div>&gt;&gt;Germany.</div>
<div>&gt;</div>
<div>&gt;The US designed two nifty `more-bang-for-the-buck' weapons - the
Atomic</div>
<div>&gt;Demolition Munition, and the Special Atomic Demolition
Munition.</div>
<div>&gt;</div>
<div>&gt;The ADM was a large device, with a yield in the 100s of kt to
Mt,</div>
<div>&gt;designed to be used by the Engineers to, say, level a forest;
destroy a</div>
<div>&gt;mountain pass, whatever.</div>
<div>&gt;</div>
<div>&gt;The SADM was the pack weapon, for use by special forces. It
could take</div>
<div>&gt;out a dam or other large, hard target. Yield was 10s of kt,
IIRC.</div>
<br>
<div>Matt,</div>
<br>
But do not forget the US Army's version of the Polish Nuclear Hand
Grenade...The &quot;Davy Crocket&quot; a nuclear tipped bazooka, with
only one small minor issue. The firer was in the primary blast radius, he
could not get out of it either, ie the rocket/motor did not have the
fuel/power to deliver the warhead out far enough.&lt;G&gt;
<br>

<font size=2>Sinbad Sam<br>
&quot;Black Curtain&quot; Rod Holder...<br>
AI Virus inferior races(Aslan, Humaniti, Kkree, Droyne) Interfacer<br>
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions<br>
sinbad@ignore.hex.net<br>
</font></html>

- --=====================_6824118==_.ALT--

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:13:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Sensors and piracy

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:
> tracking accuracy. The hard part about hitting targets with lasers isn't the
> inherent accuracy, it's lightspeed lag and dodging.

Well, inherent accuracy is quite possibly a problem if _you_ are dodging, but
this is more a stabilization issue than anything else.  There's a reasonable
argument for adjusting accuracy based on whether or not the firing ship is
manuevering (thus, you can have two ships, both evading, missing each other all
day long; or, they can both not evade, and hit every time out to the maximum
range of their weapons..).

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 17:45:12 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [GT] Equipment and ROF question

Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:01:34 -0400, "Dan Eveland" <develand@mindspring.com>

>RoF question: Since Gauss rifles have a RoF of 20, then do they go by the
>RoF rules for RoF 20 or more in the Compendium II ?

Yeah, unless you don't want to use them...

>Also, do the ships like the merchant ship or scout ship count against the
>40-point disadvantage limit?

I think is was intended that they don't (they are presented as a
single advantage).

>Also, can a group of
>characters pool points for the ship and be co-owners

I would allow it.  (I would have liked to see this suggest
in GT)

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:58:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Power Systems in GT

Note that contrary to what some people have posted, the rules allow you to
to have multiple power plants in Gurps Traveller.

The "start up" system is the Engineering module. By buying two engineering
modules you have bought two power plants, each with half your total power.
By buying three, you have bought three power plants, each with a third
your total power, and so on.

This does not not give you "back up power plants" but does allow you to
do certain design concepts. Note that if you want a backup power plant you
can buy a second engineering module and then insert a number of Anthony's
power plant modules.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:03:59 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: SJG and virus

At 03:43 PM 10/19/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:57:46 -0400,  Fred and Evelyn Wolke
><thewolkes@earthlink.net>
>
>>>Maybe, but I don't think so. I think GT has to avoid even the merest
>>>hint of "the rebellion" and "virus" by contract.
>>
>>GURPS: Traveller, sidebar, page 5.
>>
>>"I dreamt of horrors last night....  and over it all, some hideous, bestial
>>face, all wires and pulleys and gears, swallowing the stars themselves, one
>>by one, until the sky was completely, totally black....
>>
>>personal journal of Prince Varian Paulo Alkhalikoi Entry for 133-1116"
>>
>>evidently the vision was Varian's, rather than Strephon's.
>
>I don't think that this was a statement of how possible
>Virus is or would have been in the GT universe, but rather
>a bit of color.

Of course it was a bit of color... but it illustrates the fact that SJG can
refer to virus in their publications.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #975
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Monday, October 19 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 976



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #968
re. GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
Re: Traveller and the "Splinter Cultures"
Re: Traveller and the "Splinter Cultures"
Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long) 
Re: re. GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Where's Lucan?
Re: Capital Ships of WWII
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:02:23 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

At 20:02 18/10/98 EDT, Sethkimmel wrote:
>In a message dated 10/18/98 2:48:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>dom@cybergoths.u-net.com writes:
>
><< Hans, (under HG) I would disagree with this. The riders should be heavily
> armoured and carry top end meson/PA weapons. This should make the squadron
> pretty effective against and equivalent BatRon or CruRon in straight
> combat. Of course, on an individual basis the BRs are weaker than a full
> Battleship.
> 
> Dom >>
>
>In a knock down drag out, I'll take BR's anyday... Ton for ton they have a
lot
>more spinal mounts and HG lives and dies by the spinal mount critical hit.
Try
>taking a Tigress versis a bunch of BR's (so the tonnage is equal. Throw in
the
>tender so the comparison is fairer, but put her in reserve...). She'll kill a
>BR every turn, but the BR's will nibble her to death with a bunch of critical
>hits every turn....

What happens if rather than using HG one uses a vector movement system and
a board? While the BRs will still get the Tigeress it wouldn't be so neat
if the Tigeress in the meantime blew away the tender (and some of the BRs,
of course).

BTW has anyone ever tried a battle between a BR equipped BatRon and a BB
BatRon, complete with all escorts, etc? It'd be interesting to see the
results, especially from a vector based system like Battle Rider (with
fixes, of course). You see, it occured to me that the BR 'Ron would have to
tie up escorts looking after the tender, while the BB 'Ron could use them
more aggressively.

Personally I feel the 3I's use the battle riders is obviously the result of
the Hawks and the accountants ganging up on the rest. BRs are better than
BBs for offensive work, but suffer in defence becuase of the inability to
run away (though they do make fine SDBs if you buy more than you have jump
capacity for - is there anything in canon for this? Everything I've seen
suggests that BRs are always bought complete with Tender). The accountant
like 'em because they give lots of firepower for your credit.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:02:47 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

At 12:28 19/10/98 -0400, thewolkes@earthlink.net wrote:

>>Something I don't like about G:T's space combat system at a general level
>>is that the range table (which modifies to-hit rolls) goes as the log of
>>range - which means it changes rapidly at very short ranges (see thewolkes
>>post - there's a big difference between 100 miles and 2 miles) and very 
>>slowly at long ranges. This is almost the exact opposite of what you want - 
>>the chance of hitting a non-evading target is linear with range and an
>>evading target goes as range^4 power, staying near unity for a while and
>>then dropping like a rock. BL did a pretty good job of modelling this
>>with its -1 DM/3 hexes...
>
>Why do you want a linear chance?  The size of the critter in your field of
>view drops off sharply, as the inverse of the square of its length (which
>is what they use).  Evasion is part of the dodge roll.

BL's -1DM/3 hexes isn't linear, because each -1DM halves your success chance.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:46:50 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)

At 13:43 19/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:

>>However, FS states that CruRons are generally of 4 to 8 ships and the
examples
>>in it implies that 8 ship BatRons are the norm. (Also, I seem to remember
>>squadrons of non-combat vessels mentioned somewhere, but I can't recall the
>>references).
>>
>
>2 battle ships and 6 escorts or 1 battle ship 2 cruisers and 5 escorts.
>Sounds very reasonable.  If you mean 8 battle ships in on formation this is
>not reasonable.  It would leave the formation to vunerable to fast attack
ships.

_Fighting Ships of the Shattered_ makes it pretty clear that a BatRon is a
group of BBs plus escorts, including escort cruisers, etc. I've always
assumed that these probably came from a CruRon that was so assigned.


- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:59:09 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #968

At 11:54 19/10/98 -0400, Walt Smith wrote:

>I think Battle Rider squadrons end up costing more on a ton-for-ton
>basis than Battleships. You need more computers, as much or more
>MCr4/ton jump drives (you've got to move battle riders, and the tender,
>and enough fuel to push everything). You do get a bit more bang for
>your buck, and some nice flexibility at the expense of being able to
>easily run like hell when overmatched.

IMO while battle riders have better tactical flexibility, they lack the
'operational' flexibilty that BBs have because they only have the one jump
drive, so you can't readily split your squadron, and because a BR squadron
needs more escorts inorder to protect the tender.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:33:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: re. GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

On Mon, 19 Oct 1998, bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)

wrote:

> I was thinking more of small military ships - escorts, frigates, destroyers. 
> On the other hand, it looks like I miscalculated hit probabilities, which seem
> (if I'm reading it right) to be quite low...consider a civilian ship:
> 
> Gunner     +13
> Wpn. acc   +13
> Wpn. ROF   + 4
> targeting  + 7
>  program
> Active     + 2
>  sensor
>           -----
>             39
> 
> Firing at a 400-ton target (+9 size) at 7 hexes (-43) it hits only on a 3.
> At 2 hexes it hits on a 5-. Civilian ships will have to plink away a long
> time to hit anything...

Note that skill 13 is rather low. Remember that in GURPS, weapon skills
are scaled differently than non-weapon skills. Thus, while 13 is between
"rather skilled" and "well trained" for normal skills, for weapon
skills (see the bottom of p. B45) skill 12 is "novice", skill 15 is
"veteran" and an actual expert is skill 18. See Meaning of Skills, p. B45.

In the Spinward Marches in 1120, I would expect that the average gunner on
a merchant ship is a recently retired or mustered out naval rating who had
served in a planetary or colonial naval force. 

Gunner skills also recieve a +1 bonus for IQ 11 or +2 for IQ 12.

While some ships may indeed operate with gunners with skill 12-13, I
expect an effort may be made to hire gunners with higher skills.
Considering the 1000-ship naval fleets (and uncounted escorts) that are
canon in the Imperium, to say nothing of the SDB fleets, finding former
naval gunners would not be very hard at all ... most would also have
useful electronics skills, and could presumably double as shipboard
security, stewards, etc. while the ship was in jump.

This is the apparent assumption of GURPS Traveller, since merchants have
no gunnery skill in their template. It was certainly the way most free
traders operated in the games I've been in.

The standard naval enlisted template gives Gunner-16 for a gunnery branch
specialist. NPCs may have slightly lower skill; nevertheless, it means
that for an engagement between a merchant free trader with the usual
"ex-navy gunner" at the turret the engagement chance, even with civilian
targeting software, jumps from 5 or less at 2 hex range to 11 or less.

> Even a military ship (gunner 14, targeting +10) only has an adjusted gunnery
> of 44 - vs an 800-ton target at 7 hexes it's only hitting a third of the time.
> So the short weapon ranges and low accuracy abotu cancel out. Small-ship
> combat only happens at very close ranges - and hence only when one ship
> has a big acceleration advantage or both ships are looking for a fight.
>

Again, I suspect that naval vessels would make an effort to produce
quality crew. Remember, GT is set 10 years after the Fifth Frontier War.
Those ratings who remained in service likely have combat experience and
are now petty officers in charge of the big guns. Moreover, many turrets
and probably most bays are operated by veterans (skill 15-16). Certainly
the fellow commanding the spinal mount will be pretty good... if you can't
find a spinal mount gunner in your crew of 200 or whatever with skill
15-16, you probably need a new first officer -- training standards are
slipping.

Note that skill 17-18 would indeed be very rare ... but in the Imperial
Navy and those sector navies on the front line, I'd say skill 15-16 is
more the rule than the exception. Among pirates and planetary navies, and
backwater sector navies I'd say skill 14 is more likely.

These were the assumptions on which the game numbers were determined. From
a game perspective (does anyone actually *play* rather than make economic 
and scientific calcuations?), they also allow a crew of PCs based around
the recommended templates to more effectively handle low skill NPCs. A
game in which the PCs could hit the enemy on a 16 or less but the enemy
could hit them on a 12 or less means that PCs in a smaller vessel have
little chance. A game in which the PCs have around a modified 11 or
less to hit while the ungodly hit on a 7 or less is one in which a
small ship with a good crew can survive long enough to reach a jump point
get rescued, or inflict some damage on the enemy...

So the assumption is, basically, that merchant crews will be mainly
ex-navy with skill 13-15 (much like many airliners in the US are piloted
by former air force...) and that naval skills will tend to be similar,
perhaps 13-15 in planetary up to 14-16 in imperial navy. The merchant
gunners may be out of practice but the navy blokes are usually younger, so
it evens out. If you disagree with these assumptions, add +2 to the basic
hit chance for every every skill point below these assumptions.

- -David

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:46:24 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com>
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

 
> >Not mirror.  A good black coating and surface angles to defect what is not
> >absorbed away from your target.
>
> It's hard to get a black coating that doesn't have some diffuse reflection - 
> ie some fraction of the light gets scattered in all directions no matter
> what the angle of reflection is. This kind of stealthing works much better
> in radar where diffuse reflection isn't an issue. 
 
Another point is that on an airplane (or a ship, for that matter)
there are prefered directions. In such a case you know that it is
safe (more or less) to reradiate the radar pulse, say, UP. In space
angled hulls (like an F-117) make no sense unless you decide to point
the prefered direction towards the guy looking for you--you have to
know where he is, and there can't be too many others around that are
off-axis. If I took an F-117 and presented you with the bottom of
the aircraft as your sensor target, it wouldn't be stealthy at all
(by virtue of reflection, anyway).

That said, a pirate simply trying to hide from a merchant can use
this as long as there isn't a dispersed planetary sensor system to
deal with--there's another thought for you pirates... BRIBE THE
SENSOR OPERATOR. At your class E starports, this shouldn't be too
hard to do, the guy is probably assigned to it because he was a
troublemaker in the first place :-)

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:57:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roberto Camino <swordworlder@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller and the "Splinter Cultures"

- ---Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@mail.lanline.com> wrote:
> Does anyone feel that this concept has a place in Traveller?  If
> so, how, and what would the individual cultures and archetypes
> be?  How would they "fit in" to the rest of the Traveller
> universe, and where (my guess would be in Solomani space)?  How
> would this affect rebuilding after the Collapse?  Etc.?

Considering that the other cultures beyond the Solomani Sphere were
1)seeded, not evolved, and 2)resurected from twice collapsed
interstelar civilizations, I would argue that the solomani would be
the only humanoid race that you might want to apply this to.  In any
case, I'd be apt to limit the effect to a residual, considering the
time that has passed getting to the current milieu.  It might be great
fun as a topic for sociological and archelogical inquiry/research
during the early 1100's imperial, though!  Imagine the cultural
tension you could add to a campaign if characters started stereotyping
and slurring each other when the heat gets poured on =:-o


RC

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:06:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roberto Camino <swordworlder@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller and the "Splinter Cultures"

- ---CardSharks@aol.com wrote:
>
> The draft Traveller board game (done in 1975-76) before there ever was role-
> playing had several cultures in it. You could see the prototypical Aslan,
> Vargr, Hivers (three different hives), Centaurs, and a human mercenary Dorsai
> planet.
> 

At one point in the dim and distant past, I had a history or timeline
summary that showed the stages GDW went through in bringing out this
game.  Does anyone remember seeing such a thing?  It this info
published on the web?  I probably still have the artical, but I've no
idea where.  I think I failed an aging effect roll recently!

RC

==

- ------------------------------------------------
Sword Worlds: subsector of the Spinward Marches.
The worlds are named after famous weapons of
lore.  The people are fiercely competative
merchants.  The storyline was first introduced
by H. Beam Piper in "Space Viking", c. 1965.
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:33:53 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

At 15:16 19/10/98 EDT, Marc Miller wrote:
>In a message dated 10/19/98 1:43:27 PM Central Daylight Time,
>johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu writes:
>
><< 
> Ummm, yes, on December 7th, 1941, in fact, it was shown rather
> conclusively.
>  >>
>
>No no no. That was their point. It wasn't clear that in a standup battle with
>battleships in the mix that battleships would be defeated by carrier air. PH
>was a special case (no war footing, Sunday morning, etc). Midway was a
special
>case (no real battleships involved; it was carrier versus carrier).
>
>Only later in the war did it bcome clear that battleships were out of the
>running.

The British had found this out three days after Pearl Harbour. Both HMS
Repulse and HMS Prince of Wales were sunk by Japanese Bombers and Torpedo
Planes. As HMS Prince of Wales was a new battleship with state-of-the-art
anti-aircraft weaponry it should've been pretty obvious at that point.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:10:29 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!

At 19:43 19/10/98 EDT, TravelrTNE wrote:

>That personal belief would be quite dumb since Richard died in his late 30s
>IIRC.
>Richard's own contemporaries thought him to be quite ruthless and
>unscrupulous.  He's mostly held to be a bad King, a bad son, and a bad
>husband, but he was an awesome warrior.

He's generally held to be a bad King because he spent only 6 months of his
reign in his kingdom (England). What a lot of people forget, though is that
England was peaceful and well organized, unlike his french posessions,
which were fragmented, rebellious and often under attack by the King of
France. Thus he would've been foolish to spend more time in England.
However there's little doubt that his decision to go on crusade was not
very bright, and staying with it after hir rivals had gone home was dumb.

I'd suggest that being a good son to Henry II was not an easy task, and
none of his sons (aside perhaps from Henry) succeeded. He was also a good
enough son to be made heir rather than John (inheritance wasn't strictly by
birth order at that point). IMO Richard was a good son to mother, Elanor of
Aquitaine (he would have done better if he'd been a worse one).

Sorry, it's just that this common view of Richard I bugs me.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:54:23 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

At 21:49 19/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:
>At 11:25 AM 10/17/98 +1300, you wrote:

>>OK, I'm talking about the TU here, so I'm using Traveller sensors
>>(specifically TNE's), but from what I understand these rules understate the
>>range of passive sensors massively. Anyway a size A planet runs to a little
>>less than 18,000 km which gives 100 dia as 1,800,000 km. This gives 60
>>hexes at 30,000 km each. This gives a surface area of about 45,000 hexes. 
>
>something wrong here.
>
>surface area of a circle = 4PI X r^2
>
>4PI x 1,800,000,000^2 = 4.07e^19 square meters or 4.07e^16 square km or
>1357168026351 hexes of surface area.  Remember it's a sphere not a circle
>and you have to do the calculation in units.

Ummm... 1 square km is 1,000,000 square metres, so 4.07E19 m^2 becomes
4.07E16 km^2. Also the hexes are 30,000 km across, and so have and area of
about 5.846E8 km^2. This still gives an area of about 70,000 hexes.

>>A range 16 active EMS has a long range of 64 hexes which is more than 100
>
>Ok, I don't play TNE (I miss the release and have not tried to get the OOP
>books sence) so I have to ask...
>
>1) How many hexes can one sensor actively scan in one hour?  Your text above
>says that it can be detected at that range but it does not say how long it
>takes to scan a sphere 1,800,000 km in diameter.  If memory serves that's 6
>ls or 12 ls round trip time for the signal.  Assuming a 1' of arc scan
>(unlikely to be that high a resolution at that range) per scan and a 12
>second delay that makes a spherical active scan take 432 hours.

OK, maybe traveller is unrealistic, but in the rules it only takes the 1/2
hour turn (mind you the rules never really covered looking for somebody
that you had no idea was ever there). 

>2) What kind of signal is this sensor sending out to bounce off of the
>target?  Remember for a non collumated emission that power drops by the
>inverse square law.  Note that our deep space probes today use a high gain
>narrow field antenia to send the data back to us and even then the signal is
>way down in the mud.  A spherical pulse is unlikely and one powerfull enough
>would do bad things to the planet below's TV sets and any living thing on
>the ship.  If the above active sensor is lidar you are stuck with the above
>delay times and a much narrower aperture than 1'.  Most lazers dispersion
>out at much less that .01'  High speed mirrors and good hardware might give
>you 1' per 12 second but I really dought it.

Apparently AEMS is like a very wide-band radar. 

>>A range 8 passive EMS has the same chance on a ship running 'cold' at 8
>>hexes or an accelerating ship at 32 hexes. IMO while it's nice to be able
>>to pick up a ship that's loitering before it starts accelerating it's not
>>really necessary for reasons I'll go into later (besides that's what our
>>nice big active EMS is for). This gives us a sensor area (cutting through
>>the sphere) of 200 and 3200 hexes, respectively. If the patrolling vessels
>>look for accelerating vessels we only need 14 to cover the 100 dia limit,
>>otherwise we'll need 225. That's ignoring the fact that, IMO, with 14+
>>patrol vessels (remember I'm using TNE, and thus HEPlaR. I don't know if
>>this applies with thrusters, but I think so) the would-be pirate is very
>>likely to have his high signature exhaust pointed towards one of them.
>>
>
>1357168026351/3200 = 424115008 that's a lot of ships.  If it took 1 ship a
>half hour to scan 3200 hexes and move on it would take one ship  24,207
>years to scan  the surface of the jump sphere of a system.  Care to take a
>guess at how long it would take to search the entire volume?

It's more like 70,000/3200 = 22 still more than at first calculated, but
not excessive. You don't need to search the whole volume constantly as once
you know there's nothing bad in it all you need to do is keep a good watch
on the perimeter. However, IMO, this is moot as I doubt that the pirate can
match with the prize and take anything worthwhile before the law arrives,
let alone get away.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:38:12 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long) 

> That said, a pirate simply trying to hide from a merchant can use
> this as long as there isn't a dispersed planetary sensor system to
> deal with--there's another thought for you pirates... BRIBE THE
> SENSOR OPERATOR. At your class E starports, this shouldn't be too
> hard to do, the guy is probably assigned to it because he was a
> troublemaker in the first place :-)

My take is this:  A pirate group will *always* have ears to the ground for 
information on future shipping.  A lot of them will be tied into the insurance 
network.  The hottest setup would be for the group to be in collusion with 
free traders for insurance scams.

For instance, Free Trader 'Rabid Wombat' is a couple months behind on its 
payments.  The stereotypical sleazy guy comes up to the captain and offers him 
a deal.  The captain buys some cheap easy to sell cargo on spec and insures it 
like it was worth a fortune.  'Rabid Wombat' lifts out and gets met near the 
80 diameter point where a 'pirate ship' does a token attack causing cosmetic 
damage.  The 'Wombat' immediately surrenders, is boarded and stripped.  More 
cosmetic damage is done and its jump drive is disabled.  The 'pirates' head 
for the 100 diameter limit and jump to 'Wombat's next stop and sell the cargo. 
 'Wombat' returns insystem to file the insurance claim.  Everybody is fat & 
happy.

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:48:33 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: re. GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

David Pulver wrote:

>These were the assumptions on which the game numbers were determined. From
>a game perspective (does anyone actually *play* rather than make economic
>and scientific calcuations?)

Gosh David, this is the TML. Whaddiya expect? :-)

Actually, I have *yet* to see a copy of GURPS Traveller in my FLGS.
(grrr...) Here I am, in a town where I can find rarities like German
Imperial Atlases and World Builder Handbooks, and I can't get anyone to
order me a GURPS Traveller book. Sheesh!

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:51:46 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan?

From:           	TravelrTNE@aol.com
Date sent:      	Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:43:08 EDT

>> Is Dulinor dead? this is a biggie. If Dulinor is dead did Strephon (away at
>> Longbow) order him killed, I think thats unlikely (timeframes all wrong).
>Its far
>> more likely that Imperial security forces acted on initiative.

>I think it's fairly likely he's dead.  I'm very skeptical of Dulinor finding
>refuge outside of the Imperium and there only in his own domain would Dulinor
>be safe... maybe a second Ilelish revolt is brewing... but Hutara has
>apparently been gotten to, as well as power being handed to his daughter...
>Did Dulinor raise a loyal daughter?  

Doesn't matter. No matter what, would you trust the daughter of a trator with 
that much power, or assuming Isis ratted on Dulinor would you trust someone 
with so little honour?

>> I would be very happy to see the abomination of the Deyo transponder,
>> Cymbeline chips and the Virus forever banished to the depths of TNE were
>they
>> belong (no offense guys, I just don't like them).

>And I'd prefer Merchants & Mercenaries to stay forever dead & buried w/ all
>the other OOP campy '50s-esque "sci-fi" but no offense, either, I just don't
>like them.  The original post is much more friendly to us TNE'ers, as well...
>Of course, most of the relevant Virus research isn't well under way until the
>late 1120s...  

My apologies. No offence was intended. It was intended merely as a humerous
expression of my opinion and dislike of the Virus et al. I apologies unreservedly 
for any offense

[snip]

>> Make no mistakes Strephon may have been honourable, but he was an
>> honourable fool.

>The situation blew up out of his control.  The only real fault (aside from not
>spotting Dulinor's rather extreme disatisfaction) was not immediately trying
>to regain the reigns at Capital, but going to Usdiki and letting Lucan
>consolidate his position.

I have no doubt that Strephon's presence was required elsewhere. What I see 
as Strephons failures are:

1 - He failed to prepare Lucan (3rd in line) for the throne. This was an 
unforgivable error. Lucan was most definitely not too far from the throne to be 
ignored. If Strephon and Iphegina had died (unlikely, but a definite possiblity) he 
becomes 1st in line; or if Varian dies he becomes 2nd in line. There are no 
excuses for this failure of judgement.

2 - When he absented himself from Capital he failed to make adequate 
preperations for a crisis. As far as we know he did not inform anybody of his 
absence. Assuming he informed Iolanthe and Iphegina, that was not sufficent. 
Both of them were regulary in the same place. At the very least several well 
trusted members of the moot should have been in the know (including 
Archduke Tranian). They obviously weren't because Tranian supported Lucan's 
claim to the throne. His failure was not leaving Capital, but in not telling people 
he was going.

3 - When the crisis blew up he failed to act swiftly and decisivly to restore 
order. Strephon was just 6 jumps from Capital. He had the authorisation codes 
to confirm his identity (if not refer to point 2). He should have transmitted them 
immediately to all fleet commanders, doing so would not have compromised 
Longbow but it would have prevented the disintergration of the Imperium. He 
must have known what Lucan's personality was like. The crisis came and he 
hesitated. If he acted decisively and quickly he could have stopped the war. It 
would have in all likelyhood cost him and his family the throne, but it would 
have saved the Imperium.

I see Strephon as a rather mediocre ruler. Honourable and noble, yes. Capable 
under normal cirumstances, yes. But he failed to see or prevent the potential 
(however remote) for a tragic disaster in his actions. And when the crisis came 
he hesitated and "kicked for touch" by running to Usdiki. Even then he failed to 
act (he must have had the codes to prove he was Strephon, even in 1117 
transmitting them could have stopped the rebellion).

What I think has happened is that Strephon has suddenly realised just how 
close to disaster thinggs came. He has realised just what could have 
happened, and has acted to rectify the situation. I'd expect that better 
preperations have been made for any future absences.Varian and Lucan have 
been seperated and moved away from the throne; and I would not be surprised 
if they get a crash course in discipline and responsibility very soon ("Prince 
Lucan, congratulations your application to the Imperial Marine acadamy has 
been accepted"). And more importantly Dulinor's very real complaints might get 
addressed.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:52:06 PDT
From: "Paul Zumstein" <pzumstein@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Capital Ships of WWII

>From: DustyLV769@aol.com
>
>I would have to say that IMO, the first clear proof that battleships were no
>longer a main factor in Naval combat came almost at the end of the war: the
>sortie by the IJN to Okinawa, with the fleet flag on board Yamato.  One BB,
>one CA and a number of DD's hit by 3rd Fleet (??) aircraft...only 2-3 DD's
>survived.  This occured in April 1945, and there is an excellent book about it
>"A Glorious Way To Die"
>
>Can anyone think of anything that occured sooner?  Surigao Strait has just
>sprang to mind...
>

The Prince of Wales.

PZ


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:58:53 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>For the space/cost of a missile bay you can get 50 laser turrets with 150
>lasers total. The 10 turrets/1 bay/1000 tons limit will mean that maxed-out
>ships only get 30 lasers per missile bay, which is a little more saturatable.

IIRC, A turret can control 2 missles.  A Bay can control
50 missiles.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:17:24 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!

>"Rape and pillage" was synonymous w/ warfare well until (and even during)
>the 20th century.

Still is. 

My kids have told me stories that still give me nightmares...  And, silly
me, I thought the nightmares after watching someone died of a massive
cranial trauma were bad...

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #976
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 20 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 977



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Stealing Spacesuits (was re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty)
re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)
Re: Capital Ships of WWII
OT: Murderous Thug PC's in D&D
re: Where's Lucan?
Of pirates and insurance scams (was  sensors)
GURPS traveller space combat
Re: Capital Ships of WWII
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles* 
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Murderous Thug PC's in D&D
Re: GURPS traveller space combat 
Re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)
Re: Piracy
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:14:25 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Stealing Spacesuits (was re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty)

William F. Hostman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Any pirate taking away the crew's vacc suits is going to acquire QUITE a
rep, and probably quite a bounty paid by donations from passengers and
crews affected.
<snip>
aside from the bits about taking spacesuits (which are generally somewhat
personalized, usually worn (no pun intended), and often will have hard to
remove identifications), looks pretty good.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Just a clarification: I'm not talking about stealing someone's spacesuit,
then dumping them out the airlock. I'm simply talking about not leaving
behind an item with a purchase price of Cr10000.

They may be worn, but spacesuit reconditioning services are canon
and common - though I think the 75% markdown is appropriate. You
ever know a belter who didn't need another suit?

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:22:20 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty

William F. Hostman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>What you can't take: Ship components. Bulky cargo items. Fuel.
>Starship weapons. Valuable things, but you simply don't have the
>time to get them.

Actually, "Standard" (FF&S Socket) turrets and barbettes could quite
possibly be grabbed, if they aren't slag by the time you get there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nothing you have to unbolt, chop cables and otherwise disconnect.
Remember, a patrol ship is vectoring towards you - you have to load
up and burn rubber for jump point _right now_.

If you have the time, then heck - strip the thing down to the bulkheads.
Just leave enough stuff for crew survival.

William again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Starships: 10% of value. Starships are so well documented that it is
>expensive to dispose of stolen ones. They may simply be used as
>auxiliaries to the "pirate fleet". Few will be taken, as per #2 above.

I'd say you'd probably be able to part it out for at least 25%. More work,
but still doable.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'd considered a "chop shop" as a way of disposing of starships. I think
your 25% may be a close number in that case (figure 50% of value after
the shipbreakers chop it up, then take half of that for middlemen and
transport losses). I'll stick with 10% for now, until my example pirate's
criminal empire gets big enough to support a shady salvage yard. <G>

William again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Rescue Balls: Assume one per passenger including low berths,
>Cr600 each, pirate recoups 25% of that.

probably could recoup 50% or more with streetwise tasks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm trying to include middlemen and transport costs here. 


I'll consider your ship's safe figure, at least it has some more
assumptions to play with than mine does. Thanks for the critique.


Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:27:17 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Yes, thought I may still be wrong :)

A couple of points.  This is only radiation likely tp penetrate starship
hull.  and represents about 5% of the total radiation emitted by a nuclear
weapon in space.  Radiation protection is rouhly depended on density
(almost exclusively for  gamma rays) and and even that level of protection
offers considerably less protection against  neutron radiation (though
abouyt a foot of 'heavy' (i.e. wet) comcrete reduces bt about 1/10.  This
rules are based roughly around real protection levels, You need abot 10 cm
of steel for a reduction to !/10  from Gamma rays,   a material twice as
dense requires half the thickness *but weighs the same).   Yiou can use
sophisticated boraonated plastics and others which will help against.  One
problem is ionisation of particles struck by neutrons and gamma rays (not
considered)That TL 10 battle suit is probably a great 'game' solution to an
intractable proble.  If you multiply the values given by 15 you get the
radiation absorbed per square meter in joules.  This will probably cause
significant heating on traditiuonal suits.  (that other 95% soft x-rays).
I ignored all that radiation when calculating thes evalues.    I suggest
that gurps might just be using atmosphere radiiation effects rather than
space.  This would  give those sorts of errors.  If you wnt more detail let
me know.

Colin

 And this radiation At 06:48 19/10/98 -0400, you wrote:
>At 05:32 PM 10/19/98 +0800, you wrote:
>>The radiation effects from these bombs will kill anyliving thing way beyond
>>these ranges.  (considereing only the HArd gamma and neutron radiation)  I
>>did some calcs a while back for long range PDM using nuclear arheads.  ( If
>>you are interested I will send you a copy).  AGainst a minimally armoured
>>(TNE AV less than 50) vessels the stats are:
>>
>>Values are in REMS, 500 and you will probably die , over 5000 and you fry.
>
>A TL10 battlesuit provides a radiation protection factor of 20 (divide
>radiation by 20) so we can probably reasonably assume that a starship hull
>will have a PF of 100 for civilian ships and 1000 for military, higher for
>TL12.  This doesn't invalidate your point, but it does make the radiation
>somewhat more survivable.
>
>>                   Range in KM
>>Warhead size 10    20    30    40    50    60    70    80    90    100
>>100KT       22K   5600   1900  1400  900  600    500   300   300   200 
>>250KT       56K   14K    4600  3500  2200 1500   1100  900   700   600
>>500KT       111K  28K    9300  7000  4500 3100   2300  1700  1400  1100 
>>1MT         222K  55K    25K   14K   8900 6200   4500  3500  2700  2200
>>5MT         1.1M  278K   123K  69K   44K  31K    23K   17K   14K   11K
>>10MT        2.2M  556K   247K  139K  89K  62K    45k   35K   27K   22K
>>25MT        5.6M  1.4M   617K  347K  222K 154K   113K  87K   69K   56K
>>50MT        11M   2.8M   1.2M  695K  445K 309K   227K 174K   137K  111K
>>100MT       22M   5.6M   2.5M  1.4M  890K 620K   450K 350K   270K  220K
>
>GURPS Space lists the radiation from a 1 megaton space burst at 2000 yards
>(~2km) at 6600 rads... many orders of magnitude lower than what you have
>listed.  Are you certain of these figures?
>
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:36:30 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)

- -----Original Message-----
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@hartwick.edu>



>Let's assume we're using a 400tn _Nishemani_ class corsair, the
>classic example pirate ship - probably a refitted armed merchant
>or paramilitary ship.


Okay. A purpose-built corsair. So Imperial ports and patrolled areas are
right out.


>It's got a 110tn cargo bay that can, among
>other things, hold a 100tn ship. Like a type-S Scout, or a Seeker,
>or an X-Boat, or any one of those small craft that are all over an
>inhabited system. It also has twenty low berths, so you have
>somewhere to put the crews of those craft.



Hmm. This is an interesting configuration. I know that according to the
rules (well, MT rules, anyway) this is possible, but I am curious as the the
geometry of your ship that can hold a type-S scout or seeker. Or a 95-ton
shuttle, for that matter. That's a long, pointy vehicle bay (with, I
suppose, a door sufficiently sized for one of these vehicles). I'm
nitpicking, though.


>Now, I've got some assumptions about piracy that I'd like to
>reiterate, just so critics know my basis and can kibbitz properly.
>
>1. Pirates need to clear out quickly; for most targets, the patrol
>will be on the way.
>
>This limits what you can take.


Or makes it impossible for you to take anything, depending whether or not
precipitation out of jumpspace is random along the 100-diameter limit, how
long it takes to match vectors (on average) and so on. Of course, these are
an important IYTU tweaks.

[snip]


>This will not apply if you've hit the target in an unpatrolled system, and
>that's good - you may well have taken a hit or two from a target well-
>equipped enough to be in an unpatrolled system alone, you'll need all
>the booty you can get.


Yep.

>2. It's very hard to jump away a starship you take.


Okay.

>3. You can use or sell what you take.

>
>Here are my assumptions on value for items:


[snip]

I like these numbers. I have no clue how realistic they are, but I like
them.

[snip]

>
>Therefore:
>
>Even if a pirate has to hunt for an entire year to bag one Fat Trader,
>he's still making reasonable money. ...

[snip]

>There may be more efficient uses for a starship than piracy, but there are
>people who cannot do legal careers for various reasons and ships they'd
>not be able to use legally. Combine the two, and you get Corsairs.
> I believe my analyses show that a pirate can make money, if the setting
>IYTU allows them to survive and travel.

Aye, but that last is the catch, isn't it?

And what about those pirating Xboats? ;-)

"Arrgh! Manuever over here and prepare to be boarded!"

Still, I like this post. At last, a rundown of hard numbers for the pirate
side of things! :-)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:29:25 -0500
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: Capital Ships of WWII

The Bismark was not destroyed by planes (or the British navy, the German
Scuttled her) but she was hunted and disabled by plane launched torpedoes as
I recall.

TV

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:39:40 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: OT: Murderous Thug PC's in D&D

Kelly St. Clair wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> (However, a note: in the AD&D game, the most commonly overlooked
> type of treasure is household goods. Those kobolds may have only
> had a handful of pennies, but that big iron cookpot is worth a 
> gold piece or two.)

I suspect this is because it would drive home to the players the
uncomfortable realization that their "noble adventurers" are really just
racist, heavily-armed burglars and killers.  :/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Most of the races the PC's are being racist against think of humans
as either torture toys, slave pit candidates or food (or all three). I
don't shed too many tears for the plight of orcs and ogres. Still, the
bloodthirsty hack-n-slasher can get a bit tiresome after a while.

Kaznak's Kobolds were my answer to these guys. Kaznak's mob of
little blue gits scurried away when the PC's passed through their area
near the entrance of the dungeon. The PC's went down into the
dangerous deeps to perform heroic deeds, while the kobolds busied
themselved laying traps and ambushes for the party's return.

The PC's really should have suspected something when they started
up the stairs and noticed the pile of barrels stacked at the top. I guess
they were a little too tired from all the monster-hacking and treasure
hauling they'd been doing.

You really have to see the look on a 10th level fighter's face when he
gets killed by a bunch of kobolds that never came within twenty feet
of him. :)

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:45:31 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Where's Lucan?

TravelrTNE wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And I'd prefer Merchants & Mercenaries to stay forever dead & buried w/ all
the other OOP campy '50s-esque "sci-fi" but no offense, either, I just don't
like them.  The original post is much more friendly to us TNE'ers, as well...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:P  Phbtbtbtbtbtbt!    :P

Besides, it wasn't 50ish, it was 70ish...says the guy with the first seven
volumes of _Tom Corbett, Space Cadet_.  ;)


Walt Smith
CT+++++

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:58:03 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Of pirates and insurance scams (was  sensors)

>My take is this:  A pirate group will *always* have ears to the ground for
>information on future shipping.  A lot of them will be tied into the
insurance
>network.  The hottest setup would be for the group to be in collusion with
>free traders for insurance scams.
>
>For instance, Free Trader 'Rabid Wombat' is a couple months behind on its
>payments ... [snip of scam] ... The 'pirates' head for the 100 diameter
limit
>and jump to 'Wombat's next stop and sell the cargo. 'Wombat' returns
insystem
> to file the insurance claim.  Everybody is fat & happy. [...]


... and the poor, dumb insurance company just can't figure it out. Uh, huh.
;-)

You're right, though: there are probably all manner of scams that can be
pulled off to illegally aquire credits. I wouldn't call it piracy, though
(it's just fraud).

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:00:51 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: GURPS traveller space combat

>Note that skill 13 is rather low.

>So the assumption is, basically, that merchant crews will be mainly
>ex-navy with skill 13-15 (much like many airliners in the US are piloted
>by former air force...) and that naval skills will tend to be similar,
>perhaps 13-15 in planetary up to 14-16 in imperial navy. 
I interpreted the gunner-16 in the Navy Enlisted template as being an
exceptional (PC-quality) individual (it's 90 points, after all); but
I confess my GURPS ignorance. We'll take 14 as average
civilian and 15 for navy. We then get

Civilian vs 400-ton target: 7 hexes 5-
                            2 hexes 7-
(not quite as plinky...)
Military vs 800-ton target: 7 hexes 11-

Civilian point defence: 12-  (Missiles have only a ~20% chance of 
                              getting through a few lasers.)
Military Point Defence: 17-  (Military ships are effectively immune to
                              impact missiles (as they should be); 
                              military missiles should be self-guiding 
                              and/or det-laser types.) 

I still can't tell how many missiles the two gunners in a bay can
control - two (one per gunner), fifty (one per communicator), or
one hundred (one per communicator per gunner, which the text could
be taken to imply?) I suppose the answer is 50, but that seems weird.
(And implies that a standard missile rack should add an extra laser
comm or two.)

>a game perspective (does anyone actually *play* rather than make economic
>and scientific calcuations?)
Sarcasm ill-becomes you, Mr. Pulver :-) 
And you haven't even seen a KKM, planet-buster, or a serious Virus
debate yet...How much Virus *can* dance on the head of a pin? Most
TML posters have the hearts of tenured university faculty.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:06:38 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Capital Ships of WWII

From:           	"Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
Date sent:      	Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:29:25 -0500

>The Bismark was not destroyed by planes (or the British navy, the German
>Scuttled her) but she was hunted and disabled by plane launched torpedoes as
>I recall.

Arghhhh. I have seen this argument so often and it annoys me every time. Their 
is no evidence that the Bismark was scuttled. And even if it was all that ment 
was her sinking was hastened.

The evidence is fairly conclusive and it supprises me every time I see this 
claim. Within half an hour of the engagement (09.15) the Bismark was lying low 
in the water and steaming at 5 knots.

To quote from the official Admiralty report:
"By 10 am the Bismark was a silent battered wreck, her mast was down, her 
funnel had disappeared, her guns were pointing in all directions, and a cloud of 
black smoke was rising from the middle of the ship and blowing away in the 
wind. Inside she was clearly a blazing inferno, for the bright glow of internal fires 
could be seen shining through numerous shell and splinter holes in her sides. 
Her men were deserting their guns, and parties of them could be seen running 
to and fro on the upper deck as shells continued to rain in, and occasionally 
jumping over the side to escape by a watery death from the terror on board. 
Captain Patterson (HMS Rodney) would have ceased fire earlier if he had 
known of this, but her port side was so screened by a wall of shell splashes 
along her whole length that it was none too easy to notice what was happening 
on board her."

Post war tests on the 12.6 inch armoured plates of the Tirpitz clearely showed 
that the 16 inch and 14 inch shells would have easily penetrated at the ranges 
the engagement was fought (which were sufficently short to make deck 
penetration unlikely). Before Tovey broke of the gun battle, Rodney was firing at 
a range of 4000 yards. As to scuttling, of the 115 survivors, all were from 
topside positions (no stokers or artificers amongst them) none could confirm if 
any such order had been given; if she had been scuttled, you would have 
expected some survivors from below decks.

Perhaps the best comment on the matter is:
"She (Bismark) fought an extremely couragous battle against greatly superior 
forces; in the best traditions of the old Imperial German Navy; she went down 
with her colours flying"
(Adm Sir John Tovey, C in C Home Fleet 1941)

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:07:37 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles* 

> >For the space/cost of a missile bay you can get 50 laser turrets with 150
> >lasers total. The 10 turrets/1 bay/1000 tons limit will mean that maxed-out
> >ships only get 30 lasers per missile bay, which is a little more saturatable.
> 
> IIRC, A turret can control 2 missles.  A Bay can control
> 50 missiles.

HG rules say 1 bay for every 1000 tons displacement, and it takes the place of 
10 hardpoints.  So, if your boat is only 1000 dt, your bay weapon means you 
have no hardpoints.  This rule works for me.  A 100 ton bay has 100 missiles 
in its barrage, a 50 tonner, 50.  Definitely a serious wakeup call.  <grin>  
And under HG rules, you could *still* stuff 3 missile racks into a triple 
turret, not just 2.  Prob is, under those rules, you can't have a missile bay 
if you use missile turrets, which makes sense to me.  Personally, on, say, a 
5000 dt frigate, I'd use a pair of 100 ton missile bays as a standoff weapon, 
10 triple laser turrets for point defense, and 20 dual energy weap turrets for 
close-in work.
tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:08:02 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Indeed the largest bomb ever tested was Tsar Bomba, approximately 50+
megatons.  

At 15:15 19/10/98 EDT, you wrote:
>In a message dated 10/18/98 20:17:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>wombat@premier.net writes:
>
><< > Great idea, but we can build 100 Mt nuclear warheads right now...
> 
> Probably true (I could possibly find out for sure, but, if I then posted
> it, I'd have to degauss _all_ of your hard drives [as well as degaussing
> your _brains_... ;-)]).
> 
> The question is, what size warheads would _fit_ on a standard-sized
> missile?  (Let's face it, if you can't put it on target, a _gigaton_
> nuke doesn't do enough to justify popping it.) >>
>
>It is true...the Soviet Union announced in the late 1950's (and it was
>confirmed by declassified docs after the fall of Communism) that they had
>constructed a 100Mt "doomsday" bomb.  I do not believe it was ever test-
>detonated though...and certainly was not deployed to any weapons system.
>
>DustyLV769@aol.com  (who's ex-girlfriends dad is a retired nuclear weapons
>engineer!  :-)
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:03:23 -0500
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: Murderous Thug PC's in D&D

>You really have to see the look on a 10th level fighter's face when he
>gets killed by a bunch of kobolds that never came within twenty feet
>of him. :)
>
>Walt Smith

The D&D campaign I have been playing in for about 10 years, one of our
players has successfully played Rusty and Dusty Kobold.  They are brothers
(players who take kobolds get  two).  There have been plenty of NPC
adventurers who rued the day they tangled with those two.  Rusty was very
handy with fireballs and made folks think twice about messing with him.
hehe
The little guys make great suprises.

TV

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:31:56 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS traveller space combat 

> And you haven't even seen a KKM, planet-buster, or a serious Virus
> debate yet...How much Virus *can* dance on the head of a pin? Most
> TML posters have the hearts of tenured university faculty.

Virus doesn't dance on the head of a pin, it engraves its microcode onto it so 
it can be carried around without being detected.  <ducking>

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:55:20 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)

William F. Hostman wrote:

>>Starships: 10% of value. Starships are so well documented that it is
>>expensive to dispose of stolen ones. They may simply be used as
>>auxiliaries to the "pirate fleet". Few will be taken, as per #2 above.

>
>I'd say you'd probably be able to part it out for at least 25%. More
work,
>but still doable.
>
>>Small Craft: 25% of value. They are more ubiquitous, and tend not to
>>be kept track of in interstellar databases as much. (note: one
lifeboat
>>taken will pay all maintenance, life support and salary costs for a
>>400tn corsair for about three years).
>>
>>Vehicles: 25% of value, for the same reasons as small craft.
>
>Again, if you have the connections, part them out for about 40% of
value.

who do you think they are selling them to, but the friendly chop-shop

Charles

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:55:11 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Charles Prevatte wrote:

>At 10:32 PM 10/17/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>I have been thinking about this & well, I had this thought...
>>
>>Piracy can work in the Traveller Universe if you think about it this way,
>>pirates are already breaking one law, right?  So you who have said that if
>>a pirate has 100 MCr then he is a rich man, right?  Wrong, all he has to do
>>is get a bank to loan him the money to buy his ship & then skip out on the
>>payments...  In other words, if a pirate can scrap together say 10-20 MCr,
>>then he could get a ship & start out being a pirate...
>>
>>Just a quick thought...
>>
>
>What's a little fraud to murderers?  Great idea.  Run this sting a few times
>under different names and you have a fleet of pirate ships.  A take off on
>todays credit thieves using stollen credit infomation to buy cars.

this will work better with used ships, especially decomissioned wartime
commerce raiders, secure traders, etc.

Charles

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:55:29 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Steve Daniels wrote:

>I think the "Nuclear Briefcase" is actually what was called by the US Army
>(although perhaps not officially) the "Nuclear Bullet."
>
>It wasn't a bullet at all but a very large backpack weighing in excess of
>120 pounds.  It was awkward to carry, due to its length, but it was
>one-man-portable. (120lbs is the same load a fireman carries when
>fully rigged up).  And there used to be some in the former West
>Germany.
>
>I don't know what the megaton/kiloton yield would be.  Especially
>after you subtract the load of the non-reacting components of the
>device, which, IIRC, where quite heavy themselves.  Say it was
>20 kg or 45lbs of reaction mass.  What would the yield be?

As per "The History of the US Nuclear Arsenal" by James Gibson
"numbers are in dispute" due to poor documentation

Special Atomic Demolition Munition
shipping container
   35in x 26.6in x 26.2in
   weight 163 lbs

warhead
   <20in length
   <11in dia
   <79lbs
   yield 1 to .1 kt (not adjustable in the field)

Charles

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:48:57 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty

Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Let's assume we're using a 400tn _Nishemani_ class corsair, the
>classic example pirate ship - probably a refitted armed merchant
>or paramilitary ship.


Okay. A purpose-built corsair. So Imperial ports and patrolled areas are
right out.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Or it's a starmerc. Or it's an armed merchant/fast trader. 
Another bit about the _Nishemani_ (and, most probably, other
corsair craft) - it doesn't always seem to be the same craft,
especially at a distance, so it might even be able to spend some
time being watched by the good guys, as long as it didn't get
too close.

Variable emissions arrays. A variable transponder. Even external
modules that can be deployed as fake fins and such (it only has to
fool a radar). Maybe enough to make the locals think the ship is
a harmless Fat Trader or legit Impie Patrol Cruiser, just for a critical
few hours or so.

Joseph again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>It's got a 110tn cargo bay that can, among
>other things, hold a 100tn ship. Like a type-S Scout, or a Seeker,
>or an X-Boat, or any one of those small craft that are all over an
>inhabited system. It also has twenty low berths, so you have
>somewhere to put the crews of those craft.

Hmm. This is an interesting configuration. I know that according to the
rules (well, MT rules, anyway) this is possible, but I am curious as the the
geometry of your ship that can hold a type-S scout or seeker. Or a 95-ton
shuttle, for that matter. That's a long, pointy vehicle bay (with, I
suppose, a door sufficiently sized for one of these vehicles). I'm
nitpicking, though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Still working on it. I'd like to come out with a deck plan for this baby,
but the design of the bay is hard to match up with my esthethic
senses. Mebbe pirate ships are supposed to be ugly. ;)

Joseph again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> I believe my analyses show that a pirate can make money, if the setting
>IYTU allows them to survive and travel.

Aye, but that last is the catch, isn't it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If YTU has an Imperium with a (relatively) infallible ability to detect,
identify and track every ship at every location in every system, then
you'll have no pirates. If YTU has no ships worth anything straying
away from patrolled space, or a patrol cruiser stationed within easy
interception range of every belter's workshack and lumbering supply
shuttle, then you'll have no pirates.

You'll also have no point to involving the PC's in space travel. You may
as well play Traveller like the first release of _Star Frontiers_, where
space ships weren't considered at all - just drop your PC's at the gate
of a different star port every week, space was too boring to spend any
game time on.

IMO, the dangers of space travel in adventure sci-fi are more interesting
when some of them include a human element as an adversary.
I like at least the option of pirates being an available opponent.
Thus my tweakings and analyses.

Thanks for the comments.


Walt Smith

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #977
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 20 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 978



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Striker
Re: GURPS: Traveller Kits
OT: Kobolds (was re: Murderous thug...)
re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty
Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Piracy
Re: Where's Lucan?
Re: The Fourth Imperium:  was  Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964
Kobolds in Traveller (was: Murderous Thug PC's in D&D)
Piracy: Anatomy of a Strike (was re: Economics of Piracy)
Re: GURPS: Traveller Kits
Re Piracy and Parting Out
Re: Capital Ships of WWII
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
G:T errata
Re: Economics of Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:21:47 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Striker

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)
...
>I think using Striker may be a mistake.  It was writen mainly for planetary
>combat.  I'm not sure that it's numbers would apply to the navy.  I was
>never able to get a copy of Striker of my own so my knowledge of it is
>limited.  Are their buggetary numbers in it for the purpose of building and
>operation a space navy?  All I ever saw was ground combat.

  Try Mr. Millers Far Future Inc. <FarFuture@aol.com> for a set (IIRC),
just indicate that the message is a commercial inquiry, I guess.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:11:07 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller Kits

>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:42:15 -0700
>From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>

>     This is directed towards Loren W., but anyone who knows the answer
>could reply.  I was working with a player last night to create a character,
>and they asked me a question I could not find the answer to.  Under the
>Marine Special Ops they have an advantage called Fit (5), and another
>called Very Fit (10).  Where are these located in the books.  I own a
>GRUPS: Basics Third Edition (Actually two) as well as Space, Vehicles,
>Martial Arts, Aliens, Ultra Tech, and many more.  I was unable to locate
>this advantage, could you please enlighten me as to its location.

Its in GURPS Compendium I.  The book has a lot of advantages,
disads, etc.

If you don't want to get it, just replace that advantage with
another one.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:36:53 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: OT: Kobolds (was re: Murderous thug...)

Thomas Vickers wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The D&D campaign I have been playing in for about 10 years, one of our
players has successfully played Rusty and Dusty Kobold.  They are brothers
(players who take kobolds get  two).  There have been plenty of NPC
adventurers who rued the day they tangled with those two.  Rusty was very
handy with fireballs and made folks think twice about messing with him.
hehe
The little guys make great suprises.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Kobolds with fireballs?

Geez, all my kobolds needed were some rubbish piles, some barrels,
a couple strong sticks and some slings.

Reminds me of a famous-near-last-words quote from a superhero game
I was in:

"If these are his (the GM's) idea of flunkies, I'd hate to see what his
supervillains look like."

<G>

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:01:27 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty
...
>Okay. A purpose-built corsair. So Imperial ports and patrolled areas are
>right out.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Or it's a starmerc. Or it's an armed merchant/fast trader. 
...
>Variable emissions arrays. A variable transponder. Even external
>modules that can be deployed as fake fins and such (it only has to
>fool a radar). Maybe enough to make the locals think the ship is
>a harmless Fat Trader or legit Impie Patrol Cruiser, just for a critical
>few hours or so.

  As the original poster pointed out, these are some of the redeeming
characteristics that make using an Imperial port, or getting stopped
by a patrol craft, _totally *bleeping* suicidal_. Unless of course
they're not detectable by detailed physical inspection.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:48:51 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Current Tech: Shortstop

My brother at Fort Bragg tells me of a piece of gear the US Army is
doing some test deployments of now, it's called Shortstop.

Shortstop is a backpack-sized box of electrical stuff, about the size
of a WW2 field radio. It puts out radio waves of a kind that might
have it's designer mobbed by Army grunts intending to buy him
drinks, offer him their women, etc.

What does it do? It makes proximity-fused munitions - artillery shells,
mortar shells, some kinds of air-dropped munitions, etc. - explode a 
little differently.

I'm sure most readers are familiar with prox-fused rounds. If you toss
an explosive round an some infantry and it smacks into the ground,
it pretty much only kills the guy it landed on and makes a hole for
his buddies to hide in. Put a proximity fuse on the round, it gets to
explode just _before_ it hits the ground - killing lots more people as
it sprays them liberally with blast and shrapnel from above.

Now enter Shortstop. It emits radio waves that confuse these proximity
fuses, so they think they're close to the ground and explode.

While they're still 500 meters away.

You can make a shell that ignores Shortstop. It'll cost you about
US$1000 each, instead of about US$25 to $50 each, so you won't
have as many to shoot.

Everything I've heard about the armed forces tells me that, of all the
things to get attacked with, infantry hates artillery the most. The way
it comes from out of nowhere to kill you, the way you can't do anything
but hunker down and hope they run out of ammo. I'm imagining these
grunts, if Shortstop works, fighting for the priviledge of wearing it
(and thus being in the middle of the protection zone).

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:42:22 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>Historically pirates were mutineers and criminals of various stripes.  They
>did not run because they were wanted to many places to do so.  They did not
>build ships except for privateers which are NOT pirates and were the nature
>of this discussion when I first brought it up.  Pirates generally stole
>ships, captured and converted ships, or aquired them be mutinee.

  While not quite the same thing, there was apparently a quite extensive
strain of piracy that amounted to business ventures run from ports outside
of state control (western Ireland, the Barbary coast, etc.) on either side
of 1600.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:42:27 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan?

>From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
>Subject: Re: Where's Lucan?
...
>I see Strephon as a rather mediocre ruler. Honourable and noble, yes. Capable 
>under normal cirumstances, yes. But he failed to see or prevent the potential 
>(however remote) for a tragic disaster in his actions. And when the crisis
came 
>he hesitated and "kicked for touch" by running to Usdiki. Even then he
failed to 
>act (he must have had the codes to prove he was Strephon, even in 1117 
>transmitting them could have stopped the rebellion).

  The same was pretty much said of Louis XVI ~ "he'd have made a fine petty
bourgeois watchmaker. It's a shame he was King of France..."

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:08:22 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: The Fourth Imperium:  was  Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964

> From: jim clem <travmind@hotmail.com>
> > 2)  Psionics are in use, though not common among people.  The 4th Imp 
> > makes serious use of 'psi cops' and in military uses.  This is _NOT_ a 
> > kinder, gentler Imperium.  Psi is also used for system interfaces, as 
> to 
> > help prevent a recurrence of the Virus incident.  
> 
> I can see psi cops...
> ===========================
> 
> Actually, the psi generally ignore most folk, realizing it to be a waste 
> of time to try and watch everyone in sight.  However, if you are a 
> person of some importance, you can count on being watched.

I can Psi-Cops like Al Bester from B5...  They police the Psis...

Great plot device...  A PC Psi has been using his gifts for his own gain &
a Psi Cop is sent out after him...  Or, the Psis decide to take over the 4I
& use their gifts to make the difference, i.e. a teleporter can tie up huge
amounts of troops, a clairvoyant can see where troops are, a
telekinetic<sp> can operate many weapons at once, a telepath knows what you
are thinking, & someone with Awareness can increase his strength for short
periods of time...  In other words how can you stop them?

Legate Legion, Militant Jewish Terrorist
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

We are Microsoft of Borg.  Your distinctive capabilities will be adapted to
service us.  Resistance is futile.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 02:38:39 EDT
From: GypsyComet@aol.com
Subject: Kobolds in Traveller (was: Murderous Thug PC's in D&D)

"Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com> reminisces:

>>You really have to see the look on a 10th level fighter's face when he
>>gets killed by a bunch of kobolds that never came within twenty feet
>>of him. :)
>>
>>Walt Smith
>
>The D&D campaign I have been playing in for about 10 years, one of our
>players has successfully played Rusty and Dusty Kobold.  They are brothers
>(players who take kobolds get  two).  There have been plenty of NPC
>adventurers who rued the day they tangled with those two.  Rusty was very
>handy with fireballs and made folks think twice about messing with him.
>hehe
>The little guys make great suprises.
>
>TV

 Has anyone used similar races/teams in their Imperial Traveller games? I've
suffered bouts of midget gangsters and little green men from Mars (ever see
"Spaced Invaders"?), and of course Raccoonids are rather common (since I game
with their creators). I'm also quite guilty of inflicting "an indeterminate
number of Droyne" on groups in the past...
 Anyone else?

GypsyComet
http://members.aol.com/gypsycomet/index.html
 wherein Raccoonids and flying Hedgehogs may be found...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 02:50:36 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Piracy: Anatomy of a Strike (was re: Economics of Piracy)

Steven Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Variable emissions arrays. A variable transponder. Even external
>modules that can be deployed as fake fins and such (it only has to
>fool a radar). Maybe enough to make the locals think the ship is
>a harmless Fat Trader or legit Impie Patrol Cruiser, just for a critical
>few hours or so.

  As the original poster pointed out, these are some of the redeeming
characteristics that make using an Imperial port, or getting stopped
by a patrol craft, _totally *bleeping* suicidal_. Unless of course
they're not detectable by detailed physical inspection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Of course you're not _using_ the ports, or getting close to patrol
craft. Agreed, suicidal. You might, however, still be able to *hunt*
near such areas, *if you can look harmless for a long enough
period of time*. That's what these features are for - to let you look
like normal traffic until you find a target.

Jump in-system, to a system that hasn't enough patrol craft to
stop everyone immediately. Emit and transpond like an innocent
Fat Trader, with an ID code that looks right but will eventually
(days/weeks later) twig suspicious, if anyone decides to look carefully
at the records. Point your ship towards some outer system
destination, or into normal traffic, whatever vectors you nearer other
ships and farther from patrol ships. Check vectors carefully, ready
for a strike & grab on a ship you can match with, or ready to rabbit
when your turn on the board & search queue gets close.

You've sweated an hour inside a patrol ship's interception envelope.
He's turned to match with a Free Trader, his projected area where he
can still catch you slowly drags away. Your Navigator works
feverishly, ID'ing the abilities of other ships in traffic, carefully
plotting who you can catch, and who you'll have time to raid
before you and your prize drift back into the interception range of
that overworked patrol ship out there.

There it is...a Fat Trader, kind of new looking, vectoring into the
ecliptic traffic pattern on a laborious parabola after a minor 
realspace jump error. The Navigator lays the plot...we can intercept
her, and might - if we can disable her or get her to surrender - have
ninety minutes to get clear before the nearest patrol cruiser can
intercept.

The Pirate Captain gives the order. Precious minutes are wasted by
the authorities, as  junior patrol crewman on boring sensor watch tries 
to figure out if his equipment is malfunctioning. Where did that Trader 
go? There it is...pulling how many G's? Call the Captain, alert! But
we're hard aside a merchantman, with a third of our crew not
aboard...the nearest backup is where?!? More time lost...he's
a patrol captain, not a front-line Imperial Navy warship commander.

The hapless Fat Trader is easy pickings. A string of rescue balls,
their emergency beacons a plaintive wail in the darkness, streams
off on one vector as the Corsair takes another. The patrol captain
makes a hard choice - chase a pirate, or ensure the safety of the
drifting crew? The Fat Trader drifts silent, her lifeboat missing, her
lockers and safe stripped...the passengers and crew safe aboard,
the hazardous rescue balls merely a diversion, this time.

Records will add the mysterious trader to the attack and seize list,
but that radar profile and transponder signature will never be seen
again. Perhaps a taunt over the radio from the fleeing pirate before
his ship sought sanctuary in jump space, nothing more will be
known...until the pirate makes a mistake.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 04:55:39 -0400
From: John Macek <macek@erols.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller Kits

Leo Hale wrote:
> 
>      This is directed towards Loren W., but anyone who knows the answer
> could reply.  I was working with a player last night to create a character,
> and they asked me a question I could not find the answer to.  Under the
> Marine Special Ops they have an advantage called Fit (5), and another
> called Very Fit (10).  Where are these located in the books.  I own a
> GRUPS: Basics Third Edition (Actually two) as well as Space, Vehicles,
> Martial Arts, Aliens, Ultra Tech, and many more.  I was unable to locate
> this advantage, could you please enlighten me as to its location.
> 
> Thank you in advance.
> 
> Leo

Greetings,

Try looking in Compendium I.  You'll find them there.

You are welcome,
John

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:49:20 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Piracy and Parting Out

Yes, piracy exists IMTU. Quick, somebody add some IMTU codes for Piracy.
BTW, who's maintaining the IMTU Codes sheet?

Anyway, any corsair design which is going to survive is going to look like
a fairly typical hull of some other class(es). For example, typical hulls
would be 400td cyl AF (like the subbie), 400td needle AF (like the PC),
200td hulls to match the various type "A" traders, etc. Most should be
built with multiple power plants: one PP to match "Target Profile", and the
other to beef up for combat mode. (Yes, this requires FF&S, or bending MT
to allow multiples on-line at once. Which, btw, Hard times seems to allow.)

As for parting out ships, many parts will be resaleable to others at low
control ports, "Starmerc Moots", pirate hangouts, etc, and probably without
too many middlemen. I read somewhere that turret installations only take
about 2 or three hours, assuming the socket is present, and the software is
ready. If the socket is a standardized unit, a competant engineer should be
able to rip it out pronto.

Basically, even with cautious assumptions of revenue capability, the key to
piracy inthe late 3rd imp isn't technology.... it is whether or not the
Imperial Gov't gets enough outcry in a given area to actually put a stop to
it. This crucial threshold seems to be the key hangup in the discussions
(I'll skip names). If the threshold is particularly low, the 3i will be
spending most of it's naval budgets to patrol; if it's too high, the 3I
will only know of wars when the invaders start unloading at the downports.

Canon says there are pirates, and that they exist throughout the spinward
marches (TTA). The CGen provides for "Letter of Marque" as a benefit for
Pirates (sup4, MTPH). The rules of war do not prohibit space-naval actions
between imperial member worlds (TTA, Sup 8, MTIE, Striker). TCS doesn't
(directly) address Imperial conditions.

 The encounter tables provide a fairly low (but everpresent) chance of
pirate encounters in systems, with 1/36 significant encounters being with a
ship minded towards piracy of some flavor (MTIE). Under MT, (and IIRC,
under CT) you roll for ship category, then type, then mission, then
disposition. Disposition rolls of 2-5 (Hasty departure or leaving) would
tend to indicate that the ship either is not interested in you, or is going
elsewhere. At least the hasty departure (2-3) would indicate not enoguh
time to take you on... so that's redcuing hostility chances to 33/36 of
1/36 or less (11/432) chance of a viable pirate encounter, before applying
the commonsense approach of making a reaction roll! Sounds about like the
chances of being carjacked while driving in a bad neighborhood. Also note
that the encounters are significant encounters (MT makes clear in the rules
on encounters (MTRM) that all encounters rolled are significant encounters,
not the sum total of items you happen to be elligible to encounter. In
short, space encounters are things that catch your eye, not just every ship
in space.

As for pirates vs starmercs: if the imperium leaves anti-piracy (except
large scale operations like the kforzueng) work to local and private
concerns, starmercs will exist in areas where piracy, privateering, etc is
occuring. If starmercs can be built. most of them make excellent pirates,
too.

Since tradewar is cannon, there's likely to be work for starmercs in areas
where  there is a tradewar brewing (nobody wants to be unguarded during a
hostile action, even if they are not a valid target). If the economic costs
of piracy are borne by ship-owners (rather than governments or powerful
insurance corporations), neither the government nor the corporations are
going to consider  the occasional loss of a cargo or 2 a year per system
too terribly bad, so long as the taxes get paid. Only when it becomes
CHEAPER to hunt and capture/kill/erradicate the pirates than to ignore them
will a government do something about it. Only if insurance companies can
effectively lobby can they do something about piracy, lest they charter
their own starmercs, and/or engage in tradewar against their rival's
clients (ala some of the 1930's gangwars protection rackets gone bad).

If you want something really annoying, look at the hijacking rules... 1/216
chance of a hijacking attempt if there are ANY NPC's aboard...

Oh, one other side thought... could some of those "pirate" encounters be
ships just hijacked??? <EFG>

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:47:34 GMT
From: johnl@vnet.net (John Lansford)
Subject: Re: Capital Ships of WWII

On Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:06:38 +1300, you wrote:

>From:           	"Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
>Date sent:      	Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:29:25 -0500
>
>>The Bismark was not destroyed by planes (or the British navy, the German
>>Scuttled her) but she was hunted and disabled by plane launched torpedoes as
>>I recall.
>
>Arghhhh. I have seen this argument so often and it annoys me every time. Their 
>is no evidence that the Bismark was scuttled. And even if it was all that ment 
>was her sinking was hastened.
>
>The evidence is fairly conclusive and it supprises me every time I see this 
>claim. Within half an hour of the engagement (09.15) the Bismark was lying low 
>in the water and steaming at 5 knots.

Actually, due to the rudder damage, Bismarck's best speed was about
five knots anyway.

Everything you quoted (hardly an unbiased source, BTW) did not rule
out Bismarck being scuttled. Close range gunfire from KGV and Rodney
did indeed penetrate the armor belt, but above the waterline. I
believe the senior surviving officer of the Bismarck recounted that
the scuttling order had indeed been given (again, not quite an
unbiased source) as well.

>To quote from the official Admiralty report:
>"By 10 am the Bismark was a silent battered wreck, her mast was down, her 
>funnel had disappeared, her guns were pointing in all directions, and a cloud of 
>black smoke was rising from the middle of the ship and blowing away in the 
>wind. Inside she was clearly a blazing inferno, for the bright glow of internal fires 
>could be seen shining through numerous shell and splinter holes in her sides. 

Above the water line, which might explain why hardly anyone from below
decks escaped. The routes to the upper decks were blocked with fire
and debris.

John Lansford

The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage:
http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 05:49:07 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

At 11:27 AM 10/20/98 +0800, you wrote:
>Yes, thought I may still be wrong :)
>
>A couple of points.  This is only radiation likely tp penetrate starship
>hull.  and represents about 5% of the total radiation emitted by a nuclear
>weapon in space.  Radiation protection is rouhly depended on density

For radiation protection at OUR tech level.  Who knows what methods they
have at TL 10-12.

>(almost exclusively for  gamma rays) and and even that level of protection
>offers considerably less protection against  neutron radiation (though
>abouyt a foot of 'heavy' (i.e. wet) comcrete reduces bt about 1/10.  This
>rules are based roughly around real protection levels, You need abot 10 cm
>of steel for a reduction to !/10  from Gamma rays,   a material twice as
>dense requires half the thickness *but weighs the same).   Yiou can use
>sophisticated boraonated plastics and others which will help against.  One
>problem is ionisation of particles struck by neutrons and gamma rays (not
>considered)That TL 10 battle suit is probably a great 'game' solution to an
>intractable proble.  If you multiply the values given by 15 you get the
>radiation absorbed per square meter in joules.  This will probably cause
>significant heating on traditiuonal suits.  (that other 95% soft x-rays).

That's if the radiation is absorbed.  Perhaps they have a way of reflecting
it?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 23:11:54 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: G:T errata

Just looked on the G:T errata page. Its just been updated and included is that 
TAS membership is a one off Cr1,000,000 not a yearly cost. And we can all 
now breath a little easier.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 20:12:22
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Economics of Piracy

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)
>

This is very cool stuff. Comments inserted individually.

Step zero ... fill your cargo bay with a collapsible fuel bladder. If you
dont need it, vent it, and use the cargo space for loot as and when
neccessary. It will give you the opportunity to refuel a prize for a
jump-1, if you do in fact hit an advantageous tactical opportunity (such as
a sensor operator who has been stunned by a large amount of cash).

>1. Pirates need to clear out quickly; for most targets, the patrol
>will be on the way.

Agreed. I think about one hour works - could be as low as thirty minutes.

>
>This will not apply if you've hit the target in an unpatrolled system, and
>that's good - you may well have taken a hit or two from a target well-
>equipped enough to be in an unpatrolled system alone, you'll need all
>the booty you can get.
>

Agreed.

>2. It's very hard to jump away a starship you take.
>
>If the target had fuel, it would have jumped away from you. It's almost
>trivial for the crew of the target to lock out their computers long enough
>for the patrol to catch up. And if you had to put a couple laser bolts into
>their Engineering Compartment to convince them to give up, they're
>not going anywhere anyway.
>

I'm not so sure of this. In this case, the crew may be on the wrong side of
a dilemna - if they allow the ship to be captured, even after a 'fair
fight', then the pirates could say 'Golly good show, chaps' and steal the
ship and leave them in a life boat, or survival capsules, or whatever.

If they cripple their own ship, then murder is an option, in order to
encourage the others.

>3. You can use or sell what you take.
>
>Here are my assumptions on value for items:
>
>- ----------------------------
>
>Starships: 10% of value. Starships are so well documented that it is
>expensive to dispose of stolen ones. They may simply be used as
>auxiliaries to the "pirate fleet". Few will be taken, as per #2 above.
>

If you have another state anywhere nearby (say, within a sector) that is
prepared to buy captured ships, then I think it would be worth taking the
'long road' to it, and selling it there. Two years travel time still leaves
a fair chunk of change in selling a Far Trader in the Vargr Extents.

>Small Craft: 25% of value. They are more ubiquitous, and tend not to
>be kept track of in interstellar databases as much. (note: one lifeboat
>taken will pay all maintenance, life support and salary costs for a
>400tn corsair for about three years).

I think this may be higher, if you are selling to belters. But 50% retail
could turn into 25% wholesale.

>
>Vehicles: 25% of value, for the same reasons as small craft.

Ditto.

>
>Supplies: Spare parts, tools and life support essentials can be taken.
>There is a bit of a handwave here, but I assume that the pirate can use
>these to defray some costs of life support and to affect the price of his
>annual maintenance. Total up what the target ship spent on life support
>for the current trip, and credit the pirate 25% of that towards his life
>support expenses only. As for annual maintenance, reduce the cost
>to the standard .1% per year - the stolen parts and tools help make
>up for the bribes and extra costs, even in a law level zero port, of
>getting annual maintenance done on a less than legal starship.
>

0.1% really isnt that much money. You can run up double that with one good
laser blast. Budget for combat damage.

>Vac Suits: assume one per crew member of the target, plus two
>spares. Each one worth Cr10,000, pirate recoups 25% of that.
>
>Rescue Balls: Assume one per passenger including low berths, 
>Cr600 each, pirate recoups 25% of that.
>
>Passenger valuables: Assume, as a minimum average, cash and other
>easily convertable valuables on hand equal to the price paid for passage.
>These valuables are recouped with no reduction (or the reduction is
>included in the average). High passenger Cr10,000, Low passenger
>Cr1000, Middle passenger Cr8,000.
>

I'd actually double this - people are going to have cash etc to spend at
the other end. A travelling businessman may have very valuable paperwork as
well.

>Ship's Safe: Ships need to carry cash, they can't remain on-planet
>long enough for credit to clear in a crisis - whether it's a fine that needs
>to be paid or an opportunity speculative cargo. Figure as an estimated
>average, Cr25000 per 100tns of ship. Note that my only real source
>for this is the Cr100,000 the _March Harrier_ had on hand at the start
>of _The Traveller Adventure_, it may be much higher. This will be in
>cash, recouped at 100% of value.

Yep. I'd double this too.

>Cargo: The pirates will have to (very) quickly evaluate the cargo, and
>guess what they have time to take. A zero-G cargo handler robot or
>exoskeleton would be a very good thing here. Variation is too high
>to allow a very useful average value of what can be taken, as one ship
>may have two tons of gemstones while another may have nothing but
>grain. I decided on allowing the pirates to recoup an average value of
>Cr250 per cargo ton of the target (25% of Cr1000 per ton). This allows
>some losses for travel, middlemen, and the other expenses of getting
>even a valuable cargo to market.
>

Lots of ways around this - the easiest is to weld cargo crates to the hold.
Or have the paperwork in a mess 'Umm, the *manifest* is accurate, but I was
drunk when I allocated the shipping containers'

>Passengers: I decided to leave kidnapping for ransom or slavery out of
>the equations. There will be exceptions, and I even have some ideas
>(for later) that the slow communications time of the Imperium may make
>kidnapping for ransom far easier than it is on Earth today, if you are 
>patient or ruthless enough.

Kidnap for ransom makes sense for me, slavery less so.

>
>- ---------------------------
>
>With the above numbers, I've hit a tentative conclusion as to what a
>pirate needs to do to keep going: 
>
>A Far or Free Trader will get him about Cr100000. A Fat Trader will get
>him about MCr3 and change. Small craft are worth several MCr each.
>

What is a Fat Trader doing outside a very safe, predictable trade route, or
at least without an escort ?

>Not counting the value of the ship, the pirate needs to spend about
>MCr1 a year in maintenance, salary and expenses. 

Fair enough, if maintainence is being discounted. I'd assume some level of
combat damages, and of course bribes are deductible for pirates. I'd call
it MCr 5 all up.

>
>So:
>
>One starship taken in the course of a corsair ship's career will pretty
>much amortize the entire value of the pirate ship for five years or
>more.

Fair enough

>
>Each small craft taken and popped into the cargo bay will pay
>expenses for at least two years, or pay part of the value of the
>pirate vessel. 15 lifeboat/launches is all it takes to completely pay
>off the current value of a 400tn Corsair, pinnaces and ship's boats are
>worth even more.

Pirating small craft in the outsystem therefore seems to be an optimal
strategy. Add some raiding of belter colonies, and we have a nice
low-profit low-risk pirate strategy.

>
>Ten Free Traders taken in a year will pay all expenses except battle
>damage.

This is one every 5 weeks ... quite a bit when assuming 1 week per jump.

>Most battle damage will probably occur in an unpatrolled system,
>as the stakes are higher and the target vessel is probably better armed.
>Unpatrolled systems are the only systems where a pirate will want to
>fight at all - the risks are too high compared to the rewards in a system
>where patrol ships are en route to the fight.
>Targets taken in unpatrolled systems can almost always be considered
>valuable enough to cover cost of damage - unless the damage stops
>the pirate from jumping back to base.

If this is true, cargo haulers will be able to ask for more to ship goods
to unpatrolled systems, and will thus be able to afford to be more heavily
armed. Freight rates should get a risk premium ...

>
>Therefore:
>
>Even if a pirate has to hunt for an entire year to bag one Fat Trader,
>he's still making reasonable money. I believe this answers some 
>arguments that a pirate loses too much money by lying in wait for 
>targets, or by having to transit several systems to get from a base 
>to a good hunting area.
>
>Income can be far, far higher than just expenses if the pirate hits a few
>good targets. This allows there to be enough income potential to make
>up for the really bad luck a pirate can have - one missile hit can cost
>millions, even if it doesn't kill you. Piracy therefore becomes high-risk,
>but very profitable if the risks pan out.

True. 
>Please take a look at my assumptions, especially those on the value
>of the booty, and comment - these assumptions are critical to the
>economic viability of the pirate career.

They are pretty decent. You might want to check Appendix A of Andrew's
Elizabethan Privateering to see how high and low the revenue from
privateering could be.

>
>Walt Smith
>

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #978
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 20 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 979



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: [GT] Equipment and ROF question
Starship Morgages (was Re: Pirates)
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Piracy
GT and TAS errata
Re: Capital Ships
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
[GT] Equipment and ROF question
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #976
re: Economics of Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:31:01 +0100
From: pbendal@ibm.net
Subject: Re: [GT] Equipment and ROF question

Dan Eveland wrote:

> Also, do the ships like the merchant ship or scout ship count against the
> 40-point disadvantage limit?  I don't think it should.  Also, can a group of
> characters pool points for the ship and be co-owners.  Seems easy enough.

I don't see any reason why groups can't pool points for ships and vehicle.
Twilight:2000 used the system and it worked quite well as far as I remember.

> By the way, the hardback GURPS Traveller and hardback GURPS Basic rules are
> ultimately cool.

I received mine yesterday in Sweden. They were sent on 12th and 14th so took
about a week to reach me, which I thought was pretty good.
I had time for a quick read of GT and agree with a lot of the comments made so
far; very nicely presented, hex grid deck plans look weird to start with, ship
design seems nice and simple for an intro system.
One bit I especially liked was in chargen. The template format is a nice one.
Every career gets a number of mandatory skills with some points left over for
tweaking. Makes more sense to me.
Don't know if  I'm too keen on the ads, disads or quirks though. I'd probably
put together a list of ref approved ones (for starships, contacts etc.) before
running a game with new characters.

Paul Bendall

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 03:08:04 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Starship Morgages (was Re: Pirates)

Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> wrote

> you wrote:

> >Piracy can work in the Traveller Universe if you think about it this 
> >way all he has to do
> >is get a bank to loan him the money to buy his ship & then skip out 
> >on the payments...  In other words, if a pirate can scrap together 
> >say 10-20 MCr, then he could get a ship & start out being a pirate...

Is the bank liable to make a loan on any ship design?  When the bank
sees the design for a 4 g, jump 3 big cargo hold, no high or middle
passenger design ship aren't they going to wonder what you will use it
for?

If you tell them the ship will be used for mercenary operations won't
the high risk use of the ship make them need to charge you a higher
intrest rate?

It occured to me that ships with a higher jump number will find it
easier to skip out on their loans because they may be able to outrun the
news more easily.  In addition ships with higher jump numbers will have
less space left for cargo anyway & thus will have a greater risk of not
making money.

What if getting a bank loan was a task and the jump number of the ship
was a negative DM to the task.  Thus it would be harder to get a loan
for a less commercially viable, easier to skip on, ship.  Marginal
success on this task could mean the loan was at a premium intrest rate,
required a higher % down, or both.

The reality of the loan industry is that if the banks don't think you
can pay them back or that if & when you don't pay thay can seize your
collateral (the ship) & sell it to pay off the loan they _will_not_ make
that loan.

> What's a little fraud to murderers?  Great idea.  Run this sting a few 
> times under different names and you have a fleet of pirate ships.

So how much time will this take?  IE how long does it take to qualify
for a starship morgage bank loan in Traveller?  (Obviously this will
vary depending on which bank you use.)

This gets back to the classic question of how much information about
people is readily available.  The more information the bank has about
you the more rapidly they can make their decision.  If the bank had to
do an Imperium wide data search on you to check for previous
convicitions it might cost several Megacredits  (or more) and take
several years to get back information from all the planetary governments
in the Imperium and of course given 11,000 planets there will be
thousands that don't bother to respond to the bank and hundreds that
don't keep records or keep their records a secret.  How can the bank
decide to take the risk?

On the other hand it is easily possible (and probably makes for a more
playable universe) if the banks _do_not_ check that extensively.  After
all if the morgage loan intrest rates include an appropriate risk
premium and/or the loan ammount includes the cost of barratry insurance
the bank won't care too much.  Then they will not need to make as
extensive a background check on loan applicants.

- -- 
   pnewman@alaska.net		Peter Newman 
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I have been nothing but compassionate and understanding. I mean, all
you had to do was to admit you were wrong and I was right and everything
would've been fine." Ivanova to Winters in Bab5: "Divided Loyalties"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:02:34 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

At 01:48 20/10/98 -0400, Walter Smith wrote:

>I'm sure most readers are familiar with prox-fused rounds. If you toss
>an explosive round an some infantry and it smacks into the ground,
>it pretty much only kills the guy it landed on and makes a hole for
>his buddies to hide in. Put a proximity fuse on the round, it gets to
>explode just _before_ it hits the ground - killing lots more people as
>it sprays them liberally with blast and shrapnel from above.
>
>Now enter Shortstop. It emits radio waves that confuse these proximity
>fuses, so they think they're close to the ground and explode.
>
>While they're still 500 meters away.
>
>You can make a shell that ignores Shortstop. It'll cost you about
>US$1000 each, instead of about US$25 to $50 each, so you won't
>have as many to shoot.

Now all they need is something that screws up contact fuzed ones and we'll
be right :)

>Everything I've heard about the armed forces tells me that, of all the
>things to get attacked with, infantry hates artillery the most. The way
>it comes from out of nowhere to kill you, the way you can't do anything
>but hunker down and hope they run out of ammo. I'm imagining these
>grunts, if Shortstop works, fighting for the priviledge of wearing it
>(and thus being in the middle of the protection zone).

Nope. I woudl want to be near to the the box, but not carrying it. 1. It's
bound to be heavy and in addition to all my other gear. 2. The wearer will
instantly become sniper and machine gunner bait.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 23:12:26
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: Piracy: Anatomy of a Strike (was re: Economics of Piracy)
>
>Jump in-system, to a system that hasn't enough patrol craft to
>stop everyone immediately. Emit and transpond like an innocent
>Fat Trader, with an ID code that looks right but will eventually
>(days/weeks later) twig suspicious, if anyone decides to look carefully
>at the records. Point your ship towards some outer system
>destination, or into normal traffic, whatever vectors you nearer other
>ships and farther from patrol ships. Check vectors carefully, ready
>for a strike & grab on a ship you can match with, or ready to rabbit
>when your turn on the board & search queue gets close.
>

Any sort of traffic control is going to make this very difficult.

Allocating 'parking orbits' while waiting for customs clearance or traffic
control allocating courses is going to make things hard for our pirate.

>You've sweated an hour inside a patrol ship's interception envelope.
>He's turned to match with a Free Trader, his projected area where he
>can still catch you slowly drags away. Your Navigator works
>feverishly, ID'ing the abilities of other ships in traffic, carefully
>plotting who you can catch, and who you'll have time to raid
>before you and your prize drift back into the interception range of
>that overworked patrol ship out there.

OK, so we have a number of ships in the system greater than n, but small
enough that you dont have to go halfway across the system with a patrol
ship on your tail.

We also have a tax base small enough to support one active patrol boat
(there might be a couple in the shop).

Are both these conditions credible ? Would a class D or E system (from the
sounds of it, that seems to be about what you are describing) have this
level of traffic ?

>
>There it is...a Fat Trader, kind of new looking, vectoring into the
>ecliptic traffic pattern on a laborious parabola after a minor 
>realspace jump error. The Navigator lays the plot...we can intercept
>her, and might - if we can disable her or get her to surrender - have
>ninety minutes to get clear before the nearest patrol cruiser can
>intercept.
>

Quick note ... 90 minutes is probably long enough to transfer fuel from
your collapsible bladder into the Trader.

It is also a neat bit of sensor work to detect if it's new or not from
sensor readings at the sort of ranges I think you're talking about. About
size, power plant output and current gees is about it, I think. Still,
enough to create a target profile.

>The Pirate Captain gives the order. Precious minutes are wasted by
>the authorities, as  junior patrol crewman on boring sensor watch tries 
>to figure out if his equipment is malfunctioning. Where did that Trader 
>go? There it is...pulling how many G's? Call the Captain, alert! But
>we're hard aside a merchantman, with a third of our crew not
>aboard...the nearest backup is where?!? More time lost...he's
>a patrol captain, not a front-line Imperial Navy warship commander.
>

At this point, the pirate may get a nasty surprise if the Fat Trader is
more heavily armed than expected. This is a definitly substantial, possibly
fatal, risk.

The patrol cruiser may also be able to engage in long-range nuisance fire,
especially with x-ray lasers. But this depends on combat vs sensor ranges.

>The hapless Fat Trader is easy pickings. A string of rescue balls,
>their emergency beacons a plaintive wail in the darkness, streams
>off on one vector as the Corsair takes another. The patrol captain
>makes a hard choice - chase a pirate, or ensure the safety of the
>drifting crew? The Fat Trader drifts silent, her lifeboat missing, her
>lockers and safe stripped...the passengers and crew safe aboard,
>the hazardous rescue balls merely a diversion, this time.

This is no choice, to me at least. The crew are absolutely safe in the
rescue balls. I mean, if you cant survive in one for time for help to
arrive, what use are rescue balls ?

A quick sensor scan may also pick up if the balls are radiating heat ... a
third-line sensor ship may not think of this, however.

>
>From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
>Subject: Re Piracy and Parting Out
>
>Anyway, any corsair design which is going to survive is going to look like
>a fairly typical hull of some other class(es). For example, typical hulls
>would be 400td cyl AF (like the subbie), 400td needle AF (like the PC),
>200td hulls to match the various type "A" traders, etc. Most should be
>built with multiple power plants: one PP to match "Target Profile", and the
>other to beef up for combat mode. (Yes, this requires FF&S, or bending MT
>to allow multiples on-line at once. Which, btw, Hard times seems to allow.)
>

Depending on how common Cargo Riders are, one of those designs could be an
excellent concept. Cargo shuttles for peace, fighters for war.

>Basically, even with cautious assumptions of revenue capability, the key to
>piracy inthe late 3rd imp isn't technology.... it is whether or not the
>Imperial Gov't gets enough outcry in a given area to actually put a stop to
>it. This crucial threshold seems to be the key hangup in the discussions
>(I'll skip names). If the threshold is particularly low, the 3i will be
>spending most of it's naval budgets to patrol; if it's too high, the 3I
>will only know of wars when the invaders start unloading at the downports.

Well, it's not *neccessarily* only the IN that has the resources. Planets
with vaguely reasonable amounts of trade (and thus traffic) certainly have
enough resources to secure their systems against reasonable sized pirate
groups. Banks may also be interested, and insurers and re-insurers would
certainly be interested in reducing claims.

>As for pirates vs starmercs: if the imperium leaves anti-piracy (except
>large scale operations like the kforzueng) work to local and private
>concerns, starmercs will exist in areas where piracy, privateering, etc is
>occuring. If starmercs can be built. most of them make excellent pirates,
>too.

True.

>
>Since tradewar is cannon, there's likely to be work for starmercs in areas
>where  there is a tradewar brewing (nobody wants to be unguarded during a
>hostile action, even if they are not a valid target). 

I'd say that if piracy is at all common, there would be a lot of work for
starmercs.

>If the economic costs
>of piracy are borne by ship-owners (rather than governments or powerful
>insurance corporations), neither the government nor the corporations are
>going to consider  the occasional loss of a cargo or 2 a year per system
>too terribly bad, so long as the taxes get paid. Only when it becomes
>CHEAPER to hunt and capture/kill/erradicate the pirates than to ignore them
>will a government do something about it. Only if insurance companies can
>effectively lobby can they do something about piracy, lest they charter
>their own starmercs, and/or engage in tradewar against their rival's
>clients (ala some of the 1930's gangwars protection rackets gone bad).

Well, given the fact that insurance companies will have substantial amounts
of money, I'd say they are in a decent position to lobby. Better than Free
Traders, anyway.

A corruptible Imperium also cuts both way - I am more than happy with the
idea of Regina Reinsurance slipping a quiet megacredit a month to the
Subsector Admiral to make sure an active anti-piracy profile is maintained.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:30:02 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: GT and TAS errata

> Just looked on the G:T errata page. Its just been updated and included is
that 
> TAS membership is a one off Cr1,000,000 not a yearly cost. And we can all

> now breath a little easier.

Well, a little bit anyway; it still only gives Middle passages instead of
High :) But this is actually a change that I can live with; a player
pointed out to me once that at Cr9000 every two months (assuming you sold
the passages and didn't use them) a character could live pretty well..maybe
TOO well :) 

Allen

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:07:26 -0600
From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
Subject: Re: Capital Ships

>>>>
IMO; this not Pearl was
more illustrative of the vunerability of capital ships to air power.
Both
ships were steaming at flank speed, had plenty of searoom to
manuever, were at
general quarters, and had their AA guns manned; yet they still
couldn't defend
themselves....
>>>>
I agree this seems like the end of battleships as "stand alone"
combat vessels.  However, nothing has yet shown they have no utility. 
Battleships have been used in all major US conflicts since and had
very good effect.  They make a powerful offensive core of a task
force, but have limited defence against air attacks (that's what the
escorts are for).
I would love to see a 1998 designed battleship.  I think the almost
60 years of advances in naval architecture could make a modern
battleship very impressive compared to WWII designs.
- - Joseph

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:14:39 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:58:53 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
>For the space/cost of a missile bay you can get 50 laser turrets with 150
>lasers total. The 10 turrets/1 bay/1000 tons limit will mean that
maxed-out
>ships only get 30 lasers per missile bay, which is a little more
saturatable.
IIRC, A turret can control 2 missles.
***************
3 missiles. one for each launcher in the turret.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:11:53 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:47:37 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>Capitol ships will probably be more likely to really be fighting with
their
>spinal mounts, no?
I was thinking more of small military ships - escorts, frigates,
destroyers.
On the other hand, it looks like I miscalculated hit probabilities, which
seem
(if I'm reading it right) to be quite low...consider a civilian ship:
************
yes you are doing it correctly.


Firing at a 400-ton target (+9 size) at 7 hexes (-43) it hits only on a 3.
At 2 hexes it hits on a 5-. Civilian ships will have to plink away a long
time to hit anything...
**************
yes...the do, we tried it it took about 10 turns for the free traders to
disabe 2 fighters.


In point defence mode, the military ship gets 44 - 39 (0 hex) + 10 (PD) for
a
a little better for the missile (about a quarter of missiles will get
through.)
*********8
unles it was a missile bay.


These are not as high to-hit numbers as I initially thought they were
(unless
I'm doing something wrong) - in fact, they seem too low; GURPS lasers must
not be very accurate :-)
**************
not compared to FFS lasers, no...but it makes for a better game IMO.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:15:45 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Lars Adler <adler@hartree.pc.Uni-Koeln.DE>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

On Sat, 17 Oct 1998, Anson Betts wrote:

> Why not invent some slang terms? Here are my humble suggestions,
> 
> >Highport
> Up   'Jim's up at the moment. Try his cellphone.'
> 
> >Downport
> Port  'Mary is at the port meeting with a trader..'
'Dirtside' was somewhere suggested for this. Don't recall the supplement
now. But that's possibly a differation by area.

L.A.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:08:05 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Lars Adler <adler@hartree.pc.Uni-Koeln.DE>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, Sanders wrote:

> At 11:07 AM 10/16/98 +0100, you wrote:
> >-> Council
> >Rat
> 
> Thus a German speaker in the Imperium call would the Zhodani Council the
> Zhodani Rat? ;-)


This one would be called 'Der Rat der Zhodani' (sounds a little better
and is spoken like 'Raht')
Other Translations to German (by Fantasy Productions):

Das Imperium
Das Zhondani-Konsulat
Das Aslan-Hierat
Die Vargr-Weiten
Die Zweitausend Welten (Zentauren)
Der Solomani-Rand
Der Schwarm (was taken for the Hive)
Die Darrian-Konfoederation
Die Schwertwelten

Sectors:

Spinwaerts-Marken
Trojaner-Weiten
Flimmerdrift-Weiten
Beutesektor
Kernsektor
Leeres Viertel

Try to figure out which is which ... it isn't that diffucult.
I have to look up the others - perhaps the next time.
There was also a Translation of the Library Data supplements.
Examples:

Infodata
All-Gelaende-Fahrzeug
Tschilper
Sprungantrieb


I thought to make a helpfile of the german 'Infodata', if it seems there
is some interest in it ...

L.A.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:46:07 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Lars Adler <adler@hartree.pc.Uni-Koeln.DE>
Subject: Re: Polyglot Traveller Lexicon

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, Volker A. Greimann wrote:

> -> Highport
> No direct translation i can think of
Orbitalstation would be a designation for this. Else we had to invent
one: Himmelshafen, Aussenstelle, Oberdock etc.

> -> Downport
> ditto
Bodenstation it would be called, other names could be: Erdhafen,
Unterdock, Abschussrampe.

But most often such items aren't transleted to german anymore, they're
taken directly like words from various technology areas. 

(Examples: You often hear the words Computer, Harddisk, Monitor, although
in German they're named Rechner, Festplatte, Bildschirm. Much words now
are taken from other languages.)

L.A.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:19:41 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:07:37 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
> >For the space/cost of a missile bay you can get 50 laser turrets with
150
> >lasers total. The 10 turrets/1 bay/1000 tons limit will mean that
maxed-out
> >ships only get 30 lasers per missile bay, which is a little more
saturatable.
>
> IIRC, A turret can control 2 missles.  A Bay can control
> 50 missiles.
HG rules say 1 bay for every 1000 tons displacement, and it takes the place
of
10 hardpoints.  So, if your boat is only 1000 dt, your bay weapon means you
have no hardpoints.  This rule works for me.  A 100 ton bay has 100
missiles
in its barrage, a 50 tonner, 50.
************
well 100DT bay aren't available (yet) buy 50 missile can ruin your whole
day.


 Definitely a serious wakeup call.  <grin>
And under HG rules, you could *still* stuff 3 missile racks into a triple
turret, not just 2.  Prob is, under those rules, you can't have a missile
bay
if you use missile turrets, which makes sense to me.
*************
out of cuitosity, why does this make sense to you?


  Personally, on, say, a
5000 dt frigate, I'd use a pair of 100 ton missile bays as a standoff
weapon,
10 triple laser turrets for point defense, and 20 dual energy weap turrets
for
close-in work.
**********
I would go with more lasers and some sand. (or lots of armor)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:13:30 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: [GT] Equipment and ROF question

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:01:34 -0400
From: "Dan Eveland" <develand@mindspring.com>
Subject: [GT] Equipment and ROF question
Pardon me if these have already been answered.  I was gone for a while and
had to delete 2000+ messages without reading them.
RoF question: Since Gauss rifles have a RoF of 20, then do they go by the
RoF rules for RoF 20 or more in the Compendium II ?
****************
yes, if the entire burst goes to the same target.


Also, do the ships like the merchant ship or scout ship count against the
40-point disadvantage limit?  I don't think it should.
**********
no, ships are an advantage.



 Also, can a group of
characters pool points for the ship and be co-owners.  Seems easy enough.
*****
I would allow it.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:47:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #976

On Mon, 19 Oct 1998, Traveller-digest wrote:

> Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
> 
> Personally I feel the 3I's use the battle riders is obviously the result of
> the Hawks and the accountants ganging up on the rest. BRs are better than
> BBs for offensive work, but suffer in defence becuase of the inability to
> run away (though they do make fine SDBs if you buy more than you have jump
> capacity for - is there anything in canon for this? Everything I've seen
> suggests that BRs are always bought complete with Tender). The accountant
> like 'em because they give lots of firepower for your credit.

The Drak Ne'Vha in GURPS Alien Races I operate an almost exclusive battle
rider force -- basically, they did not develop jump drive until contact
witht he Vargr, but had a large spacefaring non-starship navy at the time
(interplanetary conflicts). So rather than scrap the whole thing, they
simply built battle tenders. The different Drak Ne'Vha clans use battle
riders for planetary defense; when operating as part of the central
government's military (Ash Lokbar) they load 'em onto battle tenders.
Basically, they are a starfaring "big SDB" force -- in fact, they even
build "escort tenders" that are designed to carry 2-4 SDB-sized riders.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:12:13 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Economics of Piracy

Ian Whitchurch wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Step zero ... fill your cargo bay with a collapsible fuel bladder. If you
dont need it, vent it, and use the cargo space for loot as and when
neccessary. It will give you the opportunity to refuel a prize for a
jump-1, if you do in fact hit an advantageous tactical opportunity (such as
a sensor operator who has been stunned by a large amount of cash).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
In my way of thinking, the 30 to 90 minute looting window won't allow
enough time for EVA, hose hookups, pumping and such. If you have
a couple hours (say you're at the edge of a lightly patrolled system and
the local patrol was out of position) then you might be able to pull
this off.

Ian again, on the target ship being disabled by combat or by the crew:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not so sure of this. In this case, the crew may be on the wrong side of
a dilemna - if they allow the ship to be captured, even after a 'fair
fight', then the pirates could say 'Golly good show, chaps' and steal the
ship and leave them in a life boat, or survival capsules, or whatever.

If they cripple their own ship, then murder is an option, in order to
encourage the others.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, murder is always an option...
This may be a case where ruthlessness pays, as long as the fear you
spark in the merchant crews is a bigger benefit than the interest you
spark on the part of the nearest Impie naval commander.

I've just figured that the fuel and time factor would make most (not all,
by any means, but most) taking of the ships themselves problematical,
all the other things the crew can do just make this worse.

Ian again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>support expenses only. As for annual maintenance, reduce the cost
>to the standard .1% per year - the stolen parts and tools help make
>up for the bribes and extra costs, even in a law level zero port, of
>getting annual maintenance done on a less than legal starship.
>

0.1% really isnt that much money. You can run up double that with one good
laser blast. Budget for combat damage.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Annual maintenance never includes battle damage, you pay that as soon
as you can after you get hurt.
Even with battle damage you'll get some benefits (that I have yet to
work out). If you lose a turret, but capture a target with a full-loaded
triple beam laser turret on board, you may actually come out ahead
of the game. Plunder can be a wonderful thing.

Ian again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Passenger valuables: Assume, as a minimum average, cash and other
>easily convertable valuables on hand equal to the price paid for passage.
>These valuables are recouped with no reduction (or the reduction is
>included in the average). High passenger Cr10,000, Low passenger
>Cr1000, Middle passenger Cr8,000.

I'd actually double this - people are going to have cash etc to spend at
the other end. A travelling businessman may have very valuable paperwork as well.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This is one of the fuzzier assumptions in the list. I'll assume (especially
with CT "ice rot" low berth rules) that no one would want to travel
low passage more than once, so these people may be bringing 
all their money with them to start a new life. That businessman
may have an attache case full of multi-MCr bearer bonds. Really
rich people would probably ride on a high-jump liner that won't stop
in places a pirate could lurk, but there would be exceptions.

Ian again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What is a Fat Trader doing outside a very safe, predictable trade route, or
at least without an escort ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, the corsair only has to hit _one_. ;)

This kind of reasoning is why I didn't bother with the numbers for
a subsidized liner or any of the big trade ships from the Traveller
Adventure. They, IMO, won't be lonely often enough for a 400tn
Corsair to plan on hitting one. Could happen, as a surprise to
both parties..."What are _they_ doing here?!?"

A Fat Trader still under sub contract still has a chunk of the year
to trade where it will, and there are "Free Merchants" out there
(Fat Traders released from their subbie contracts). The profit numbers
for the Fat Trader are most strongly affected by the presence of the
launch/lifeboat - any ship that has one will make about as much
money. A Lab Ship (which may spend lots of time in poorly settled
areas) would net quite a bit more.

Ian again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Pirating small craft in the outsystem therefore seems to be an optimal
strategy. Add some raiding of belter colonies, and we have a nice
low-profit low-risk pirate strategy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now that I think about it, snapping up small craft may be the higher
profit strategy. One 20tn launch (with my original assumptions)
will be worth more to a pirate than a 200tn Free Trader.

Ian again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>Ten Free Traders taken in a year will pay all expenses except battle
>damage.

This is one every 5 weeks ... quite a bit when assuming 1 week per jump.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Just counting up numbers. Toss in a small craft or two, other targets
of opportunity, and the number of archetypical PC-owned craft the
pirate needs to take in a year will drop considerably.

Ian again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If this is true, cargo haulers will be able to ask for more to ship goods
to unpatrolled systems, and will thus be able to afford to be more heavily
armed. Freight rates should get a risk premium ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Maybe someone will even think to transport the cargo in a
400tn _Nishemani_ class Corsair... <G>

Ian again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They are pretty decent. You might want to check Appendix A of Andrew's
Elizabethan Privateering to see how high and low the revenue from
privateering could be.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
High revenue: you retire to some border empire, buy your own planet.
The next time the Impies hear about you, their representative is calling
you "Your Excellency".

Low revenue: your ship is dark, you can see the oncoming patrol
cruiser through the hole it knocked in your ship, and the air in
your vac suit is leaking out.

You lays your course and you takes your chances... <G>


Walt Smith

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #979
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 20 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 980



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

The Fourth Imperium Working Group Forms!
Re: Piracy
GURPS traveller space combat
apology 2 too
Re: Starship Morgages (was Re: Pirates)
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: re. GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Sensors and piracy
Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 05:44:13 PDT
From: "jim clem" <travmind@hotmail.com>
Subject: The Fourth Imperium Working Group Forms!

I'd like to announce the formation of a Fourth Imperium Working Group. 
In the same vein as HIWG, BARD, and others, I'm asking if anyone would 
like to join such a group, who's mission is to create a Fourth Imperium 
setting.  I'm considering it to be centered on Terra, about 1000 years 
after VIRUS, with psi policing, guilds, and ruling houses. It is very 
feudal, maybe even more so than the 3I, and has probably not met the 
Regency yet.  Tech is high, 17 or 18.  The K'kree are enemies, while the 
Aslan are common as mercs, with the merc companies being given fiefdoms 
between the 4I and the Hierate.  The Hivers are not trusted, and the 
Vargr are welcomed sort of as long lost cousins, also common as mercs.  

If anyone would like to join, please mail me personally, and I'll begin 
to set up a mailing list.  Also, if Marc reads this, or someone can give 
me his email addy, I'd like to ask if he's interested in sanctioning 
this as an 'official' milieu.

Thanks in advance all, looking forward to putting our collective minds 
(resistance is futile) to work on this.



Jim Clem, B.S.E.
GM, The Scattered Worlds Traveller PbEM, Where Humaniti Carves out a New 
Home
http://www.geocities.com/area51/dimension/7081/trvpg1.html
Founder and CEO, Diasporan Systems, Inc.

"Who am I? I am Susan Ivanova, Commander. Daughter of Andre
 and Sophie Ivanov. I am the Right Hand of Vengence and
the boot that is going to kick your sorry ass all the way
back to Earth, sweetheart. I am Death Incarnate, and the 
last living thing that you are ever going to see. God sent
me." from "Between Darkness & Light" -Babylon 5 

Now THATS my kind of woman!!!!


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:34:09 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Charles Prevatte writes:
 
>>How long will the approach take him? Every minute he spends catching one
>>victim costs money.
>
>With a high Delta V and cold gas manuvering thruster it would not be a
>problem.

A high Delta V will seriously hamper your ability to slow down once you
get near the area where you want to lurk. In space you do not stop just
because you stop accelerating. A high Delta V means you spent a long time
building up your speed and have to spend a lot of time decellerating.
Cold gas maneuvering thrusters? What is the cost, in both money and tonnage
of a cold gas thruster system?

>As for matching velocities, you can finish that after you disable him.

You miss my point. Matching velocities will take time and all the while
the merchant is bulleting towards safety and one or more patrol vessels
are speeding towards you. Also you are getting deeper and deeper into a
gravity well. Once you do chase down the merchant and plunder him, you
will have to make an 'outside 10-diameter' jump. 
 
>>Known arrival points are either a random spot at the 100 diameter limit or
>>a specific spot on the 100 diameter limit. [...] ...in the secnod case it
>>would beordinary prudence for a system patrol to be stationed at the spot.

> 
>Not necessarily.  Planets move as do solar systems.

So do patrol vessels.

>The best spot to enter depends on many things including Delta V and landing
>point.

Landing point? Surely the actual landing spot on the planet would not mean
more than a few minutes' difference in arrival time. Especially since the
ship will arrive with a plus or minus of up to a day.

>IF the pirate knew these thanks to spies or surveilance he could be johnie
>on the spot.

Since this is determined when the astrogator makes his astrogation plot, the
pirate would have no way of getting advanced notice of it. Try to allow the
victims a few brain cells to knock together, Charles.
 
>>>and he could grab a target of opportunity.
>>
>>Again, you're not doing the math. What are the odds of getting an opportunity
>>in the first place?
> 
>See above.

Dosen't tell me a thing because you are ignoring several factors.
 
>>>The random incouter charts make them seem fairly common as far as pirates
>>>can be common.
>>
>>If pirates was so common as the encounter tables suggested, then they would
>>cost the _private_ sector enough money that it would be worth their while to
>>fund their own patrol ships (which, incidentally, they do, canonically).
> 
>I would they spend those credits if it were not needed?  And what would be
>the need for armed merchants which are also canon if there were no pirates?

Chicken and egg argument. If pirates were so common as the encounter tables
make them, then arming a merchant ship makes sense. But if merchant ships
are aremed, pirates have yet another problem. So there can't be any pirates,
especially if there are armed merchant ships. So there is no need for armed
merchant ships.

But to answer your question: Maybe the ships are armed for the same reason
companies buy insurance?

>>>1)  The number of military ships are low compared to the area they must
>>>patrol.
>>
>>Necessitates changing another part of canon, making that part very much less
>>plausible.
>
>Not really,  From all I have read the number of ship (1000 per sector) is
>not all that high.  Once you figure formations you end up with 200 small
>squadrons of even less larger squadrons for 400+ worlds.

First of all, the 1000 ships per sector is for the regular fleet only. It
dosen't include subsector fleets (which recieves the same amount of funds
as the regular fleet, though they spend them differently) and it dosen't
include planetary navies. Most especially it does not not include auxiliaries.
Yet most auxiliaries would be quite capable of giving a pirate a hard time.
 
>>>Reasonable idea if the tax base could not support that large an IN.
>>
>>But the rax base can easily support that much and much, much more.
> 
>But that depends on your assumtions.  If you ASSUME that the 1% is for ALL
>impirial spending you end up with a different story.

Yes, but I don't assume that, for two reasons: There is canonical evidence
against it and real world examples show that those figures are reasonable.

>Or if you ASSUME that 1% has to include all ground forces, airforces,
>logistics, and auxilleries then you end up with a different set of
>numbers.

No I don't. I have accounted for planetary armies, because I have assigned
70% of the canonical 3% to planetary forces (No, I tell a small lie: I have
simplified matters by letting the Imperial cut be 1/3rd instead of 30%). I
have accounted for the subsector forces by allowing them half the Imperial
cut. I have allowed for logistics by paying 10% of the cost of the ships
pa. in maintenance. I have guestimated the number of auxiliaries in a
typical fleet (If you want to increase that number, go ahead. But keep in
mind that most auxiliaries are quite capable of handling a pirate). I
account for the Marines by assuming they are part of the ship complement. I
have... you know, I _have_ forgotten to account for the Imperial Army. I did
originally, but they must have gotten dropped accidentally at some point.
Not to worry. I have 66% of the Imperial armed forces budget unaccounted for
still, so I will assign the Army something out of that. How much do you think
would be reasonable? It's my impression that the Imperial Army is a
relatively small outfit (I said relatively! ;-). What about the 8%
canonically use on the Army by vacuum worlds? And I haven't accounted for the
Scouts either. What would be reasonable for them?

>These are all assumtions not canon.

Most of it is canon.

>The only canon we have is cross version. Is there enough canon in any one
>version of the TU to figure the budget for that version?

Yes. CT. Though I don't quite agree with your point, which seems to be that
the four Traveller versions constitute four distinct canons. My approach is
to accept anything official as canon provided it 1) makes sense and 2) does
not contradict any other canon. 

>I have CT and T4.  In T4 you lose military money if you spend it elsewhere.

You're referring to PE, aren't you? I must confess that I simply hhaven't
had the energy to try to integrate PE economics with earlier versions. 

>Maybe they are spending the money in 'infrastructure'.

They are. Annual maintenance is 0.1% of ship's cost (1% of annual budget).
Salaries run to about 0.25% (2.5% of annual budget). 2.5% goes to building
replacements (that's an assumption on my part based on a 40 year life
cyclus for the ships. Since there is canonical evidence of ships lasting
for over a century that may be quite a bit too high). I presume the remaining
71.5% of the budget goes to "infrastructure".

>OR mabe the writter goofed and left out some obvious point like the military
>ships were 'down' for repairs or R&R 50% of the time like the US military is
>with it's planes.

Not according to any campaign rules I have seen.

>Or maybe the writers did not fully understand the implications of their
>material.

That's the meta-explanation, of course. But that's not much help in-game.

>>>2)  Pirates can hide from sensor in system and jump out after they attack
>>>with a reasonable chance for escape.
>>
>>Works for me (I'm the proponent of the "interdimensional heat sink in space"
>>to allow much greater stealth. Unfortunately it dosen't work for those who
>>know more physics than I do, ane they are the ones who wrote the sensor
>>rules.
> 
>I like the laser cooling system from the 'sun diver' novel myself.

Other's don't. Right Leonard?

>Looks like I know what I'll be reading ing the 'reading room' for a
>while....There has to be simple answer hear somewhere that we are just
>overlooking.

I hope there is, but there don't _have_ to be. Sometimes a background just
contains a contradiction. I have canonical statements that the _Maghiz_
took place in -927, -925, AND -924. There is no simple answer to explain
that. Two of them are just plain wrong. But go ahead. I wish you luck.

>...The 'down for repairs' could deal with the military. After all 1/12th
>have to be at a military base one month our of the year for their overhaul
>plus the travel time from their patrol routes to and from the base...

That was addressed last time around (or was it the round before that?). 
Annual maintenance takes two weeks, not four. And most systems have a
Class A or B starport on a high-population world within one or two jumps.



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:59:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: GURPS traveller space combat

On Tue, 20 Oct 1998, : bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
> Subject: GURPS traveller space combat


> control - two (one per gunner), fifty (one per communicator), or
> one hundred (one per communicator per gunner, which the text could
> be taken to imply?) I suppose the answer is 50, but that seems weird.
> (And implies that a standard missile rack should add an extra laser
> comm or two.)

Fifty.
 
> >and scientific calcuations?)
> Sarcasm ill-becomes you, Mr. Pulver :-) 
> And you haven't even seen a KKM, planet-buster, or a serious Virus
> debate yet...How much Virus *can* dance on the head of a pin? Most
> TML posters have the hearts of tenured university faculty.

I have ... I just haven't responded. I lurked reading the traveller digest
posts on the web sporadically for about two years, and regularly since
last year when GT was announced.

Sarcasm aside, I find the TML is actually one of the better RPG-related
lists I've seen, with a general high quality of writing and debate.

One thing I've noticed is that no one has really commented on the GT
transponders... which are obviously not the ones from TNE (:

- -David

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:52:00 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: apology 2 too

I'm afraid I must apologise once more.

Peter Newman's name has been missed from the credits of _101 Religions_
after some excellent contributions.

As both of the errors seem to have emanated from my direction I can only
assume I goofed somewhere have have eaten the shredded remains of a draft
copy as penance.

Hopefully this will be the last you hear from me on the subject, however,
once again to say that future printings should include in his name.

Thanks for listening

tc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:57:49 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <David.Smart@ons.octel.com>
Subject: Re: Starship Morgages (was Re: Pirates)

Peter Newman wrote:
>
<snip>
>This gets back to the classic question of how much information about
>people is readily available.  The more information the bank has about
>you the more rapidly they can make their decision.  If the bank had to
>do an Imperium wide data search on you to check for previous
>convicitions it might cost several Megacredits  (or more) and take
>several years to get back information from all the planetary governments
>in the Imperium and of course given 11,000 planets there will be
>thousands that don't bother to respond to the bank and hundreds that
>don't keep records or keep their records a secret.  How can the bank
>decide to take the risk?
>
>On the other hand it is easily possible (and probably makes for a more
>playable universe) if the banks _do_not_ check that extensively.  After
>all if the morgage loan intrest rates include an appropriate risk
>premium and/or the loan ammount includes the cost of barratry insurance
>the bank won't care too much.  Then they will not need to make as
>extensive a background check on loan applicants.

So the banks file a claim, leaving the insurance companies to chase down
the lost ship/crew in manner of bail companies which use bailbondsmen.
Of course, the insurance companies have a different names for their
employees...bounty hunters.

Oooooh, I *like* this! Imagine PCs being hunted by a group of bounty
hunters funded by an insurance corp. which has assets derived from an
entire sector. Of course, smaller companies could also look to hire a
freelance team (as in PCs). Oh, yeah!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:11:03 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

>>You can make a shell that ignores Shortstop. It'll cost you about
>>US$1000 each, instead of about US$25 to $50 each, so you won't
>>have as many to shoot.
>
>Now all they need is something that screws up contact fuzed ones and we'll
>be right :)

What about a shell that targets Shortstop?  Shoot that off first, and then
no more worries.

Also, if you are churning out millions of Shortstop-proof shells I suspect
that the cost will drop. 

Hm. Maybe an ECM/ECCM task roll, as a contested task, and using tech level
difference as an advantage?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:26:13 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

Charles Prevatte writes:

>>_Rebellion_ p. 27 states that each sector of the Imperium theoretically has
>>a group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships. This number includes combat
>>vessels such as cruisers, carriers, battleships, and _some_ escorts
>>(emphasis mine). It does not include auxiliaries, support ships, and scouts.
> 
>Now this is posible.  A 1000 ship sector Navy INCLUDING escorts is
>reasonable. What I said was 1000 capital ships alone was not reasonable.

Charles, you read the text the way the Devil reads the Bible. The text say
"combat vessels SUCH AS cruisers, carriers, battleships, and some escorts".
For those escorts to be metioned in the same breath as cruisers, carriers,
and battleships it seems reasonable to assume that they would be in the
same general weight class as cruisers, carriers, and battleships. So I
conjectured that some cruiser-sized escorts existed and that it was those
that was meant. Ast it turns out, _Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium_
(which I don't have) makes it clear that such ships do exist, so no
conjecture is needed. those escorts are capital ships without a spinal
mount. The sloan Class is that kind of escort the same way the KINUNIR is
a cruiser. 

>It does not fit the numbers in the histories of the frontier and false wars.

Well, most of the histories deal with the movement of fleets, so I don't
see why it makes a difference whether it is 8 battleship fleets or 64
battleship fleets. It's true that the number of squadrons in FFW is far
too low, but FFW was a boardgame. My take on that is that the forces were
reduced proportionally to make for a playable game. But trot out your
evidence. Maybe I missed something somewhere.

>if escort are in the same proportions as wet navy then their will be 200
>capital ships and 800 escorts or 250/700 if their are a lot of cruisers.

The one example I have (I guess I will have to get hold of FSSI after all)
has none of the escorts from the 1000 ship figure. It does have one
auxiliary type escort per capital ship. Which is what I gave my hypothetical
average fleet.

>I think they would have to be.  More than likely the 'missing ship' are
>auxilleries and 'coast guard' ships belonging to well to do planets.

Those count against a different budget.

>>The simplest solution is propably to ignore the ',and some escorts' part and
>>just consider the presence of a spinal mount the criteria for being part of
>>the 1000 ship figure.
>
>Then the number of ships is out of line with CT history.  Look at the
>production nubers for the two cruisers that have their own books.

The KINUNIR is not a real cruiser. The AZHANTI had a "print run" of, what,
120? (My books are at home). Perhaps it was an atypical number. One example
just proves that it is within the parameters but it dosen't say where.

>Those numbers and their service dates does not make sense for a 1000 capital
>ship navy per sector but does make sense for a 250-300 crusier heavy capitol
>ship navy.

Would you explain your reasoning here, please?

>>In the following for ease of reference I'm going to use the word 'armada'
>>about the sector fleets and reserve the word 'fleet' for the sub-sector-sized
>>fleets that the armadas are composed of. Also 'combat vessels' for the ships
>>included in the 1000 ship figure and 'auxiliaries' for all the ships that
>>isn't.
>>
>>If the 1000 ships are for a sector with a full sixteen sub-sectors, then the
>>average fleet has 1000/16 = 62.5 ships. Since there are 320 regular fleets in
>>the Imperium, the total of combat ships for the Imperium would be around
>>20,000.
>
>Where is 'fleet' defines as the ships of one sector?  I have not seen this.

_Rebellion_ explains that the Imperium operates with two kinds of fleets.
Numbered fleets are (roughly) one regular and one subsector fleet to a
subsector (with a few extra for special cases; the Imperium have about 300
subsectors and 320 regular fleets). The other kind is the named fleet. A
named fleet is either a command structure for all the numbered fleets in
a sector of a separate force. The evidence is conflicting, but I have
chosen the first interpretation. In any case, there is a named fleet for
each sector and provision for creating special named fleets for special
occasions.

>I have seen 'sector fleet' and 'subsector fleet' both used.

'Sector fleet' would be the same as a named fleet. 'Subsector fleet' is
ambiguous. It could be the regular fleet stationed in a subsector, but
it is more likely to be the local fleet (also known as the reserve fleet,
but that can be confused with the ships laid up in ordinary (if any).
I prefer 'regular' and 'colonial' fleet. That is unambiguous.

>>Further down it is stated that a regular fleet has between 2 and 10 squadrons
>>amounting to a total of between 50 and 200 ships. This would appear to
>>average out to 125 ships per fleet with an average of 6 squadrons per fleet
>>and 21 ships per squadron.
>
>Where is squadron size defined?  I missed this too.  The fleets I have seen
>discribed were not this large?

Further down on the same page IIRC.
 
>>However, FS states that CruRons are generally of 4 to 8 ships and the
>>examples in it implies that 8 ship BatRons are the norm.
> 
>2 battle ships and 6 escorts or 1 battle ship 2 cruisers and 5 escorts.
>Sounds very reasonable.  If you mean 8 battle ships in one formation this
>is not reasonable.

That's what the examples imply. 8 battle ships.

>It would leave the formation to vunerable to fast attack ships.

The example don't mention escorts. That dosen't mean they are not there.

>>Obviously this must be one of the cheapest squadrons in the navy.

>This is not a good squadron to use as it is a battle rider squad.  In CT
>battle ridder are uncommon compared to jump warships.  For a jump capable
>group to carry equaul firepower it would raise the cost quite a bit.

That was my point.

>Auxiliary ships gernerally equal or outnumber the combat ships at least
>historicaly.  The CT battle histories I've read generally delt with the
>combat ellements and 'fast raids' of cruiser spuads but simiple logistic
>would require massive transport capacity to attack a planet or reload the
>missle bays of a cruron of batron.

If you want to suggest some numbers and sizes for auxiliaries, then you
are more than welcome.
 
>>but what about the couriers, destroyers, smaller escorts, transports and
>>tankers that appear in FS and elsewhere? For example, I happen to believe
>>that a navy would have a massive number of couriers, say 20 per fleet, but
>>even
> 
>I read in the scouts book the the scout couriers are sumsumed in times of
>war into the navy.

That's right. But that dosen't mean the Navy can't have some scout ships of
it's own. Propably larger than Type Ss.

>I think that this is where they come from and the Navy just borrows what it
>needs.

It dosen't make much difference either way. You need a LOT of 100 T ships to
make a dent in the Imperial naval budget.

>Don't forget the costs of bases in there.

That is supposed to be paid for out of the 10% maintenance cost.

>A subsector naval base would cost at least as much as the ships it was
>designed to service at one time.

Well, if you could prove that you would have a basis for challenging the 10%
figure.

>If it could handle 2 battle ships the dock would cost the same or more than
>two battle ships or there abouts. The support structures would cost as much
>or more than the navy.  At least than is how is today.

The equipment AND the personnel to service a ship will cost roughly what it
costs to maintain 25 ships of that size. Which is what the 0.1% maintenance
fee goes to.

>>The other possibility is that a large number of ships are laid up in
>>ordinary. That would require that part of the annual budget was used to
> 
>The USA has more ship in mothballs than operating including several carriers
>and battle ships.

Unfortunately a huge reserve fleet gives other problems for the background.
Right, Gary?
 
>I think using Striker may be a mistake.  It was writen mainly for planetary
>combat. I'm not sure that it's numbers would apply to the navy.

It specifically states that: Military spending ranges from 1% (after a long
time of peace) to 15% (during a war) with 3% being the average for the
Imperium. It further states that the Imperium gets 30% of that and that
the Imperium uses half of that for its regular forces and half for its
colonial forces. It does not say how big a percentage the Imperium uses
for the Imperial Army, but it does say that individual planets use between
6% to 40% of their budgets on their suborbital forces. The low figure is for
planets without a breathable atmosphere. 

>Does anyone know the current spending of the USA in the military compared
>the the GNP?  1% sound kind of high considering it is the GROSS national
>product.

David Pulver posted some figures just the other day. IIRC it was 1.4% for
Canada and 4% for the US.
 
>>I'd like to finish off by re-emphasizing that all those ships, the 20,000 
>>combat vessels, the 20,000 big escorts and the unspecified number of lesser
>>ships only represent 15% of the Cr150. Another 15% goes to the subsector
>>fleets and the remaining 70% goes to planetary defenses, though admittedly
>>6-40% of that (4.2-28% of the total) would go to armies.
> 
>Where are these numbers coming from?  I have not seen them and would love to
>have this resource to analize.

_Striker_. See above.
 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:27:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: re. GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

David L. Pulver writes:
> Note that skill 13 is rather low. Remember that in GURPS, weapon skills
> are scaled differently than non-weapon skills. Thus, while 13 is between
> "rather skilled" and "well trained" for normal skills, for weapon
> skills (see the bottom of p. B45) skill 12 is "novice", skill 15 is
> "veteran" and an actual expert is skill 18. See Meaning of Skills, p. B45.

Odd...that disagrees somewhat with the mass combat system, where skill 12 is
average troop level, 13 is experienced, 14 is veteran, 15 is elite.  Of course,
you really should add 1 to all those levels for gunner skills, for IQ bonuses
(assuming 10-11 is typical).

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:
> 
> >Well, there's a limit to how many PD attacks you can do with a particular
> >weapon system.  It appears to be fairly practical to saturate point
> >defense, particularly with missile bays.
> 
> For the space/cost of a missile bay you can get 50 laser turrets with 150 
> lasers total. The 10 turrets/1 bay/1000 tons limit will mean that maxed-out
> ships only get 30 lasers per missile bay, which is a little more
> saturatable. 

Well, I suspect that the penalty for multiple point defense attacks is per
gunner, not per weapon system, which means you're really dealing with 10
turrets on point defense, not 30 individual lasers.

> The high-end military will probably be done with GVE2 I suppose (which I 
> guess I'll have to buy) - dedicated point-defence lasers with high ROF and
> short range vs fully-independent or terminal-homing missiles.

Heh.  Dedicated military vehicles built with GVE2 can probably kill 5-10x their
weight in vehicles designed with the GT system, though they'll cost 2-3x as
much at the same size.  I was playing around with a 10T TL 12 fighter design..
11 Gs, DR 2000 (4000 from one facing), 12,000 hp, 11 Gs, 1 laser/1 missile,
radical stealth/ems, electronics significantly exceeding the standard cockpit
bridge, etc.... slightly over 20 MCr.  Somehow, I think that can kill Ramparts
at 2:1 odds ;)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:47:07 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Sensors and piracy

Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> wrote:


>A lasers beam spreads over great distances.  I typical comercial 1 watt unit
>today would cast a circle about 1.5 feet in diameter on the moon.  Far
>enough out and your much better ships laser would not have any effect <snip>

Traveller laser weapons (post FFS1) have a handwave called grav focusing
which improves their range etc.

Dom


- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:03:02 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

In a message dated 10/19/98 6:50:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
rboleyn@clear.net.nz writes:

<< What happens if rather than using HG one uses a vector movement system and
 a board? While the BRs will still get the Tigeress it wouldn't be so neat
 if the Tigeress in the meantime blew away the tender (and some of the BRs,
 of course).
 
 BTW has anyone ever tried a battle between a BR equipped BatRon and a BB
 BatRon, complete with all escorts, etc? It'd be interesting to see the
 results, especially from a vector based system like Battle Rider (with
 fixes, of course). You see, it occured to me that the BR 'Ron would have to
 tie up escorts looking after the tender, while the BB 'Ron could use them
 more aggressively. >>

This depends on an assumption that I have always made; ie. the squadron jumps
in and the tender dumps off her riders and HIDES till the shooting is over.
Outer system space is a large area to hide in. Thus I wouldn't have the tender
in the scenario (I use Mayday/HG so I have vector movement). I found (in a
scenario with 16x25000ton BR's versis a Tigress that the Tigress gets pounded.
16 type T Meson guns just gets too many criticals. The vector movement helps
the 'riders even more, as they tend to have agility 6 (mine do), and can zip
around the map like fat frying on a hot plate. If the tender is in the
scenario (to represent the unlikely event of the squadron jumping insystem
next to the defending BatRon, then the tender just runs like hell. A million
ton tender can absorb a LOT of criticals, and this means that the SDBs are not
being shot at. This arguement does not mean that Battleships are inferior to
rider-tender combos. They have different roles. The tender-ron is more cost
effiecient, but as has been said a zillion times before; the tender-ron is a
concentrated force multiplier (my tender-ron - 16x25000riders and a jump4
million ton tender), and thus can't be mission tailored; ie. it's the whole
squadron or nothing. A squadron of Battleships can be broken up. Lastly, as
has also been pointed out already, is the vunerability of riders to being
marooned or overwhelmed when their tender is destroyed. A remedy to this is to
install as many defenses as possible on the tender. The downside is that this
makes the tender large and expensive (I didn't make my tender so big for the
heck of it). Thus the utility of Battleships contrasts nicely with the cost
effectiveness of 'riders. This probably explains the Imperium's decision to
procure both.... I just find it's more fun to design and fight 'riders...:-)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:44:26 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

Walter Smith wrote:

>My brother at Fort Bragg tells me of a piece of gear the US Army is
>doing some test deployments of now, it's called Shortstop.
>
>Shortstop is a backpack-sized box of electrical stuff, about the size
>of a WW2 field radio. It puts out radio waves of a kind that might
>have it's designer mobbed by Army grunts intending to buy him
>drinks, offer him their women, etc.
>
>What does it do? It makes proximity-fused munitions - artillery shells,
>mortar shells, some kinds of air-dropped munitions, etc. - explode a 
>little differently.

A neat idea - I guess it's working on things that have a radar-type
fuse, since it would be hard to interfere with a time-based or
barometric fuse remotely.

>I'm sure most readers are familiar with prox-fused rounds. If you toss
>an explosive round an some infantry and it smacks into the ground,
>it pretty much only kills the guy it landed on and makes a hole for
>his buddies to hide in. Put a proximity fuse on the round, it gets to
>explode just _before_ it hits the ground - killing lots more people as
>it sprays them liberally with blast and shrapnel from above.

Yes and no. Sure, airburst is probably your fuse of choice against
troops in the open. Fire a time-on-target strike, and relocate your
artillery. But against prepared infantry, you want a delayed action fuse
- - to allow the shell to get right down in the bunker/trench with them,
rather than just spreading shrapnel onto their overhead cover.

>Everything I've heard about the armed forces tells me that, of all the
>things to get attacked with, infantry hates artillery the most. The way
>it comes from out of nowhere to kill you, the way you can't do anything
>but hunker down and hope they run out of ammo. I'm imagining these
>grunts, if Shortstop works, fighting for the priviledge of wearing it
>(and thus being in the middle of the protection zone).

Find out who is directing the fall of said artillery, and remind them
why it's considered impolite.

ObTraveller: Using a TL16 version of this to explode enemy missiles a
long way from your own ship - preferably, in the enemy's missile bay.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #980
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 20 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 981



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
UWP Cultural Extension
Re: Rape and Pillaging (was: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!)
Re: Where's Lucan?
Re: Coeur-de-Lion (Was: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!)
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
Re: Sensors and piracy
re: Sensors and waste heat

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:30:42 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Sam Thomas wrote:

>But do not forget the US Army's version of the Polish Nuclear Hand
>Grenade...The "Davy Crocket" a nuclear tipped bazooka, with only one small
>minor issue. The firer was in the primary blast radius, he could not get out of
>it either, ie the rocket/motor did not have the fuel/power to deliver the
>warhead out far enough.<G>

Yep, the Davy Crocket - a nuclear mortar, IIRC - was a bad piece of
work. Most commadanders were reportedly too scared to fire it with a HE
shell, the thing was so inaccurate.

The US Navy version of this was the ASTOR (nicknamed the ASTOR-
Disaster). ASTOR (Anti-Submarine TORpedo) was a 533mm torp with a
nuclear warhead - and a p(K) of 2.0. It would get the target, and the
firing vessel.

ObTraveller: Any similar bonehead designs in the far future? How about
an early FGMP.

Aside: No hand grenades can be thrown further than their danger radius.
They are designed to be used where terrain or buildings block the
shrapnel in the direction of the thrower. Failing that, lying down helps
a bit.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:24:34 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

SD Mooney wrote:

>The really scary thing was being told a story about some of the UK's
>warhead designer's lunchtime hobby - designing the highest yield bomb to
>fit in a briefcase. Seriously messed up IMO...

..or just a case of taking your work to lunch. It is, after all, what
the AWE crowd are payed for.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:13:03 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

In a message dated 10/19/98 11:00:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU writes:

<< My brother at Fort Bragg tells me of a piece of gear the US Army is
 doing some test deployments of now, it's called Shortstop.
 
 Shortstop is a backpack-sized box of electrical stuff, about the size
 of a WW2 field radio. It puts out radio waves of a kind that might
 have it's designer mobbed by Army grunts intending to buy him
 drinks, offer him their women, etc.
 
 What does it do? It makes proximity-fused munitions - artillery shells,
 mortar shells, some kinds of air-dropped munitions, etc. - explode a 
 little differently.
 
 I'm sure most readers are familiar with prox-fused rounds. If you toss
 an explosive round an some infantry and it smacks into the ground,
 it pretty much only kills the guy it landed on and makes a hole for
 his buddies to hide in. Put a proximity fuse on the round, it gets to
 explode just _before_ it hits the ground - killing lots more people as
 it sprays them liberally with blast and shrapnel from above.
 
 Now enter Shortstop. It emits radio waves that confuse these proximity
 fuses, so they think they're close to the ground and explode.
 
 While they're still 500 meters away.
 
 You can make a shell that ignores Shortstop. It'll cost you about
 US$1000 each, instead of about US$25 to $50 each, so you won't
 have as many to shoot.
 
 Everything I've heard about the armed forces tells me that, of all the
 things to get attacked with, infantry hates artillery the most. The way
 it comes from out of nowhere to kill you, the way you can't do anything
 but hunker down and hope they run out of ammo. I'm imagining these
 grunts, if Shortstop works, fighting for the priviledge of wearing it
 (and thus being in the middle of the protection zone).
 
 Walt Smith
  >>

No offense, but I wish this stuff woundn't be posted on line. Why let the bad
guys know what we're working on....

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:12:57 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: UWP Cultural Extension

We have an economic extension for the UWP in Pocket Empires.
Should we do a cultural extension (about the same number of digits, etc). What
would that cover?

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:23:07 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Rape and Pillaging (was: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!)

> >"Rape and pillage" was synonymous w/ warfare well until (and even during)
> >the
> >20th century.
> 
> Still is.

Yeah... apparently it is (especially when you see Bosnia, Kosovo, etc).  I
definately see a difference in teh discipline of US forces (excepting certain
unfortunate incidents in Vietnam).  

Gary

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:23:06 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan?

> >Did Dulinor raise a loyal daughter?
> 
> Doesn't matter. No matter what, would you trust the daughter of a trator
with
> that much power, or assuming Isis ratted on Dulinor would you trust someone
> with so little honour?

Sure it does... Strephon has apparently decided to make Isis Archduchess of
Ilelish.  Unless she's been "reprogammed" as well...  Still people that
powerful.  I'd think it'd be difficult for even the Emperor to get at her w/o
a fight (even if just a counter/intelligence type one)...

<snip>
> My apologies. No offence was intended. It was intended merely as a humerous
> expression of my opinion and dislike of the Virus et al. I apologies
unreservedly
> for any offense

*MY* apologies.  There's venom apparent there, which wasn't my intention.
Sarcasm yes.  Venom, no.  Mea culpa.

> >> Make no mistakes Strephon may have been honourable, but he was an
> >> honourable fool.
> 
> >The situation blew up out of his control.  The only real fault (aside from not
> >spotting Dulinor's rather extreme disatisfaction) was not immediately trying
> >to regain the reigns at Capital, but going to Usdiki and letting Lucan
> >consolidate his position.
> 
> I have no doubt that Strephon's presence was required elsewhere. What I see
> as Strephons failures are:
> 
> 1 - He failed to prepare Lucan (3rd in line) for the throne. This was an
> unforgivable error. Lucan was most definitely not too far from the throne to be
> ignored. If Strephon and Iphegina had died (unlikely, but a definite possiblity) he
> becomes 1st in line; or if Varian dies he becomes 2nd in line. There are no
> excuses for this failure of judgement.

I'd expect Iphegenia is in somewhat of a ivory tower.  Very isolated and
protected (and cloned).  ; )  She's 28 in 1116 and apparently childless and
unmarried... Social mores of the imperial family?

Why is Iphegenia the only child of Strephon and Iolanthe anyways?  Unless
they're quite... careful in trying to avoid dynastic struggles maybe.
Strephon has been married to Iolanthe since 1079...  in over 30 years of
marriage they only have one issue (surviving in 1116 anyways)?  There has to
be something up there. 

It is interesting that Strephon has Iolanthe's ova stored away... ala the
creation of Avery in the OTU timeline.  Does Strephon have any little swimmers
stored away in case of his own demise?

> 2 - When he absented himself from Capital he failed to make adequate
> preperations for a crisis. As far as we know he did not inform anybody of
his

I see it as more of an immediate "oh shit, gotta go" type event that causes
Strephon to leave for the Longbow observations.  There were some serious
issues that demanded the Emperor's personal attention.  The clone was only
supposed to be for ceremonial purposes... smile and wave and make people
*think* the Emperor is there.  It was an issue of "Imperial Security."  I
would imagine there's a chain of command that Strephon would let know...
probably not Tranian (for fear of a possible power grab or something), but who
would anticipate the Emperor's ceremonial dummy being shot up by a visiting
Archduke who's supposed to be a friend of the Emperor?  What kind of crisis
can reach Capital in less than 7 weeks that the dummy can't "fake the funk on"
till the Emperor gets back?  Aside from him getting wacked by a certain
disastified Archduke of Ilelish?    ; ) 

> absence. Assuming he informed Iolanthe and Iphegina, that was not sufficent.
> Both of them were regulary in the same place. At the very least several well
> trusted members of the moot should have been in the know (including
> Archduke Tranian). They obviously weren't because Tranian supported Lucan's
> claim to the throne. His failure was not leaving Capital, but in not telling people
> he was going.

The last person i would tell I was leaving my ceremonial dummy in charge would
be an Archduke.  All high nobility (at least down to the sector level) do the
cloning thing, so all know of their existence.  An Archduke is entirely too
powerful...  so would anyone in direct line for the throne (except maybe the
Grand Princess).   Politics in the Court, SolSec and maybe Zho spies...  There
was an urgency probably of "i'll be back before anyone knows I'm gone..."

> 3 - When the crisis blew up he failed to act swiftly and decisivly to restore
> order. Strephon was just 6 jumps from Capital. He had the authorisation codes
> to confirm his identity (if not refer to point 2). He should have transmitted them
> immediately to all fleet commanders, doing so would not have compromised
> Longbow but it would have prevented the disintergration of the Imperium. He
> must have known what Lucan's personality was like. The crisis came and he
> hesitated. If he acted decisively and quickly he could have stopped the war. It
> would have in all likelyhood cost him and his family the throne, but it would
> have saved the Imperium.

Supposedly he's in shock and being sedated by his doctor (Survival Margin pg
9) and the crew decides for the safety of the vacation palace at Usdiki.
Strephon goes along (despite the doc's impression of Strephon's "instinct")...
but from the description i see him in a depression/shock state. "We are going
to Usdiki.  Usdiki is a good place."

Otherwise this is the main flaw I see... it lets Lucan consolidate his
position.

> I see Strephon as a rather mediocre ruler. Honourable and noble, yes. Capable
> under normal cirumstances, yes. But he failed to see or prevent the potential
> (however remote) for a tragic disaster in his actions. And when the crisis came
> he hesitated and "kicked for touch" by running to Usdiki. Even then he failed to
> act (he must have had the codes to prove he was Strephon, even in 1117
> transmitting them could have stopped the rebellion).

I rather see the situation as unworkable to begin w/.  Something *must* have
been seriously wrong w/ the Imperium for it to become unglued the way it did.
It was only looking for an excuse to fly apart.  That excuse was the lack of
the One Clear Choice.

The premise of G:T is that the instability and undercurrents are still
there... it's just Strephon doesn't get wacked.  Note that Project Jumpstart
was started in 1103 due to information received from Longbow.  The disaster
was seen as coming...  it was just a different and earlier disaster due to the
assassination.

> What I think has happened is that Strephon has suddenly realised just how
> close to disaster thinggs came. He has realised just what could have
> happened, and has acted to rectify the situation. I'd expect that better
> preperations have been made for any future absences.Varian and Lucan have
> been seperated and moved away from the throne; and I would not be surprised
> if they get a crash course in discipline and responsibility very soon ("Prince
> Lucan, congratulations your application to the Imperial Marine acadamy has
> been accepted"). And more importantly Dulinor's very real complaints might get
> addressed.

Maybe.  I might be unusually pessimistic, but I see very little possiblity of
the awesomely dynamic and complex threads presented in TNE to be present in
G:T. 

Gary

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:23:02 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Coeur-de-Lion (Was: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!)

Rupert wrote:

> >That personal belief would be quite dumb since Richard died in his late 30s
> >IIRC.
> >Richard's own contemporaries thought him to be quite ruthless and
> >unscrupulous.  He's mostly held to be a bad King, a bad son, and a bad
> >husband, but he was an awesome warrior.
> 
> He's generally held to be a bad King because he spent only 6 months of his
> reign in his kingdom (England). What a lot of people forget, though is that
> England was peaceful and well organized, unlike his french posessions,
> which were fragmented, rebellious and often under attack by the King of

I've never said Richard was a bad king, just that he was generally held as
such. : )  England was only about half of the Platanaget domain.  It was
stable and secure in his reign, too.  The other half (Richards French
possessions) were almost continually under some sort of assault from Phillip
Augustus.  I would never have expected him to fawn on England while ignoring
the danger to his French possessions.

OB Trav...  Strephon was Archduke of Sylea and Marquis Usdiki (and i'd suspect
quite a few others... Duke of Core Sector? Maybe G:T can clear this up...).
Did his duties as Emperor (much less personal belief) ever conflict w/ his
duties as ruler of smaller territories?  I'd imagine Usdiki had to be run by
proxy, considering the realities of distance in Traveller.  As far as personal
belief... his "papers" in Survival Margin mention that he wanted to repeal the
Psionic Suppressions... might he do this in G:T?  SM indicates he doesn't
because of the evidence of a coming disaster from Longbow.

> France. Thus he would've been foolish to spend more time in England.
> However there's little doubt that his decision to go on crusade was not
> very bright, and staying with it after hir rivals had gone home was dumb.

Should've made Phillip stay as long as he did...  The decision to go on
crusade was demanded by public opinion (especially due to the disaster at
Hattin).  If either Richard or Phillip had refused to go, the other would have
gone even if just to gain the advantage (or deny the disadvantage) of the
other.  This seems the main reason Phillip goes on Crusade at all, since
Richard seemed genuine in his desire to fight for the cross.  That John was
left at home to scheme and screw up the administration just made things
worse...

> I'd suggest that being a good son to Henry II was not an easy task, and
> none of his sons (aside perhaps from Henry) succeeded. He was also a good
> enough son to be made heir rather than John (inheritance wasn't strictly by
> birth order at that point). IMO Richard was a good son to mother, Elanor of
> Aquitaine (he would have done better if he'd been a worse one).

Richard was Eleanor's favorite son.  Also OB Trav... what similar situations
must exist in the very high nobility?  Sons and daughters of Imperial and
Archducal families?  There is suprisingly little (notable) internal friction
mentioned... almost, i hestitate to say, unrealistically.  I can swallow the
rest but dynastic problems just seem to breed interal trouble (the reading of
Margaret's family in Rebellion is pretty interesting and along these lines, as
well).

> Sorry, it's just that this common view of Richard I bugs me.

Understandable. : )  I have a favorable opinion of Richard.  A real 3D
character... pros/cons, assets and faults.  I'm inspired to create a planet in
the wilds (along w/ NCPs), methinks... ; )

Gary

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:31:54 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

At 02:54 PM 10/20/98 +1300, you wrote:
>At 21:49 19/10/98 +0000, Charles Prevatte wrote:
>>At 11:25 AM 10/17/98 +1300, you wrote:
>
>>>OK, I'm talking about the TU here, so I'm using Traveller sensors
>>>(specifically TNE's), but from what I understand these rules understate the
>>>range of passive sensors massively. Anyway a size A planet runs to a little
>>>less than 18,000 km which gives 100 dia as 1,800,000 km. This gives 60
>>>hexes at 30,000 km each. This gives a surface area of about 45,000 hexes. 
>>
>>something wrong here.
>>
>>surface area of a circle = 4PI X r^2
>>
>>4PI x 1,800,000,000^2 = 4.07e^19 square meters or 4.07e^16 square km or
>>1357168026351 hexes of surface area.  Remember it's a sphere not a circle
>>and you have to do the calculation in units.
>
>Ummm... 1 square km is 1,000,000 square metres, so 4.07E19 m^2 becomes
>4.07E16 km^2. Also the hexes are 30,000 km across, and so have and area of
>about 5.846E8 km^2. This still gives an area of about 70,000 hexes.
>

Good point.  I missed that one.  Ok we'll say 70k hexes then.


>>>A range 16 active EMS has a long range of 64 hexes which is more than 100
>>
>>Ok, I don't play TNE (I miss the release and have not tried to get the OOP
>>books sence) so I have to ask...
>>
>>1) How many hexes can one sensor actively scan in one hour?  Your text above
>>says that it can be detected at that range but it does not say how long it
>>takes to scan a sphere 1,800,000 km in diameter.  If memory serves that's 6
>>ls or 12 ls round trip time for the signal.  Assuming a 1' of arc scan
>>(unlikely to be that high a resolution at that range) per scan and a 12
>>second delay that makes a spherical active scan take 432 hours.
>
>OK, maybe traveller is unrealistic, but in the rules it only takes the 1/2
>hour turn (mind you the rules never really covered looking for somebody
>that you had no idea was ever there). 
>

That was what I did not know.  The time for a spherical search which is what
an antipiracy unit has to perform.

>>2) What kind of signal is this sensor sending out to bounce off of the
>>target?  Remember for a non collumated emission that power drops by the
>>inverse square law.  Note that our deep space probes today use a high gain
>>narrow field antenia to send the data back to us and even then the signal is
>>way down in the mud.  A spherical pulse is unlikely and one powerfull enough
>>would do bad things to the planet below's TV sets and any living thing on
>>the ship.  If the above active sensor is lidar you are stuck with the above
>>delay times and a much narrower aperture than 1'.  Most lazers dispersion
>>out at much less that .01'  High speed mirrors and good hardware might give
>>you 1' per 12 second but I really dought it.
>
>Apparently AEMS is like a very wide-band radar. 
>

Not posible at those ranges.  The transmited power required would be
astranomical.  More that the total power output of a planet.  Calculate the
energy density at the shell then calculate the return signal with the
proviso that signal must be at least twice the background noise level.  Once
you see the numbers you will see why the area scaned must be limited to a
small fraction of the sphere even assuming a multimegawatt radar.  Also do
to multipath problems sweep rate will be limited by the propagation delay.
These are hard laws of the universe.  Light only travels so fast so scan
time is long for long range wide scan.  432 hours is probably unrealisticly
low for a spherical search by one sensor because the sensor will have to
move to complete that search due to blind spots caused by planets ect.  Also
that assumes no hit that must be checked out and cataloged into the space
debre catalog.  The space junk data base would be huge and the comp time
needed to identify and eliminate the junk would be sugnificant as each piece
makes it's own shadow that must be checked.  How would a ship know if the
new 30 meter object was junk, rock, or pirate?

>>>A range 8 passive EMS has the same chance on a ship running 'cold' at 8
>>>hexes or an accelerating ship at 32 hexes. IMO while it's nice to be able
>>>to pick up a ship that's loitering before it starts accelerating it's not
>>>really necessary for reasons I'll go into later (besides that's what our
>>>nice big active EMS is for). This gives us a sensor area (cutting through
>>>the sphere) of 200 and 3200 hexes, respectively. If the patrolling vessels
>>>look for accelerating vessels we only need 14 to cover the 100 dia limit,
>>>otherwise we'll need 225. That's ignoring the fact that, IMO, with 14+
>>>patrol vessels (remember I'm using TNE, and thus HEPlaR. I don't know if
>>>this applies with thrusters, but I think so) the would-be pirate is very
>>>likely to have his high signature exhaust pointed towards one of them.
>>>
>>
>>1357168026351/3200 = 424115008 that's a lot of ships.  If it took 1 ship a
>>half hour to scan 3200 hexes and move on it would take one ship  24,207
>>years to scan  the surface of the jump sphere of a system.  Care to take a
>>guess at how long it would take to search the entire volume?
>
>It's more like 70,000/3200 = 22 still more than at first calculated, but
>not excessive. You don't need to search the whole volume constantly as once
>you know there's nothing bad in it all you need to do is keep a good watch
>on the perimeter. However, IMO, this is moot as I doubt that the pirate can
>match with the prize and take anything worthwhile before the law arrives,
>let alone get away.
>

70,000 hexes  of 30,000,km  that's ~ 1 ls.

Let's say the ship is traveling at .5c (not bloody likely)  You search  201
hexes the first second but add only 6 new hex per second after at maximum.
If you assume perfect efficency (imposible due to overlap) that's 

70,000-201= 69,799/6= 2366.5 That's 3.23 hours at 100% efficency and .5c!

reality would be more like .1 new hexes due to overlaping passes and
reasonable speeds or 8 days to search the shell for a quiet pirate and that
pirate could hit his target while you were on the oposite side of that
sphere.  30 ls away or 40 ls of travel time.  

The two good things about pasive sensors are they are fairly fast and quiet.  

All of this assumuses a perfect operater and that the pirate does not have a
brain cell in his head.  Said pirate could be in firing range of the sensor
ship with only two seconds warning and his weapons will be maned and ready.
The sensor ship could not maintain constant readiness.  It would have to out
mass the pirate 10 to one or more to stand a chance.  And even then it will
take an unanswered shot from the pirate unless it to is silent but if it is
it can not cordinate with the rest of the defence forces but a quiet ships
or two on the perimeter might not be a bad idea if you can afford it.  Life
support cost would be high as the crew would now want to eat recycled food
for six months at a time and god help the down port when they get leave!  

The crew would also have to be larger than normal with many highly skill
sensor techs.  Nobody can watch an instrament for long and remain alert.
You would also want two operaters on duty at all times to cut down on misses.

A few high speed passive sensor ships might be the best defense again
pirates though.  The price payed by the crews living that life would be very
high.  I'd say that the antipiracy job would be a thankless lonely high
suicide rate one with the ships being pourly maintained in all but the
richest systems that an afford spares.  Look how we treat our policemen.

I would think that antipirate informatiom would be shared and these tactics
and the 'fact of pirate life' would be well known.  I would also think that
'chop shops' and pirate bases would be necessary.  Perhaps the bases are in
the ort cloud region.  I dought anyone would be poking arroung out there and
there are fuel sources.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:31:59 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

At 05:02 PM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Charles writes
>>>It's not strictly true that you can't increase signal to noise by simple
>>>addition of images from seperate telescopes. For example, if I have 16
>>>1-m telescopes and each takes a digitized picture of the same piece of the 
>>>sky, and I add the 16 images together in software, since each has independent
>>>noise I get an image with 1/sqrt(16)=4 times less noise, or 4 times higher
>>>signal-to-noise, the same as if I had a single 4-meter telescope. 
>>>
>
>>However the camera thresshold of detection is still the limit.  You will
>>never see a light source below that threshold no mater how many you use.
>This statement is simply not true (in many ways.) As a minor point, noise
>in cameras is not the limiting factor in astronomical imaging (and hasn't
>been for a while); noise due to random fluctuations in the sky background
>dominates. And, no matter what the noise is, if that noise is random you
>can improve your signal-to-noise and detection threshold by adding 
>multiple images (each with different random noise) together. I *know* this
>to be a fact; I do it for a living and add images together on a daily
>basis. Whether the images are successive ones taken by one telescope
>are multiple ones taken by different telescopes is irrelevant.
>When I add four images together I can see things that weren't present in
>the single images (in fact, about twice as faint as the limit for the
>previous images.) 
>
>>Not mirror.  A good black coating and surface angles to defect what is not
>>absorbed away from your target.
>It's hard to get a black coating that doesn't have some diffuse reflection - 
>ie some fraction of the light gets scattered in all directions no matter
>what the angle of reflection is. This kind of stealthing works much better
>in radar where diffuse reflection isn't an issue. 
>
>>What are your scan TIMES based on the volume of the sphere you are scaning?
>TL8 Passive-light sensors can be visualized as taking a series of pictures
>every ten seconds or so, each picture being about 10 degrees on a side,
>with perhaps an 8192x8192 pixel detector with 4 arcsecond pixels. It scans
>the whole sky about once per hour. Remember, a passive scan isn't scanning
>volume but the 2-d projected image of the sky...
>

1296 pictures to be processed for a spherical search.  I assume computes do
the crunching.

At that level you could spot a 100 meter lighted object at (thinking)
5156km.  (1 pixel change at that range.)  You could get resoultion enough to
get basic shape at 51kms (100 pixels) with the same system but you would
probably use a higher power lower arc system to see it clearly sooner.  Not
a bad system.  Not bad at all.  Now, what is the light sensativity threshold
for one pixel?  How bright would that 100 mete object have to be the effect
that pixel from 5156 km out?

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:32:08 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

At 07:46 PM 10/19/98 -0600, you wrote:
> 
>> >Not mirror.  A good black coating and surface angles to defect what is not
>> >absorbed away from your target.
>>
>> It's hard to get a black coating that doesn't have some diffuse reflection - 
>> ie some fraction of the light gets scattered in all directions no matter
>> what the angle of reflection is. This kind of stealthing works much better
>> in radar where diffuse reflection isn't an issue. 
> 
>Another point is that on an airplane (or a ship, for that matter)
>there are prefered directions. In such a case you know that it is
>safe (more or less) to reradiate the radar pulse, say, UP. In space
>angled hulls (like an F-117) make no sense unless you decide to point
>the prefered direction towards the guy looking for you--you have to
>know where he is, and there can't be too many others around that are
>off-axis. If I took an F-117 and presented you with the bottom of
>the aircraft as your sensor target, it wouldn't be stealthy at all
>(by virtue of reflection, anyway).
>
>That said, a pirate simply trying to hide from a merchant can use
>this as long as there isn't a dispersed planetary sensor system to
>deal with--there's another thought for you pirates... BRIBE THE
>SENSOR OPERATOR. At your class E starports, this shouldn't be too
>hard to do, the guy is probably assigned to it because he was a
>troublemaker in the first place :-)
>

Sorry, I said the very same things in another post.  Stealth scattering in
very much affected by angle of attack but you can mannage  to stealth 3
sides of your narrow edge.  One for the merchant and one for the planet.
The other is wasted but it lets you pick your attack angle somewhat.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:32:13 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Sensors and piracy

At 05:12 PM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Charles writes
>
>>A lasers beam spreads over great distances.  I typical comercial 1 watt unit
>>today would cast a circle about 1.5 feet in diameter on the moon.
>
>God knows where you got this number from; to make a 1.5' circle on the
>moon you'd need a diffraction-limited 800-meter telescope to launch the laser.
>Perhaps 1.5 miles is closer to the mark? 
>

I'm aware of the arc angle.  Are you aware of the angle of deffusion
available on lasers?  More than .001 second is a reject for good comercial
positioning use today much less high percission stuff.  We are talking
lasers (mono polar light) not telescopes.  They work very differently.  And
you do not need a telescope to launch the laser.  Course target it yes, fire
it know.  NASA uses a 2 foot relecter on the moon for laser distace
mesurements.  It was put up there by one of the apolo missions.  I do not
recall which one.

>>It's the targeting at that range that
>>is a problem even if the beam is 1 meter in diameter hiting a 10 meter
>>target with a 1 meter beam at 10^8+ (1ls)  meters is not that easy.
>Actually, targeting stationary/constant-velocity objects is pretty easy
>(see various earlier discussions in the archives.) 
>
>>Did you buy a turet that could resolve 10^-12 degrees of arc while
>>moving multiton weapons and sensors 
>
>10 meters at 10^8 meters is only 6x10^-6 degrees of arc, but that's a nit.
>The trick to getting such accuracies is not to track the whole turret to
>those precisions but to move the turret for coarse aiming and do fine aiming
>with a smaller precision steering mirror in your laser. If you have a
boresighted
>sensor looking along the same light path (with a beamsplitter or moving mirror
>to switch between the laser and the sensor) you can track the target 
>"closed-loop". Similar systems (ie the closed-loop tip/tilt tracking system 
>for a big modern telescope) already achieve 10^-6 degree tracking accuracy.
>The hard part about hitting targets with lasers isn't the inherent accuracy,
>it's lightspeed lag and dodging.
>

Quite true IF a multikilowatt xray laser weapon could and would be so
equipted on a reguler basis.  I dought it.  Drives the cost way up and would
not be needed for it's primary purpose.  Though if you had such a system it
would be a nasty sniper weapon.  What would you use for mirrors and lenses
for a Xray laser anyway?  Magnetic fields might work for lenses but what
could you make a 100% mirror for xrays out of?

The lag time would also throw a nasty PID loop constant into your control
loop making system osilation or PID windup a problem depending on the actual
numbers.  
Another problem would be correcting for ship manuvering and combat damage
venting.  A small change in delta V would make the loop have to relock if it
lost the preportional band which would have to be fairly narrow to allow
quick lockup and if you stayed in the pband then you would still have a
second or more before a intergral correction could take place.  Lock up time
would stink and you approach critical dampening.  Time here would not be
your friend.  "How close is that SDB?!?!?"  (Grin)

Ps: it's nice to discuss this with someone who knows his stuff.  You bring
up some interested points.  Some of which I had not figured into the mix.
I'll bet you'd be fun to game with.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:32:17 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Sensors and waste heat

At 04:47 PM 10/19/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Charles Prevatte wrote
>
>>>It can't exist anywhere. Laser light is *low* (almost *zero*) entropy.
>>>Heat is very high entropy. Thus you *cannot* convert heat to laser
>>>light without creating far more heat than you send away. The trick in
>>>Sundiver isn't allowed by the laws of thermodynamics.
>>>
>
>>UH...heat IS light.  Inferred light.  That is want heat is.  And there are
>>IR lasers avalable today.  The problem is convertion.  A chemical catalist
>>laser could in theory convert waste heat to collumated IR.
>
>Perhaps a basic thermodynamics text is in order? The readers-digest version
>is that if you use 100 watts of waste heat to pump a laser (somehow), you
>generate more than 100 watts of heat in the machinery used for the pumping. 
>(The details are more complicated, but basically, laser refrigeration doesn't
>work. The only good way to get rid of heat is radiate it in an old-fashioned
>black-body.)
>

That depends on your assumtion that the laser is powered by other that heat.
A chemical or solid state laser could be designed to use heat as it's power
source.  There are thermal cell just like solar cells and some of the new
solar cells use waste heat to boost poer output.  As this is a non nuclear
action the laws of conservation applies.  Total power out must be eqaul to
total power in.  If you dump 20% out as IR laser energy then you reradiate
80%  That's still a system loss of heat of 20% because it leaves the ship.
Without nuclear reations matter and energy are conserved.

>>Also there is
>>the other question as to how much waste heat a TL12 Fusion reacter has.  If
>>it's low and the insulation facter is high then there would be no need to
>>vent heat at all. 
>
>The assumption in FFS2 is about 10% (a much-debated topic). One should note
>that not just waste from the reactor, but heat from all sorts of sources
>needs to be radiated. For example, if your 10 MW laser is 20% efficient,
>you have 8 MW of misc. heat to get rid of...Or the 10 MW that goes into your
>life support, or grav compensators, or computers...
>

True 100watts in = 90 watts of laser out and 10 waste watts of heat or
whatever the ratio would be in 5000 years.

>>Again it depends on the amount of waste heat.  You need some to warm the
>>crew spaces to begin with.  If the waste heat is not greater than that there
>>is no waste heat.
>Note that even warming the crew quarters generates a signature; a 300 K
>hull is fairly easy to detect against black space. Lurking pirates need to
>actively refrigerate and/or insulate their hulls so that the hulls are 50-200K,
>and somehow get rid of all the sunlight the (black) hull soaks up, and the
>heat that is keeping the crew warm => more waste heat.
>

Again it depend on you assumtion.  If you assume a high efficency insulation
and mininal power, just enough for life support and passive sensors your
outside temp would be only a few degrees warmer than space.  Apollo could
maintain life support, manuver, sensors, and comunications on 40 watts of
power with body heat alone heat keeping the cabin at arround 20 degrees.
They pirate could use battery power and light off his reacter only to make
his attack.

The IR laser cooler is not really needed.

Charles L.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #981
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 20 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 982



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: Capital Ships of WWII
Re: Where's Lucan?
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re Piracy and Parting Out
Re: The Fourth Imperium:  was  Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964
Bonehead Gearheads, (Was Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*)
Re: Re Piracy and Parting Out
Re: Where's Lucan?
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles* 
Re: UWP Cultural Extension
Re: Rape and Pillaging
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Re: Capital Ships
Re: Starship Morgages (was Re: Pirates)
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Piracy 
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
Re: Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:42:06 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!

In a message dated 10/19/98 16:53:35 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
TravelrTNE@aol.com writes:

<< > with history or reality ( he was a major leader of the Crusades; rape and
 > pillage, because God is on your side)  But the rest of us are entitled to
 
 That kind of villifies the whole crusading movement, which is your right, of
 course...  Others might look to the heroism, chivalry and courage (on all
 sides) of the movement.  >>

This is certainly true..it was directed at the whole overriding purpose of the
Crusades, as opposed to any specific people.  My point w/ the Crusades was
simply that both sides believed that any excess was not only possible, but
demanded by God.  and this has to be the stupidest thing in the world

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:47:35 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:26:13 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet
Charles Prevatte writes:

Charles, you read the text the way the Devil reads the Bible. The text say
"combat vessels SUCH AS cruisers, carriers, battleships, and some escorts".
For those escorts to be metioned in the same breath as cruisers, carriers,
and battleships it seems reasonable to assume that they would be in the
same general weight class as cruisers, carriers, and battleships.
************
so Destroyers then :)  seeing that phrase makes me think of
Destroyers....not DEs or FFs, But DDs meant to engage capital ships.

Try this: Wrap a ship hull around a spinal mount.  Add lots of Missile bays
and some Laser turrets for point defense. you now have a ship not really
good for anything but engaging the Wall of Battle.  It doesn't carry troops
or make long patrols by itself. It has no command bridge, or really long
term accomodations.  It is grouped with other destroyers, assigned as an
escort to a BatRon  and sent out after the enemies capital ships.




That's right. But that dosen't mean the Navy can't have some scout ships of
it's own. Propably larger than Type Ss.
**********
as well as 6G jump 6 Fleet couriers.



>>The other possibility is that a large number of ships are laid up in
>>ordinary. That would require that part of the annual budget was used to
>
>The USA has more ship in mothballs than operating including several
carriers
>and battle ships.
Unfortunately a huge reserve fleet gives other problems for the background.
Right, Gary?
*******************
wasn't there some refernce to ships still being pulled out of mothballs
*years* into major interstellar wars?   sounds like huge reserve fleets to
me.




David Pulver posted some figures just the other day. IIRC it was 1.4% for
Canada and 4% for the US.
***********8
sounds about right...IIRC the US hit nearly 8% during the Reagan Era.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:00:45 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Capital Ships of WWII

In a message dated 10/20/98 2:17:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz writes:

<< >The Bismark was not destroyed by planes (or the British navy, the German
 >Scuttled her) but she was hunted and disabled by plane launched torpedoes as
 >I recall.
 
 Arghhhh. I have seen this argument so often and it annoys me every time.
Their 
 is no evidence that the Bismark was scuttled. And even if it was all that
ment 
 was her sinking was hastened. >>

I am afraid I will have to annoy you again.  Dr Robert Ballard, after finding
and photographing the wreck of the Bismarck, said that due to the way the
wreck sat on the bottom and a # of other things, there was ample evidence that
the Bismarck was indeed scuttled by the crew.

I personally believe that the Bismarck would have sank eventually anyway, but
the RN was close enough to have boarded the ship...maybe recieving valuable
info in the process.

The RN assertion that the HMS Dorsetshire torpedoed Bismark, causing her to
sink, is nothing more than wartime morale-building propoganda:  Dr Ballard
discovered no signs of any damage to the belt armor/waterline of the side of
the ship struck by the "torpedoes".

You might try the National Geographic website...they should have all the info
on the Bismarck expedition (they funded it)

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:01:22 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan?

Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:

> >Did Dulinor raise a loyal daughter?
> 
> Doesn't matter. No matter what, would you trust the daughter of a trator with
> that much power, or assuming Isis ratted on Dulinor would you trust someone
> with so little honour?

Hmmm. Since when is informing your liege that an attempt is to
be made on his life 'dishonorable', even if it means informing on the
plotters? Isis had a gutwrenching personal choice to make, to be sure,
but as far as honor goes, her course was clear...she had to do what she
did to prevent a regicide, which is always looked upon rather favorably
by the ruler in question.

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:24:26 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

..
>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: Current Tech: Shortstop
..
>You can make a shell that ignores Shortstop. It'll cost you about
>US$1000 each, instead of about US$25 to $50 each, so you won't
>have as many to shoot.

  I suspect that cheaper work-arounds will be found; the obvious one is
using teensy-weensy digital timers to replace the mechanical timer fuzes
that were replaced by radar proximity units.

>Everything I've heard about the armed forces tells me that, of all the
>things to get attacked with, infantry hates artillery the most. The way

  Now, can they make them detonate in the launch tubes? :>

>it comes from out of nowhere to kill you, the way you can't do anything
>but hunker down and hope they run out of ammo. I'm imagining these
>grunts, if Shortstop works, fighting for the priviledge of wearing it
>(and thus being in the middle of the protection zone).

  Nah, the guy beside you, in case of snipers...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:24:38 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re Piracy and Parting Out

>From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
>Subject: Re Piracy and Parting Out
...
>Anyway, any corsair design which is going to survive is going to look like
>a fairly typical hull of some other class(es). For example, typical hulls
...
>built with multiple power plants: one PP to match "Target Profile", and the

  Physical observation (by security forces or dockyard staff) will note this
and flag it, if the authorities are interested in this intelligence.

...
>(I'll skip names). If the threshold is particularly low, the 3i will be
>spending most of it's naval budgets to patrol; if it's too high, the 3I
>will only know of wars when the invaders start unloading at the downports.

  The first statement seems to require an awfully low assessment of Imperial
escort assets; all resources that specifically state scale directly as being 
one to one give truly astronomical numbers of small warships/boats to the
Imperium and its' member-states.

...
>As for pirates vs starmercs: if the imperium leaves anti-piracy (except
>large scale operations like the kforzueng) work to local and private
>concerns, starmercs will exist in areas where piracy, privateering, etc is
>occuring. If starmercs can be built. most of them make excellent pirates,
>too.

  In peacetime, having the Imperium let anti-piracy work be done by units
that may very well be part of the problem looks awfully like intentionally
creating a situation where piracy can exist.

...
>will a government do something about it. Only if insurance companies can
>effectively lobby can they do something about piracy, lest they charter
>their own starmercs, and/or engage in tradewar against their rival's
>clients (ala some of the 1930's gangwars protection rackets gone bad).

  What if the insurance companies association (which _will_ be a powerful
lobby) is somehow ignored, but understands the concept "Q-Ship"? Or hires
starmercs themselves (if the TU in question allows such).

>If you want something really annoying, look at the hijacking rules... 1/216
>chance of a hijacking attempt if there are ANY NPC's aboard...

  If you like, but how many of those are crazed accountants with dull
fruit-knives?
BTW, Will, all of these book references are hardly in the spirit of the TML :>

        Steven

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:16:19 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: The Fourth Imperium:  was  Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964

Legate Legion wrote:

> I can Psi-Cops like Al Bester from B5...  They police the Psis...
> 

No sh*t!! (I'm not a B5 fan, so this is the first time I've ever heard
of this...) I was going to mention Alfred Bester's novel "The Demolished
Man" for an example of how telepathic cops might work.

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:22:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: William Prankard <cmdrx@magicnet.net>
Subject: Bonehead Gearheads, (Was Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*)

Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>Yep, the Davy Crocket - a nuclear mortar, IIRC - was a bad piece of
>work. Most commadanders were reportedly too scared to fire it with a HE
>shell, the thing was so inaccurate.

>The US Navy version of this was the ASTOR (nicknamed the ASTOR-
>Disaster). ASTOR (Anti-Submarine TORpedo) was a 533mm torp with a
>nuclear warhead - and a p(K) of 2.0. It would get the target, and the
>firing vessel.

>ObTraveller: Any similar bonehead designs in the far future? How about
>an early FGMP.

In my M:0 game, X-TEK was experimenting with the possibility of a Spinal
Plasma Gun.  The robot ship that carried this mostrosity was destroyed in
a cataclysmic explosion.  The blast was so powerful, even coming from the
barrel that it was enough to cause heat and radiation damage to the ship,
but the real clincher was the recoil.  The "Kick" was enough to rip the
gun right off the ship!

This brought the saftey inspectors down on the Commander's rear, and X-TEK
was fined for "unsafe practices" or somesuchthing.  Makes me wonder why
they were bugging me and not the Spofulam kids!  ;-)

\\  // Commander X
 \\//  CEO X-TEK Industries of Deneb, LIC
T E K  Military & Civilan Starship Contractor
 //\\  High Energy Weapons Research
//  \\ http://www.magicnet.net/~cmdrx/xtek/xtek.htm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:29:58 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: Re Piracy and Parting Out

>Yes, piracy exists IMTU. Quick, somebody add some IMTU codes for Piracy.
>BTW, who's maintaining the IMTU Codes sheet?


The IMTU code for piracy is pi

        pi++    Piracy exists and is rampant.  Anyone may commit piracy.
                Ship tracking and ID are uncommon.
        pi+     Piracy exists.  Antipiracy is mostly political or economic,
and
                is inadequate.  Transponders may be changed or masked, or
are
                not widespread or sufficient.
        pi      Piracy only exists in the vacuum of government or corporate
                morals.
        pi-     Piracy is not sustainable.
        pi--    Piracy is impossible.

IMTU is maintained by Robert Eastlick
(http://www.metronet.com/~washi/Tas/Lists/index.html)

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:46:08 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan?

>I have no doubt that Strephon's presence was required elsewhere. What I see
>as Strephons failures are:

>1 - He failed to prepare Lucan (3rd in line) for the throne. This was an
>unforgivable error. Lucan was most definitely not too far from the throne
to be
>ignored. If Strephon and Iphegina had died (unlikely, but a definite
possiblity) he
>becomes 1st in line; or if Varian dies he becomes 2nd in line. There are no
>excuses for this failure of judgement.


Lucan and Varian were the cadet line, right?  If Strephon died, the Iphegina
assumed the rule (provided the Moot concurred), and would be followed by
Iolanthe.  (This assumes I have the names of the Empress and the Grand
Princess correct... :)

I'd have to say that not only do you not want to encourage the cadet line by
giving them the training to assume the Imperium - you would not want to
embitter them by forever denying them it once you have prepared them.

>2 - When he absented himself from Capital he failed to make adequate
>preperations for a crisis. As far as we know he did not inform anybody of
his
>absence. Assuming he informed Iolanthe and Iphegina, that was not
sufficent.
>Both of them were regulary in the same place. At the very least several
well
>trusted members of the moot should have been in the know (including
>Archduke Tranian). They obviously weren't because Tranian supported Lucan's
>claim to the throne. His failure was not leaving Capital, but in not
telling people
>he was going.


The Imperium was not at war, and there was no reason to assume (other than
basic precautions) that the entire ruling house would be wiped out in a
single blow.  Only treachery made that possible, and IMHO, no normal
security would have sufficed when the blow comes from someone who was
trusted to the extent that Dulinor was.

I would say that it is very likely that his wife and daughter were very much
aware that he was away from the Capital, and were probably supporting the
clone to maintain the pretense.   It is very likely that he felt that his
departure would cause some ruffled feathers, and chose to use the clone and
secrecy to avoid that.  I rather imagine that the p&c surrounding an
official visit by the Emperor may have been a consideration, since Longbow
was supposed to be a secret.

>3 - When the crisis blew up he failed to act swiftly and decisivly to
restore
>order. Strephon was just 6 jumps from Capital. He had the authorisation
codes
>to confirm his identity (if not refer to point 2). He should have
transmitted them
>immediately to all fleet commanders, doing so would not have compromised
>Longbow but it would have prevented the disintergration of the Imperium. He
>must have known what Lucan's personality was like. The crisis came and he
>hesitated. If he acted decisively and quickly he could have stopped the
war. It
>would have in all likelyhood cost him and his family the throne, but it
would
>have saved the Imperium.


I can't disagree with this.

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:51:21 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles* 

>  Definitely a serious wakeup call.  <grin>
> And under HG rules, you could *still* stuff 3 missile racks into a triple
> turret, not just 2.  Prob is, under those rules, you can't have a missile
> bay
> if you use missile turrets, which makes sense to me.
> *************
> out of cuitosity, why does this make sense to you?

It's a control thing.  The 'feel' of controlling a missile bay would be a 
*LOT* different than controlling a missile turret.

>   Personally, on, say, a
> 5000 dt frigate, I'd use a pair of 100 ton missile bays as a standoff
> weapon,
> 10 triple laser turrets for point defense, and 20 dual energy weap turrets
> for
> close-in work.
> **********
> I would go with more lasers and some sand. (or lots of armor)

I hardly ever play with sand.  But the armour is a given; only warships will 
have bay weaponry.  IMNSFBHO, 'merchants' with spinal mounted PA's are just 
plain *SILLY*.  They're using vaulable cubic they *COULD* be using to make 
*MONEY* with.  Same way with bay weaponry.  Under HG, you can use an empty bay 
for cargo space, but you can only use 50% of it.  For a merchie, that's 
uneconomic.

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:59:24 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: UWP Cultural Extension

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> We have an economic extension for the UWP in Pocket Empires.
> Should we do a cultural extension (about the same number of digits, etc). What
> would that cover?

It depends.  A cultural extension is going to go a long way to defining
the culture of a planet.  And consequently, diminsh or limit a referee's
freedom of movement for creating within the constraints of that. Of
course, such ref's could ignore it.

Having said that, it would be extremely convenient for me.
And it might help enhance advanced trade rules.

Do you want to stay away from the World Character stuff from Pocket
Empires?  (Progression, Planning, Advancement, Growth, Militancy,
Unity, Tolerance).  I think some of them could be broken out.

Some possible suggestions:
- -Xenophobia/Xenophilia (Tolerance?)
- -Psioniphobia/Psioniphilia (Tolerance?)
- -Language Diversion
- -Militancy
- -Creativity (to indicate relative amount of art, research, etc)
- -Loyalty (to Imperium or other political group to which the system
belongs.  If an independent system, loyalty to the system's government,
a sort of hand-waved satisfaction with government.  Low loyalty =
potentially rebellioius).

If I had to pick four:
- -Creativity
- -Xenophobia (applying to all off-worlders, not just racial)
- -Militancy
- -Loyalty

Adding all these to the government type and law level go a long way
to painting a fast but good picture of a system.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:09:00 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Rape and Pillaging

>> >"Rape and pillage" was synonymous w/ warfare well until (and even during)
>> >the 20th century.
...
>Yeah... apparently it is (especially when you see Bosnia, Kosovo, etc).  I
>definately see a difference in teh discipline of US forces (excepting certain
>unfortunate incidents in Vietnam).

  Where not a direct implementation of policy, the discipline issue is probably
very much a question of regulars vs. irregulars/guerillas.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:09:19 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
...
>All of this assumuses a perfect operater and that the pirate does not have a
>brain cell in his head.  Said pirate could be in firing range of the sensor
>ship with only two seconds warning and his weapons will be maned and ready.
>The sensor ship could not maintain constant readiness.  It would have to out
>mass the pirate 10 to one or more to stand a chance.
/...

  What's the basis for that 10:1 assertion?

...
>'chop shops' and pirate bases would be necessary.  Perhaps the bases are in
>the ort cloud region.  I dought anyone would be poking arroung out there and
>there are fuel sources.

  Little traffic except the occasional patrol by SDB's practicing warfighting
routines for their Oort cloud withdrawals.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:09:32 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Capital Ships

>From: "Joseph Kimball" <HPJKimba@ihc.com>
>Subject: Re: Capital Ships
...
>I would love to see a 1998 designed battleship.  I think the almost
>60 years of advances in naval architecture could make a modern
>battleship very impressive compared to WWII designs.

  Maybe the 2010 versions will have the laser or other beam weapon
installations they need - and their escorts can carry the ASW drones.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:09:55 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Starship Morgages (was Re: Pirates)

>From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
>Subject: Starship Morgages (was Re: Pirates)
>
>Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> wrote
...
>> >is get a bank to loan him the money to buy his ship & then skip out 
>> >on the payments...  In other words, if a pirate can scrap together 
>> >say 10-20 MCr, then he could get a ship & start out being a pirate...
>
>Is the bank liable to make a loan on any ship design?  When the bank
>sees the design for a 4 g, jump 3 big cargo hold, no high or middle
>passenger design ship aren't they going to wonder what you will use it
>for?

  Wouldn't it be easier to build it at a pirate base or just buy it
right off of the lot?

>If you tell them the ship will be used for mercenary operations won't
>the high risk use of the ship make them need to charge you a higher
>intrest rate?

  Realistically, yes, although the Traveller financial community doesn't
seem to be very highly evolved.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:59:22 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:
> 

> No offense, but I wish this stuff woundn't be posted on line. Why let the bad
> guys know what we're working on....

hey those dirty rat bastid Zhos _already_ know all about it....oh,
_other_ bad guys...

What, you were thinking maybe foreign agents listen in to the TML so
that they can learn about current miltech???

"Comrade...ve haf nothink to fear from the Amerikanskis...they'll still
arguing about pirates. All our intelligence indicates that the running
dogs will be arguing about it for the next year or so, so our glorious
invasion plans can proceed!"

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:58:05 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy 

> Charles Prevatte writes:
>  
> >>How long will the approach take him? Every minute he spends catching one
> >>victim costs money.
> >
> >With a high Delta V and cold gas manuvering thruster it would not be a
> >problem.
> 
> A high Delta V will seriously hamper your ability to slow down once you
> get near the area where you want to lurk. In space you do not stop just
> because you stop accelerating. A high Delta V means you spent a long time
> building up your speed and have to spend a lot of time decellerating.
> Cold gas maneuvering thrusters? What is the cost, in both money and tonnage
> of a cold gas thruster system?

Delta-V is the *rate* of change.  A 4G ship has 4 times the Delta-V of a 1G ship.

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:06:15 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com>
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

 
>> Regarding my comments about prefered directions in stealt...
>> 
> Sorry, I said the very same things in another post.  Stealth scattering in
> very much affected by angle of attack but you can mannage  to stealth 3
> sides of your narrow edge.  One for the merchant and one for the planet.
> The other is wasted but it lets you pick your attack angle somewhat.

The "planet" in this case consists of a distributed network of
sensors, as well as some pickets out around 100Diameters, right?
(from the bulk of comments).

I agree that on backwater worlds without a sophisticated net it'll
be possible, but richer worlds will be much harder since the
planetray defences will be spread out over a 100 diameter radius
sphere.

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 19:14:07 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>A high Delta V will seriously hamper your ability to slow down once you
>get near the area where you want to lurk. In space you do not stop just
>because you stop accelerating. A high Delta V means you spent a long time
>building up your speed and have to spend a lot of time decellerating.
>Cold gas maneuvering thrusters? What is the cost, in both money and tonnage
>of a cold gas thruster system?
>

One ton at most, 0 power, dirt cheep.  It's compress gas.  You could use
your life suport reserves.

>>As for matching velocities, you can finish that after you disable him.
>
>You miss my point. Matching velocities will take time and all the while
>the merchant is bulleting towards safety and one or more patrol vessels
>are speeding towards you. Also you are getting deeper and deeper into a
>gravity well. Once you do chase down the merchant and plunder him, you
>will have to make an 'outside 10-diameter' jump. 
>

I get it very well but as you say later, give them some credit for brains.
They come in oposite the planet, use gravity breaking and catch their prize
on the outward leg.  That is why they need a high delta V to start with.
They come up behind the target as it is acelerating out.  Best posible time.
They are far from the system and close to the jump diameter.  They have to
be quick but then they have to anyway.  If the main world has or is a moon
so much the better for the pirates.
 
>>>Known arrival points are either a random spot at the 100 diameter limit or
>>>a specific spot on the 100 diameter limit. [...] ...in the secnod case it
>>>would beordinary prudence for a system patrol to be stationed at the spot.
>
>> 
>>Not necessarily.  Planets move as do solar systems.
>
>So do patrol vessels.
>
>>The best spot to enter depends on many things including Delta V and landing
>>point.
>
>Landing point? Surely the actual landing spot on the planet would not mean
>more than a few minutes' difference in arrival time. Especially since the
>ship will arrive with a plus or minus of up to a day.
>

Depends on planetary day lenght and relative entry point.  It could make a
12 hour diference.  Not big for the merchant but maybe for the hurried pirate.

>>IF the pirate knew these thanks to spies or surveilance he could be johnie
>>on the spot.
>
>Since this is determined when the astrogator makes his astrogation plot, the
>pirate would have no way of getting advanced notice of it. Try to allow the
>victims a few brain cells to knock together, Charles.
>

Plotted courses, as in the traveller adventure.  Remember the ship was 'due in'.
 
>>>>and he could grab a target of opportunity.
>>>
>>>Again, you're not doing the math. What are the odds of getting an opportunity
>>>in the first place?
>> 
>>See above.
>
>Dosen't tell me a thing because you are ignoring several factors.
>

If the spies are on the ball their is no odds at all.  If not you cruise
through a target rich system and hope.  It cost the same as waiting 2 weeks
for the spies to get off their pots.
 
>>>>The random incouter charts make them seem fairly common as far as pirates
>>>>can be common.
>>>
>>>If pirates was so common as the encounter tables suggested, then they would
>>>cost the _private_ sector enough money that it would be worth their while to
>>>fund their own patrol ships (which, incidentally, they do, canonically).
>> 
>>I would they spend those credits if it were not needed?  And what would be
>>the need for armed merchants which are also canon if there were no pirates?
>
>Chicken and egg argument. If pirates were so common as the encounter tables
>make them, then arming a merchant ship makes sense. But if merchant ships
>are aremed, pirates have yet another problem. So there can't be any pirates,
>especially if there are armed merchant ships. So there is no need for armed
>merchant ships.
>

True.  Not points made or loss for either of us on this one.

>But to answer your question: Maybe the ships are armed for the same reason
>companies buy insurance?
>

Are american cars armed with machine guns?  If there were no need why would
the all powerfull Empire allow the ships to be armed in the first place?

>>>>1)  The number of military ships are low compared to the area they must
>>>>patrol.
>>>
>>>Necessitates changing another part of canon, making that part very much less
>>>plausible.
>>
>>Not really,  From all I have read the number of ship (1000 per sector) is
>>not all that high.  Once you figure formations you end up with 200 small
>>squadrons of even less larger squadrons for 400+ worlds.
>
>First of all, the 1000 ships per sector is for the regular fleet only. It
>dosen't include subsector fleets (which recieves the same amount of funds
>as the regular fleet, though they spend them differently) and it dosen't
>include planetary navies. Most especially it does not not include auxiliaries.
>Yet most auxiliaries would be quite capable of giving a pirate a hard time.
>

Last time I looked the subsector fleet were just accounting units and part
od the IN.
 
>>>>Reasonable idea if the tax base could not support that large an IN.
>>>
>>>But the rax base can easily support that much and much, much more.
>> 
>>But that depends on your assumtions.  If you ASSUME that the 1% is for ALL
>>impirial spending you end up with a different story.
>
>Yes, but I don't assume that, for two reasons: There is canonical evidence
>against it and real world examples show that those figures are reasonable.
>
>>Or if you ASSUME that 1% has to include all ground forces, airforces,
>>logistics, and auxilleries then you end up with a different set of
>>numbers.
>
>No I don't. I have accounted for planetary armies, because I have assigned
>70% of the canonical 3% to planetary forces (No, I tell a small lie: I have

but does canon say thats the break down?

>simplified matters by letting the Imperial cut be 1/3rd instead of 30%). I
>have accounted for the subsector forces by allowing them half the Imperial
>cut. I have allowed for logistics by paying 10% of the cost of the ships
>pa. in maintenance. I have guestimated the number of auxiliaries in a
>typical fleet (If you want to increase that number, go ahead. But keep in
>mind that most auxiliaries are quite capable of handling a pirate). I
>account for the Marines by assuming they are part of the ship complement. I
>have... you know, I _have_ forgotten to account for the Imperial Army. I did
>originally, but they must have gotten dropped accidentally at some point.
>Not to worry. I have 66% of the Imperial armed forces budget unaccounted for
>still, so I will assign the Army something out of that. How much do you think
>would be reasonable? It's my impression that the Imperial Army is a
>relatively small outfit (I said relatively! ;-). What about the 8%
>canonically use on the Army by vacuum worlds? And I haven't accounted for the
>Scouts either. What would be reasonable for them?
>
>>These are all assumtions not canon.
>
>Most of it is canon.
>

Sorry I have not seen that.  What book is it in and I look it up?  If you
are right then we can drop this line of reasoning.

>>The only canon we have is cross version. Is there enough canon in any one
>>version of the TU to figure the budget for that version?
>
>Yes. CT. Though I don't quite agree with your point, which seems to be that
>the four Traveller versions constitute four distinct canons. My approach is
>to accept anything official as canon provided it 1) makes sense and 2) does
>not contradict any other canon. 
>

What is true in CT is not always true TNE.  You have to watch for the
changes.  The transponders are a good example.

>>I have CT and T4.  In T4 you lose military money if you spend it elsewhere.
>
>You're referring to PE, aren't you? I must confess that I simply hhaven't
>had the energy to try to integrate PE economics with earlier versions. 
>

It's pretty good but it will play hell with your economic of the military.
Spend to much and you get a recession.  Oh, and all military spending come
out of the same pot not just the navy.

>>Maybe they are spending the money in 'infrastructure'.
>
>They are. Annual maintenance is 0.1% of ship's cost (1% of annual budget).
>Salaries run to about 0.25% (2.5% of annual budget). 2.5% goes to building
>replacements (that's an assumption on my part based on a 40 year life
>cyclus for the ships. Since there is canonical evidence of ships lasting
>for over a century that may be quite a bit too high). I presume the remaining
>71.5% of the budget goes to "infrastructure".
>

Maintainence would go up with ship and base age.

>>OR mabe the writter goofed and left out some obvious point like the military
>>ships were 'down' for repairs or R&R 50% of the time like the US military is
>>with it's planes.
>
>Not according to any campaign rules I have seen.
>

Then how much time do the crew get for leave?  Two weeks a year?  Talk about
moral problems.  Also those ships can't do jack while IN jump.  Have to
figure that as part of the down time.

>>Or maybe the writers did not fully understand the implications of their
>>material.
>
>That's the meta-explanation, of course. But that's not much help in-game.
>

True but it is likely the right one. (sigh) and not likely to ever be
corrected in canon.

>>>>2)  Pirates can hide from sensor in system and jump out after they attack
>>>>with a reasonable chance for escape.
>>>
>>>Works for me (I'm the proponent of the "interdimensional heat sink in space"
>>>to allow much greater stealth. Unfortunately it dosen't work for those who
>>>know more physics than I do, ane they are the ones who wrote the sensor
>>>rules.
>> 
>>I like the laser cooling system from the 'sun diver' novel myself.
>
>Other's don't. Right Leonard?
>
>>Looks like I know what I'll be reading ing the 'reading room' for a
>>while....There has to be simple answer hear somewhere that we are just
>>overlooking.
>
>I hope there is, but there don't _have_ to be. Sometimes a background just
>contains a contradiction. I have canonical statements that the _Maghiz_
>took place in -927, -925, AND -924. There is no simple answer to explain
>that. Two of them are just plain wrong. But go ahead. I wish you luck.
>

Also a good point but I'll keep hoping for a solution.  Maybe Marc will
'speak from on high' and give us the word on this and the transponders and
the sensors and ....

>>...The 'down for repairs' could deal with the military. After all 1/12th
>>have to be at a military base one month our of the year for their overhaul
>>plus the travel time from their patrol routes to and from the base...
>
>That was addressed last time around (or was it the round before that?). 
>Annual maintenance takes two weeks, not four. And most systems have a
>Class A or B starport on a high-population world within one or two jumps.
>

Would the navy let civilians do the maintainence on a Battle ship or store
the nucs for them in their lightly gaurded warehouses???

Charles L.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #982
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 20 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 983



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: Sensors and piracy
G: T Kits
Re: UWP Cultural Extension
re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Piracy
Re: Bonehead Gearheads, (Was Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*)
re: Piracy
RE: T Kits
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
re: Piracy and Parting Out
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
re: Starship Mortgages

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 19:14:12 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

At 06:26 PM 10/20/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte writes:
>
>>>_Rebellion_ p. 27 states that each sector of the Imperium theoretically has
>>>a group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships. This number includes combat
>>>vessels such as cruisers, carriers, battleships, and _some_ escorts
>>>(emphasis mine). It does not include auxiliaries, support ships, and scouts.
>> 
>>Now this is posible.  A 1000 ship sector Navy INCLUDING escorts is
>>reasonable. What I said was 1000 capital ships alone was not reasonable.
>
>Charles, you read the text the way the Devil reads the Bible. The text say
>"combat vessels SUCH AS cruisers, carriers, battleships, and some escorts".
>For those escorts to be metioned in the same breath as cruisers, carriers,
>and battleships it seems reasonable to assume that they would be in the
>same general weight class as cruisers, carriers, and battleships. So I
>conjectured that some cruiser-sized escorts existed and that it was those
>that was meant. Ast it turns out, _Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium_
>(which I don't have) makes it clear that such ships do exist, so no
>conjecture is needed. those escorts are capital ships without a spinal
>mount. The sloan Class is that kind of escort the same way the KINUNIR is
>a cruiser. 
>

I do not have a problem with that.  I never said the escort HAD to be small.
I said I had a problem with a 5000 ships sector navy.  Your quote about does
NOT say that it ONLY included HEAVY escort.  The 'and some escort' could be
dismissive for several reasons such as they are few or have little
firepower.  It does not say so.  You could be right that only heavy escort
are counted but you could also be wrong.  Just as that 1% could be all navy
ships including auxilleries.  IT does not say and we do not know for sure.

>>It does not fit the numbers in the histories of the frontier and false wars.
>
>Well, most of the histories deal with the movement of fleets, so I don't
>see why it makes a difference whether it is 8 battleship fleets or 64
>battleship fleets. It's true that the number of squadrons in FFW is far
>too low, but FFW was a boardgame. My take on that is that the forces were
>reduced proportionally to make for a playable game. But trot out your
>evidence. Maybe I missed something somewhere.
>

Some of the TNS articals included the names of the ships and their classes
that were in those fleets.  Also some mention total ship losses as well.
The production information for the Marches in in the AHL and Kinuneer books
as well as some more combat history.  From those I'd say that 1000 ships
including escorts sounds about right.

>>if escort are in the same proportions as wet navy then their will be 200
>>capital ships and 800 escorts or 250/700 if their are a lot of cruisers.
>
>The one example I have (I guess I will have to get hold of FSSI after all)
>has none of the escorts from the 1000 ship figure. It does have one
>auxiliary type escort per capital ship. Which is what I gave my hypothetical
>average fleet.
>

A little light in my opinion but that could also explain 'and some escort'
as they mayby in short supply.  (Again just a guess)

>>I think they would have to be.  More than likely the 'missing ship' are
>>auxilleries and 'coast guard' ships belonging to well to do planets.
>
>Those count against a different budget.
>

Is there canan saying aux. ships are in a different budget.  I'll give you
the 'coast gaurds' are.  There is canon to support that. lots of canon.

>>>The simplest solution is propably to ignore the ',and some escorts' part and
>>>just consider the presence of a spinal mount the criteria for being part of
>>>the 1000 ship figure.
>>
>>Then the number of ships is out of line with CT history.  Look at the
>>production nubers for the two cruisers that have their own books.
>
>The KINUNIR is not a real cruiser. The AZHANTI had a "print run" of, what,
>120? (My books are at home). Perhaps it was an atypical number. One example
>just proves that it is within the parameters but it dosen't say where.
>

It is classed a cruiser,  perhaps a light cruiser.  As for the AHL I am at
work but that number sounds right.  If memory is accuarate they were built
over a long time period and all of then were not in sevice at on time.
There may be some extrapolatable data of ship down time in there some were.
I'll try to check tonight.

>>Those numbers and their service dates does not make sense for a 1000 capital
>>ship navy per sector but does make sense for a 250-300 crusier heavy capitol
>>ship navy.
>
>Would you explain your reasoning here, please?
>

The AHLs production run and lossed if memory serves would have kept a
minimum of 30 on line at any one time.  (I've got to reread it.  I got it
out for this reason)  AHL was being replace while in production with heavier
ships with less jump capacity.  It's long legs made it a bit of an ugly
duckling so its' numbers could be scued.  The Kenineer could be one of the
special escorts you mentioned through now that I think it through.  It has
some ver interesting features.

>>>In the following for ease of reference I'm going to use the word 'armada'
>>>about the sector fleets and reserve the word 'fleet' for the sub-sector-sized
>>>fleets that the armadas are composed of. Also 'combat vessels' for the ships
>>>included in the 1000 ship figure and 'auxiliaries' for all the ships that
>>>isn't.
>>>
>>>If the 1000 ships are for a sector with a full sixteen sub-sectors, then the
>>>average fleet has 1000/16 = 62.5 ships. Since there are 320 regular fleets in
>>>the Imperium, the total of combat ships for the Imperium would be around
>>>20,000.
>>
>>Where is 'fleet' defines as the ships of one sector?  I have not seen this.
>
>_Rebellion_ explains that the Imperium operates with two kinds of fleets.
>Numbered fleets are (roughly) one regular and one subsector fleet to a
>subsector (with a few extra for special cases; the Imperium have about 300
>subsectors and 320 regular fleets). The other kind is the named fleet. A
>named fleet is either a command structure for all the numbered fleets in
>a sector of a separate force. The evidence is conflicting, but I have
>chosen the first interpretation. In any case, there is a named fleet for
>each sector and provision for creating special named fleets for special
>occasions.
>

But what is a fleet in terms or ships? 10? 20? 100?  What is a typical break
down?  BBs? CAs? CCs? DDs? DEs?

>>I have seen 'sector fleet' and 'subsector fleet' both used.
>
>'Sector fleet' would be the same as a named fleet. 'Subsector fleet' is

Makes sence.

>ambiguous. It could be the regular fleet stationed in a subsector, but
>it is more likely to be the local fleet (also known as the reserve fleet,
>but that can be confused with the ships laid up in ordinary (if any).
>I prefer 'regular' and 'colonial' fleet. That is unambiguous.
>

Who pays the bills for these?  Locals of IN?

>>>Further down it is stated that a regular fleet has between 2 and 10 squadrons
>>>amounting to a total of between 50 and 200 ships. This would appear to
>>>average out to 125 ships per fleet with an average of 6 squadrons per fleet
>>>and 21 ships per squadron.
>>
>>Where is squadron size defined?  I missed this too.  The fleets I have seen
>>discribed were not this large?
>
>Further down on the same page IIRC.
>


I don't have rebellion but THAT is going to get corrected... if posible.

 
>>>However, FS states that CruRons are generally of 4 to 8 ships and the
>>>examples in it implies that 8 ship BatRons are the norm.
>> 
>>2 battle ships and 6 escorts or 1 battle ship 2 cruisers and 5 escorts.
>>Sounds very reasonable.  If you mean 8 battle ships in one formation this
>>is not reasonable.
>
>That's what the examples imply. 8 battle ships.
>
>>It would leave the formation to vunerable to fast attack ships.
>
>The example don't mention escorts. That dosen't mean they are not there.
>

I never seen a TNS artical dealing with this size formation and Fighting
Ships production lists does not support it.  There are only a few names on
the list.  Not enough to cover a sector much less the Empire with these
groups.  What am I missing here?

>>>Obviously this must be one of the cheapest squadrons in the navy.
>
>>This is not a good squadron to use as it is a battle rider squad.  In CT
>>battle ridder are uncommon compared to jump warships.  For a jump capable
>>group to carry equaul firepower it would raise the cost quite a bit.
>
>That was my point.
>
>>Auxiliary ships gernerally equal or outnumber the combat ships at least
>>historicaly.  The CT battle histories I've read generally delt with the
>>combat ellements and 'fast raids' of cruiser spuads but simiple logistic
>>would require massive transport capacity to attack a planet or reload the
>>missle bays of a cruron of batron.
>
>If you want to suggest some numbers and sizes for auxiliaries, then you
>are more than welcome.
>

There is not nearly enough canonal data to try.  The above is bases of my
knowledge of WW2.
 
>>>but what about the couriers, destroyers, smaller escorts, transports and
>>>tankers that appear in FS and elsewhere? For example, I happen to believe
>>>that a navy would have a massive number of couriers, say 20 per fleet, but
>>>even
>> 
>>I read in the scouts book the the scout couriers are sumsumed in times of
>>war into the navy.
>
>That's right. But that dosen't mean the Navy can't have some scout ships of
>it's own. Propably larger than Type Ss.
>

Would almost have to be for extended operations.

>>I think that this is where they come from and the Navy just borrows what it
>>needs.
>
>It dosen't make much difference either way. You need a LOT of 100 T ships to
>make a dent in the Imperial naval budget.
>

You are not kidding here!

>>Don't forget the costs of bases in there.
>
>That is supposed to be paid for out of the 10% maintenance cost.
>

Does not jive with canon.  A large naval base would cost more that a tyoe A
starport and they cost more than a Battle cruiser!

>>A subsector naval base would cost at least as much as the ships it was
>>designed to service at one time.
>
>Well, if you could prove that you would have a basis for challenging the 10%
>figure.
>
>>If it could handle 2 battle ships the dock would cost the same or more than
>>two battle ships or there abouts. The support structures would cost as much
>>or more than the navy.  At least than is how is today.
>
>The equipment AND the personnel to service a ship will cost roughly what it
>costs to maintain 25 ships of that size. Which is what the 0.1% maintenance
>fee goes to.
>

Not posible.  The size of the dock alone would be half again as big as the
biggest ship it could hold.  Plus all the equipment and spare parts.  It
does not make sence.  Also the naval base is equivalent to a type A star
port in cannon.  Loke at the cost in T4 to build a class A!  It take 20
years of planetary level income!

>>>The other possibility is that a large number of ships are laid up in
>>>ordinary. That would require that part of the annual budget was used to
>> 
>>The USA has more ship in mothballs than operating including several carriers
>>and battle ships.
>
>Unfortunately a huge reserve fleet gives other problems for the background.
>Right, Gary?
>

Can you explain?  I missed this discussion.  Or just send me a copy of the
last bruehaha about it.
 
>>I think using Striker may be a mistake.  It was writen mainly for planetary
>>combat. I'm not sure that it's numbers would apply to the navy.
>
>It specifically states that: Military spending ranges from 1% (after a long
>time of peace) to 15% (during a war) with 3% being the average for the
>Imperium. It further states that the Imperium gets 30% of that and that
>the Imperium uses half of that for its regular forces and half for its
>colonial forces. It does not say how big a percentage the Imperium uses
>for the Imperial Army, but it does say that individual planets use between
>6% to 40% of their budgets on their suborbital forces. The low figure is for
>planets without a breathable atmosphere. 
>

AH!  Now the question is how much of that actually become ships.  1000cr
toilet seat anyone?  (Grin)

>>Does anyone know the current spending of the USA in the military compared
>>the the GNP?  1% sound kind of high considering it is the GROSS national
>>product.
>
>David Pulver posted some figures just the other day. IIRC it was 1.4% for
>Canada and 4% for the US.
>

And the US has not built a new carrier in a decade.  They are getting ready
to build a new one in the next year or two.  I wonder where the money will
come from.  2 billion dollars for the ship alone.  Makes you wonder.
 
>>>I'd like to finish off by re-emphasizing that all those ships, the 20,000 
>>>combat vessels, the 20,000 big escorts and the unspecified number of lesser
>>>ships only represent 15% of the Cr150. Another 15% goes to the subsector
>>>fleets and the remaining 70% goes to planetary defenses, though admittedly
>>>6-40% of that (4.2-28% of the total) would go to armies.
>> 
>>Where are these numbers coming from?  I have not seen them and would love to
>>have this resource to analize.
>
>_Striker_. See above.
> 
>

I saw a second edition striker in my local hobie shop.  Is this the one you
have?  I missed the first release years ago.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 19:14:16 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Sensors and piracy

At 12:47 AM 10/20/98 +0100, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>
>>A lasers beam spreads over great distances.  I typical comercial 1 watt unit
>>today would cast a circle about 1.5 feet in diameter on the moon.  Far
>>enough out and your much better ships laser would not have any effect <snip>
>
>Traveller laser weapons (post FFS1) have a handwave called grav focusing
>which improves their range etc.
>

Gravity?  I postulated magnetics.  I keep forgeting that the TU has
gravitic.  Makes somethings much easier.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:17:40 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: G: T Kits

     Several very kind people have answered my post regarding the Advantage
Fit and Very Fit.  The only problem I have with this now is that the book
Compendium I is out of print.  How can I get one if they are not printing
it?  Why would you use something from a book that is not in print, and not
atleast list it in the G:T book or even the errata?

Leo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:29:29 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: UWP Cultural Extension

Not having PE, I'm at a bit of a loss to comment here. Would this be
like some of the extended cultural stuff that WorldBuilders Handbook
did?

If so, yes! that sounds like a good idea!

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:
> 
> We have an economic extension for the UWP in Pocket Empires.
> Should we do a cultural extension (about the same number of digits, etc). What
> would that cover?
> 
> Marc

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:23:13 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Current Tech: Shortstop

SethKimmel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No offense, but I wish this stuff woundn't be posted on line. Why let the bad
guys know what we're working on....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It was posted in the base newspaper. My brother wasn't letting me in
on anything an enemy munitions researcher wouldn't know, or anything
all that secret.

Unless, of course, this is just misinformation to make people with
stockpiles of prox-fused munitions decide not to bother...<G>

Look at it another way: if this is the kind of stuff we have that _isn't_
secret, what kind of stuff do our special forces have that still _is_?

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:35:11 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>Are american cars armed with machine guns?  If there were no need why
>would
>the all powerfull Empire allow the ships to be armed in the first place?

Yup, they are. Or at least enough to do drive by shootings. Had a friend
teaching in Chicago one year. He left after a drive-by, with automatic
weapons. 

(Not trying to reopen the debate about whether guns are a cause or product
of the incredible violence in American society. I can game it either way,
and not living or vacationing there I'm not too worried about it in real
life.  Just pointing out that for cultural reasons American society
tolerates higher homicide rates than, say, Canada.)

So maybe there's a clause in Imperial law allowing merchants to be armed.
It was originally put in place to permit Imperial Chartered merchants to
refuse non-Imperial customs inspections. Since then it has been jealously
guarded by the Imperial Merchants Association, even though the original
reasons no longer apply (because most merchants trade exclusively with
Imperial worlds now).

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:37:08 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Bonehead Gearheads, (Was Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*)

William Prankard wrote:

> This brought the saftey inspectors down on the Commander's rear, and X-TEK
> was fined for "unsafe practices" or somesuchthing.  Makes me wonder why
> they were bugging me and not the Spofulam kids!  ;-)

Because whenever the Imperial Safety inspectors have gotten anywhere
near those kids, they wake up three weeks later, with a week-old beard,
fresh tattoos in very personal places, ritual scarring on their chests,
fragmentary and hallucinatory memories of the intervening time, a
hangover that takes a month and a half to go away, has been shown to
involve permanent brain damage, and an inexplicable fear of Vargr named
'Raoul'.

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:29:46 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Piracy

Ian wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Any sort of traffic control is going to make this very difficult.

Allocating 'parking orbits' while waiting for customs clearance or traffic
control allocating courses is going to make things hard for our pirate.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Except that traffic control probably isn't going to make people "park".

Merchants are 1G, patrol craft are 3G to 6G. Every hour a merchant
has to sit and wait is lost income. The merchant will request an
vector towards their destination and accelerate/decelerate along
it, the patrol ship will use their larger acceleration advantage to
catch the merchant.

Traffic control will space incoming merchants along these flight paths
based on a good landing interval between 1G ships. Except for
approaches to high-security sites (Naval Depots, Impie Prison Planets,
etc) the emphasis will be on maximizing starport usage, not on
keeping the ships far enough apart that they can't suddenly turn
on an extra couple of G's and attack each other.

Ian again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
OK, so we have a number of ships in the system greater than n, but small
enough that you dont have to go halfway across the system with a patrol
ship on your tail.

We also have a tax base small enough to support one active patrol boat
(there might be a couple in the shop).

Are both these conditions credible ? Would a class D or E system (from the
sounds of it, that seems to be about what you are describing) have this
level of traffic ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You're not worried about all the patrol boats. You're worried about
the patrol boats that can intercept you.

Some are in the shop. Some are on the pad. Some are hiding at the
bottom of the oceans, or deep in the asteroid belt, or way out in the
oort cloud, or in close orbit (or inside) the local gas giants. Some are
docked with ships that required extensive search (and seizure?). Some
are on maneuvers with the Subsector Fleet five parsecs from here.
Some are simply assigned to traffic patterns that take them too far
away from the current location of the disguised pirate to be a factor
for the time frame involved.

How many system patrol boats does it take to pull customs duty
on one inbound traffic pattern? Remember that some of these
traffic patterns will take a couple days to fly, I can see one ship
pulling board & inspection duty on lots of merchants. All the pirate
needs is one window of opportunity...and based on my economics
analysis, I'd say a pirate can afford to be patient.

Ian again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It is also a neat bit of sensor work to detect if it's new or not from
sensor readings at the sort of ranges I think you're talking about. About
size, power plant output and current gees is about it, I think. Still,
enough to create a target profile.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There may be some "tells" for this kind of thing - how crisp is the
emissions profile change when the Fat Trader powers up for a
significant course change? How much interference in the transponder
signal? I agree that it's good sensor work, but hey - If your sensor crew 
isn't good at picking targets, you'll not do well as a Corsair. Knowing the
difference between the emissions profile of a recently-maintained Fat 
Trader and that of an armored Q-Ship is kind of vital. People who get 
really good at this kind of thing start to do scary things with what looks 
like incomplete data.

"Yeah, it's a Fat Trader all right. Hear that whine on the power
emission static? She's got a new load on her power system,
it hasn't stablized yet - probably a new laser weapon mount."

(For comparison, check out what some submarine sonar officers
are capable of).

Ian again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>The hapless Fat Trader is easy pickings. A string of rescue balls,
>their emergency beacons a plaintive wail in the darkness, streams
>off on one vector as the Corsair takes another. The patrol captain
>makes a hard choice - chase a pirate, or ensure the safety of the
>drifting crew?

This is no choice, to me at least. The crew are absolutely safe in the
rescue balls. I mean, if you cant survive in one for time for help to
arrive, what use are rescue balls ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Rescue balls are designed to protect the occupant inside a
depressurized ship, and so a vac suited individual can transport
the occupant to a pressurized area. They are not lifeboats, nor
even vac suits - think of them more like life jackets in a rather hostile
ocean. IMO, someone who dumped a crew out an airlock
in rescue balls should be charged with reckless endangerment. 

I'm talking about the Cr600 plastic bags here - I'm sure we could
have better models available, for a price.

btw...do you think that a pirate could pull off a short-term masquerade?
Keep the authorities from getting suspicious as long as ranges are
kept long?

"..Keep your distance though, Chewie, but don't look like you're trying
to keep your distance. I don't know.  Fly casual." - Han Solo in
_Return of the Jedi_

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:36:59 -0700
From: "Brian Mays" <bmays@genscope.com>
Subject: RE: T Kits

It is out of print, but it is not uncommon.  I know the game store around
the corner from me (in San Francisco) has several copies.  If you can't find
it locally, give them a call:

GAMESCAPE  (415) 621-GAME

Another store I know has copies for sale is Gator Games, at (650) 571-PLAY

There is also Wargames West, a mail-order company that has just about
everything.  I think it's 1-800-SAY-GAME.

Finally, if you want a used copy, go for rec.games.frp.marketplace.  I've
gotten a LOT of great out-of-print stuff there, for cheap.

Hope this helps!

Brian (Professional Shopper) Mays

>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.mpgn.com
>[mailto:owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.mpgn.com]On Behalf Of Leo Hale
>Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 12:18 PM
>To: traveller@mpgn.com
>Subject: G: T Kits
>
>
>     Several very kind people have answered my post regarding the Advantage
>Fit and Very Fit.  The only problem I have with this now is that the book
>Compendium I is out of print.  How can I get one if they are not printing
>it?  Why would you use something from a book that is not in print, and not
>atleast list it in the G:T book or even the errata?
>
>Leo
>
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:43:41 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:51:21 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
>  Definitely a serious wakeup call.  <grin>
> And under HG rules, you could *still* stuff 3 missile racks into a triple
> turret, not just 2.  Prob is, under those rules, you can't have a missile
> bay
> if you use missile turrets, which makes sense to me.
> *************
> out of cuitosity, why does this make sense to you?
It's a control thing.  The 'feel' of controlling a missile bay would be a
*LOT* different than controlling a missile turret.
************
but why not both on the same ship?  seems pretty silly to me.  it is not
like they are controled by the same gunner....




>   Personally, on, say, a
> 5000 dt frigate, I'd use a pair of 100 ton missile bays as a standoff
> weapon,
> 10 triple laser turrets for point defense, and 20 dual energy weap
turrets
> for
> close-in work.
> **********
> I would go with more lasers and some sand. (or lots of armor)
I hardly ever play with sand.  But the armour is a given; only warships
will
have bay weaponry.  IMNSFBHO, 'merchants' with spinal mounted PA's are just
plain *SILLY*.  They're using vaulable cubic they *COULD* be using to make
*MONEY* with.  Same way with bay weaponry.  Under HG, you can use an empty
bay
for cargo space, but you can only use 50% of it.  For a merchie, that's
uneconomic.
**************
if you are thinking of the same merchants I am, they are really strike
cruisers in diguise :)

so the Bays are ok.  about the armor though...only some ships will have
lots of armor,  the armor slows you down, and if you are high jump or
carrying troops/fighters  you may not have room for the bigger manuver
drive needed for the extra mass of the armor.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:34:47 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Piracy and Parting Out

Steve Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  What if the insurance companies association (which _will_ be a powerful
lobby) is somehow ignored, but understands the concept "Q-Ship"? Or hires
starmercs themselves (if the TU in question allows such).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I've seen some nice Q-ship designs. A 400tn armored beast, same lines
as a Fat Trader but twice the turrets and a lot more legs. Even has a
small cargo capacity for vital freight. Nasty last thing a Corsair
crew will see.

The 400tn Patrol Cruiser design in CT seems to suggest that this craft
is seen in the hands of private security forces, and the Al Morai
Route Protectors (I have heard) are a canonical group of privately-owned
Gazelle Close Escorts, used for escort duty.

No one said being a pirate was easy, or even smart.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 19:43:48 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

At 12:09 PM 10/20/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
>...
>>All of this assumuses a perfect operater and that the pirate does not have a
>>brain cell in his head.  Said pirate could be in firing range of the sensor
>>ship with only two seconds warning and his weapons will be maned and ready.
>>The sensor ship could not maintain constant readiness.  It would have to out
>>mass the pirate 10 to one or more to stand a chance.
>/...
>
>  What's the basis for that 10:1 assertion?
>

Guesstamate.  The ships would take at least one broadside as the weapons
were unmaned and probably a second before the crew made it to stations and
got up to snuff.  How many ship could fight effectively after receiving a
broadside from an equal weight ship with max weaponry?  I'd target the
weapons and drives on the first pass if I were that pirate.

>...
>>'chop shops' and pirate bases would be necessary.  Perhaps the bases are in
>>the ort cloud region.  I dought anyone would be poking arroung out there and
>>there are fuel sources.
>
>  Little traffic except the occasional patrol by SDB's practicing warfighting
>routines for their Oort cloud withdrawals.
>
>

The ort cloud is beyond the orbit of pluto and completely circles our solar
system.  Can you say too damned big to ever search in a 100 life times?
Care to guess how long it would take the SDBs to get there on manuver drives?


Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:01:39 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Starship Mortgages

Steven Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>If you tell them the ship will be used for mercenary operations won't
>the high risk use of the ship make them need to charge you a higher
>intrest rate?

  Realistically, yes, although the Traveller financial community doesn't
seem to be very highly evolved.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This retarded evolution may be the direct result of communications
limits. How highly evolved would our world financial community be if
it took two years to just request someone's credit history, much less
decide if they are credit worthy?

Locally, I see the financial community being quite well developed.
This development will unravel quickly with parsecs of distance.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #983
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 20 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 984



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Capital Ships
Ship swallowing pirates
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: G: T Kits
UWP Cultural Extension
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
4IWG pages and subscribe points
Re: Piracy
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re UWP Cultural Extensions
Re Piracy
Re: Re Piracy and Parting Out
Striker
TAS & GT
Re: 4IWG pages and subscribe points 
Re: UWP Cultural Extension
Re: Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:25:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: Capital Ships

Anyone built any wet navy designs for Traveller lately? I've seen the
"destroyer" from Traveller Book and recall some of the old megatrav
articles published in Challenge, but I'm unaware if FFS2 had naval design
(Gurps Vehicles does, but I don't recall seeing any TL9+ vessels).

Would a wet navy really exist at Traveller TL12+ (or GURPS TL10+) or at
that point is it mostly SDBs doing the "run silent, run deep" situation?
The second ever Trav adventure I ran was a submarine vs. SDB duel (on
Ruie, I think, can't remeber for sure, though) and I recall some JTAS
("thing in the deep") but... I still wonder.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:21:25 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: Ship swallowing pirates

I played with the numbers, and it doesn't look like you can get a surplus
military streamlined ship <800 dt that will carry even a scout in a
spacedock....you can however get a 600dt ship with J3, 3Gs, 15 staterooms
and 71 cargo. (GTL 10) .  If you go for a new ship (GTL 12) it will have
151 cargo.... These ships cost 155/141MCr respectively....Anyone want to
buy a fast trader?

The transponders in GT also seem easily forgable....just record someone
else's and broadcast it back.

the only problem I foresee is the jump limit.....I like the move it back to
1,000 diameters (for incoming traffic only) idea, as I like the concept of
ships having to maneuver to get in system.

someone said that this would push the limit for a star to 4 AU (leaving 3
AU to maneuver to the mainworld).
this will take about 4.5  days.  call it 5 days total transit (have to move
out to 100d to jump). Will this break the 2 jumps every 30 days economic
analysis?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:28:40 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

>
>No offense, but I wish this stuff woundn't be posted on line. Why let the
bad
>guys know what we're working on....
>

From the security briefings I attended before I left the service, I'd have
to say that before we hear about it on this list "they" not only know it
exists.  By now they probably have the maintenance manuals.

douglas

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:35:29 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

At 07:14 PM 10/20/98 +0000, you wrote:
>At 06:26 PM 10/20/98 +0200, you wrote:
>>Charles Prevatte writes:
<<SNIP>>
>>David Pulver posted some figures just the other day. IIRC it was 1.4% for
>>Canada and 4% for the US.
>>
>
>And the US has not built a new carrier in a decade.  They are getting ready
>to build a new one in the next year or two.  I wonder where the money will
>come from.  2 billion dollars for the ship alone.  Makes you wonder.

Gotta disagree here...

CVN-72 USS Abraham Lincloln, commissioned 11/11/89
CVN-73 USS George Washington, commissioned 7/4/92
CVN-74 USS John C. Stennis, commissioned 12/9/95
CVN-75 USS Harry S. Truman, commissioned 7/25/98

and CVN-76 USS Ronald Reagan is currently under construction

And more are on the way.  Authorization was recently granted for the CVX
with a combat airwing of about 75 AC.

This is in addition to all of the Burke class DDGs built to date and the
balance of the Ticonderoga class CGs.  And that is just major surface
combatants, it is not counting the SSBN and two classes of SSN and the new
class of SSN in development.  

Kurt Feltenberger

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a
habit.”
- --- Aristotle ---

mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:38:59 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: G: T Kits

Publishing schedules...the Compendia are slated for reprinting RSN if
not now, per the SJG web site.

Leo Hale wrote:
> 
>      Several very kind people have answered my post regarding the Advantage
> Fit and Very Fit.  The only problem I have with this now is that the book
> Compendium I is out of print.  How can I get one if they are not printing
> it?  Why would you use something from a book that is not in print, and not
> atleast list it in the G:T book or even the errata?
> 
> Leo

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 20:48:36 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: UWP Cultural Extension

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:


>We have an economic extension for the UWP in Pocket Empires.
>Should we do a cultural extension (about the same number of digits, etc).
What
>would that cover?


I'd vote for it.  It would give referee's a little more idea of the world
than the current UWP without (hopefully) being too rigid.

Is there any chance I could resurrect my idea of a couple of years back to
include some idea of what 'net/information/library facilities are
like/available/allowed?  I don't think this is necessarily going to be a
direct function of TL (though related) and do think that it's something
that can enhance role playing rather just being extra detail.

Other possibilities might include:
some kind of language code
some of the _World Builder's Handbook_ type details


tc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:43:36 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:14:39 -0400
>From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com

>Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:58:53 -0800
>From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
>Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
>>For the space/cost of a missile bay you can get 50 laser turrets with 150
>>lasers total. The 10 turrets/1 bay/1000 tons limit will mean that
>maxed-out
>>ships only get 30 lasers per missile bay, which is a little more
>saturatable.
>IIRC, A turret can control 2 missles.
>***************
>3 missiles. one for each launcher in the turret.

Yeah, I realized later I was thinking about something else
that comes (or came in some playtest version) at 2/turret.
I'm not sure what.

______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:45:56 PDT
From: "jim clem" <travmind@hotmail.com>
Subject: 4IWG pages and subscribe points

There are now two pages for the Fourth Imperium Work Group:

My own:
http://www.geocities.com/area51/dimension/7081/4I.html

and Keven Pittsinger's:
http://www.glasscity.net/users/jamstar/traveller/4i/index.html

We are getting great response to this project, its exciting!!

There are signup boxes for the mailing list at each of these, any and 
all are welcome (even those GURPS people) <grin>, and long live the New 
Imperium!!!


Jim Clem, B.S.E.
GM, The Scattered Worlds Traveller PbEM, Where Humaniti Carves out a New 
Home
http://www.geocities.com/area51/dimension/7081/trvpg1.html
Founder and CEO, Diasporan Systems, Inc.

"Who am I? I am Susan Ivanova, Commander. Daughter of Andre
 and Sophie Ivanov. I am the Right Hand of Vengence and
the boot that is going to kick your sorry ass all the way
back to Earth, sweetheart. I am Death Incarnate, and the 
last living thing that you are ever going to see. God sent
me." from "Between Darkness & Light" -Babylon 5 

Now THATS my kind of woman!!!!


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:55:35 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>Except that traffic control probably isn't going to make people "park".
>
>Merchants are 1G, patrol craft are 3G to 6G. Every hour a merchant
>has to sit and wait is lost income. The merchant will request an
>vector towards their destination and accelerate/decelerate along
>it, the patrol ship will use their larger acceleration advantage to
>catch the merchant.

Assuming there are enough patrol vessels in the mainworld orbit to manage
the traffic.  A class D starport may be lucky to have an armed shuttle.  A
class E starport will probably do all it's inspections at the downport (by
definition, a cleared spot of bedrock...) - provided that the starport is
aware of the ship before it lands at all.

[snip]

>
>"Yeah, it's a Fat Trader all right. Hear that whine on the power
>emission static? She's got a new load on her power system,
>it hasn't stablized yet - probably a new laser weapon mount."
>
>(For comparison, check out what some submarine sonar officers
>are capable of).


Those are officers in a specialized field using the best technology the
planet has to offer.  What about the Naval ensign dumped on a Tech 9 world
using local equipment to try and determine the sensor readings from a TL-B
ship?  Assuming that the ship is not actually using TL-D ECM equipment.

>
>Ian again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>The hapless Fat Trader is easy pickings. A string of rescue balls,
>>their emergency beacons a plaintive wail in the darkness, streams
>>off on one vector as the Corsair takes another. The patrol captain
>>makes a hard choice - chase a pirate, or ensure the safety of the
>>drifting crew?
>
>This is no choice, to me at least. The crew are absolutely safe in the
>rescue balls. I mean, if you cant survive in one for time for help to
>arrive, what use are rescue balls ?


To give time for the crew to survive until rescue arrives.  Not to wait out
an extended period while the 'rescue' goes haring off after who knows what.
Assuming, of course, that the patrol ship survives the encounter.

Remember:
 1) Rescue balls, by definition, are not launched under ideal conditions.
 2) They may contain wounded
 3) Maintenance on such items is (ahem) usually spotty at best - you can't
count on optimum performance.
 4) There has got to be a real psychological effect to having your ship
blown out from under you, stuffing yourself into a plastic bag and ejecting
from the ship - and then waiting to be either rescued or run out of air.
(brrrrr)
 5) Can you say "lowest bidder"?

douglas

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:06:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

The Kinunirs are very interesting vessels. Much of this is the result of
being transition designs from Book 2 to High Guard, but nevertheless...

Originally concieved as vanguard cruisers (whatever that meant), a shift
in policy saw a redesign and conversion to colonial cruisers
("euphemistically called battle cruisers").

What is a Colonial Cruiser and why the euphemism? Obviously not a ship for
the colonial navy, since they were built for Imperial service.

Examining the design, it is fairly clear that it cannot stand up to line
of battle and in fact the design history supports this, with Allamu being
"caught in the van" at the Two Suns (where it obviously wasn't supposed to
be) and getting toasted. The Ninkur Sagga fought on the flank of same
battle; obviously the Kinunirs might be committed to fleet action if
nessasary. They also escorted Haunting Thunder during the Fourth Frontier
war on a commerce raiding mission.

But what were they good for? Kinunir has them primarily tooling about on
independent operations. And that, I think, is what they are for. Not big
enough to make a big fuss, but large enough to protect themselves in peace
time. They are there to intimidate individual low-tech planets...
basically, they are for gunboat diplomacy of the British colonial type. A
kinunir with its Marine platoon (nuclear armed!) and missile turrets (with
nuke warheads) can inflict a lot of devastation in a punative raid. TL5
world has kidnapped trade reps? TL7 planet has a hostage situation at the
imperial consul's residence? Some pesky corsair in a stolen X-boat tender
shooting up shipping across the sector? Local ancient site need some
protection? Send a kinunir. It combines planetary bombardment and marine
special operations capability in one tidy package, it's got good jump legs
and, most of all, it has one special edge: that puzzling little factor 1
black globe generator.

Moderately useless in combat, it has one big advantage: against a world,
the kinunir class can jump in well outside planetary detection range,
locate the present planetary orbit and where it will be, build up a little
velocity, globe on, and come in invisible. This lets them ignore any
system defense boat patrols until the last moment. If necessary, the
kinunirs effectively have the capability (by uncloaking near orbit) to
mount a surprise nuclear missile strike on any planet not well equipped
enough to have nuclear damper systems and extensive anti-missile defenses
and the discipline to turn 'em on with practically no warning (and a lot
of planets will have cities or other installations that aren't protected
- -- imagine what a salvo from six triple missile turrets can do to your
crop lands). They can also do other tricks, e.g., releasing the pinnace
with a marine force aboard while following englobed -- as long as the
pinnace follows a straight course, there is a cruiser ready and invisible. 

Of course, this is a nasty capability and a nasty job, which is why the
kinunirs are *euphemistically* battle cruisers. You don't want to admit
the main purpose of them is to be a roving Imperial Marine special
operations and pocket strike cruiser designed to be able to keep jerkwater
worlds in line. Of course, the Vegans are a bit more honest: you will note
that they Regal Splendor has "served mainly in the insurrection suppress
role" since it was shipped to them in 1092. Want to bet the Vegans
installed the missile racks soon after the Impies removed 'em?

- -David

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:05:30 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

>>And the US has not built a new carrier in a decade.  They are getting
ready
>>to build a new one in the next year or two.  I wonder where the money will
>>come from.  2 billion dollars for the ship alone.  Makes you wonder.
>
>Gotta disagree here...
>
>CVN-72 USS Abraham Lincloln, commissioned 11/11/89
>CVN-73 USS George Washington, commissioned 7/4/92
>CVN-74 USS John C. Stennis, commissioned 12/9/95
>CVN-75 USS Harry S. Truman, commissioned 7/25/98
>
>and CVN-76 USS Ronald Reagan is currently under construction
>
>And more are on the way.  Authorization was recently granted for the CVX
>with a combat airwing of about 75 AC.
>
>This is in addition to all of the Burke class DDGs built to date and the
>balance of the Ticonderoga class CGs.  And that is just major surface
>combatants, it is not counting the SSBN and two classes of SSN and the new
>class of SSN in development.
>

Just as a side note tho' - according to the last figures I saw (a few years
ago, admittedly), we were only building to a sustained fleet size of 160 -
240 ships.  (8 new constructions per year, 20 - 30 year design life).

That's roughly 1/3 the size that was looked at in the early 80's and half of
the fleet size needed to successfully carry off Desert Storm.

douglas

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:26:43 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re UWP Cultural Extensions

>
>We have an economic extension for the UWP in Pocket Empires.
>Should we do a cultural extension (about the same number of digits, etc). What
>would that cover?
>
>Marc

My "requests":

1) Xenophobia/Xenophilia scale
2) Civil Law - Personal freedoms other than weapons
3) Weapons Law - what weapons are allowed
4) Criminal Enforcement - Chance of encountering LEnf, plus tenacity thereof.
5) (How to lable this one is a problem) a scale which indicates how much
the locals are likely to accuse non-locals of crimes without obvious
suspects.
6) how much they appreciate the arts.
7) how much they appreciate/trust the sciences.
8) how much they appreciate/trust the media...

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:45:39 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Piracy

>What is a Fat Trader doing outside a very safe, predictable trade route, or
>at least without an escort ?
>
Working his subsidized route. Routes are subsidized for some reason. Oft,
this is due to a poor route that needs a ship or 3 running it regularly.
Subbies, based upon TTA, have no freedom of course in typical operations:
45 weeks per year they operate on the given route. They get 5 weeks "route
Free", and 2 weeks for annual maintenance. They can bank the free weeks.
They turn over half their profits as their monthly payment... no profits,
and they must simply submit the proofs.

>
>If this is true, cargo haulers will be able to ask for more to ship goods
>to unpatrolled systems, and will thus be able to afford to be more heavily
>armed. Freight rates should get a risk premium ...
>
>>
obviously, the Imperial government has set prices at CrImp 1000 per ton
freight. Which is why it would seem most shipping would be done via
speculative cargo... where net take per ton can usually run aroun 1200-1500
cr/ton. Likewise, Cr8000 and Cr10000 for mid and high passages. These costs
are per jump. Per jump makes no sense, so it is an obvious pricefix
designed to discourage high-jump merchants.

Since it is obvious that there is price-fixing, if the Impies say "You
can't charge more", and catch you doing so, you lose. So you simply don't
go, unless you have a really good speculative cargo with an excellent
trader roll, and can afford the protection or the risk.

>Ian Whitchurch wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Step zero ... fill your cargo bay with a collapsible fuel bladder. If you
>dont need it, vent it, and use the cargo space for loot as and when
>neccessary. It will give you the opportunity to refuel a prize for a
>jump-1, if you do in fact hit an advantageous tactical opportunity (such as
>a sensor operator who has been stunned by a large amount of cash).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>In my way of thinking, the 30 to 90 minute looting window won't allow
>enough time for EVA, hose hookups, pumping and such. If you have
>a couple hours (say you're at the edge of a lightly patrolled system and
>the local patrol was out of position) then you might be able to pull
>this off.

Hmmm... maybe there should be a table of loading and unloading times.... I
know battletech has one (somewhere in the rules <G>)... I'll see if I can
find and adapt the Battletech one.

>I've seen some nice Q-ship designs. A 400tn armored beast, same lines
>as a Fat Trader but twice the turrets and a lot more legs. Even has a
>small cargo capacity for vital freight. Nasty last thing a Corsair
>crew will see.
>
>The 400tn Patrol Cruiser design in CT seems to suggest that this craft
>is seen in the hands of private security forces, and the Al Morai
>Route Protectors (I have heard) are a canonical group of privately-owned
>Gazelle Close Escorts, used for escort duty.
>
>No one said being a pirate was easy, or even smart.
>
>Walt Smith

And I've read a reference that Al Morai's route protectors sometimes turn
pirate on opposing lines... During tradewars.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:42:07 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re: Re Piracy and Parting Out

>Hello,
>>From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
>>Subject: Re Piracy and Parting Out
>...
>>Canon says there are pirates, and that they exist throughout the spinward
>>marches (TTA). The CGen provides for "Letter of Marque" as a benefit for
>>Pirates (sup4, MTPH).
>...
>
>  Not in my (1sr ed?) copy. Or is that a MT ref?
>
>        Steven

I stand corrected. MT does, Sup 4 doesn't

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:40:29 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Striker

>I saw a second edition striker in my local hobie shop.  Is this the one you
>have?  I missed the first release years ago.
>
>Charles L.
>
If it says "Striker 2", it is the TNE version, which lacks the economica of
the CT version (which has 3 little black books...)

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:07:10 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: TAS & GT

Allen Shock Writes:
>> Just looked on the G:T errata page. Its just been updated and included is
>that
>> TAS membership is a one off Cr1,000,000 not a yearly cost. And we can all
>
>> now breath a little easier.
>
>Well, a little bit anyway; it still only gives Middle passages instead of
>High :) But this is actually a change that I can live with; a player
>pointed out to me once that at Cr9000 every two months (assuming you sold
>the passages and didn't use them) a character could live pretty well..maybe
>TOO well :)
>
>Allen
But it now (in GT) gives one every month: Cr7200 per month, rather than
Cr4500 per month. So it's some 60% more return now. Monthly mids actually
makes more sense to me... a reasonable rate of return over 10 years.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:54:38 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: 4IWG pages and subscribe points 

> There are now two pages for the Fourth Imperium Work Group:
> 
> My own:
> http://www.geocities.com/area51/dimension/7081/4I.html
> 
> and Keven Pittsinger's:
> http://www.glasscity.net/users/jamstar/traveller/4i/index.html
> 
> We are getting great response to this project, its exciting!!
> 
> There are signup boxes for the mailing list at each of these, any and 
> all are welcome (even those GURPS people) <grin>, and long live the New 
> Imperium!!!

Think we oughta start a 4IWG webring, too?  <ducking>

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:08:34 EDT
From: "Sean Nelson" <sean_c_nelson@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: UWP Cultural Extension

>CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

>> We have an economic extension for the UWP in Pocket Empires.
>> Should we do a cultural extension (about the same number of digits, 
etc). What
>> would that cover?

Bloo replied:
<snip>
>If I had to pick four:
>- -Creativity
>- -Xenophobia (applying to all off-worlders, not just racial)
>- -Militancy
>- -Loyalty
>
>Adding all these to the government type and law level go a long way
>to painting a fast but good picture of a system.

I like it. 

What about:
- - Communal Perspective
    I remember, in my university days, discussing a sociological theory 
(I don't remember whose)that the further north a country was located the 
more likely it was going to have a "sense of community"
ingrained in its laws and culture.  I, personally, find the idea a 
little too simplistic.  Nevertheless the concept that a group of people 
who share a difficult existence have a larger sense of community is not 
completely out of whack.  
  Consequently the argument can be made that the more hazardous the 
living conditions the higher chance of a culture that works on an 
egalitarian principle (I am intentionally avoiding a right-left 
discussion).
  Notwithstanding the xenophobic dimension, the prospects for adventures 
are intriguing.  
   A planet's culture that sees itself as a family could have all sorts 
of help for the downtrodden, and be a very big headache for those who 
are viewed as 'privileged'.

- - Conservatism (with regards to protocols)
  Because of its political connotation I would prefer to use another 
word, but this is all I can think of right now.
  I am referring to how important planetside protocols and rituals are.
  Here on earth (I know some of you visit sometimes), breaching a 
tradition can have different effects:
  "You're leaving the faith for an inter-racial marriage, and bringing 
up my grandkids as atheists?"
 Depending on what faith you are leaving you might merely receive a 
shrug from your friends and family or much much worse.
   Not to mention what happens when a PC shakes hands with an embassy 
official - an insult on planet X.
   Does he laugh out loud and point out the mistake, or ...

- - Diversity
  Is the planet a homogeneous group, a melting pot, a diverse 
multicultural mix?  Segregated warring cultures?

I think a rich culture can be one of the keystones to a good campaign.
I could go on and on with what I would like to see, but we need to save 
some work for the GM.

- -Sean

- -----------------------------------

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:27:27 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Piracy

 
> Delta-V is the *rate* of change.  A 4G ship has 4 times the Delta-V of a 1G ship.

Delta-v is the TOTAL rate of change of velocity. A traveller ship
has a delta-v of its acceleration times the total duration the drive
can run. Basically, only missiles and other reaction drives have a
limit on this in traveller (12g24 missile has 24gs of delta-v, but
can only accelerate at 12 gs).

- -Merrick

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #984
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, October 20 1998      Volume 1998 : Number 985



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: UWP Cultural extention 
Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions
Re: Sensors and piracy
Re: Starship Morgages (was Re: Pirates)
Re: Ship swallowing pirates
Re: Sensors and piracy
Starship Mortgages
Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Compendium I (was GT Kits)
Re: 4IWG pages and subscribe points
Re: UWP Cultural extention
Re: Capital Ships
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Re: Ship swallowing pirates
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: Piracy
Re Piracy and Parting Out
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
TL 12 submarines
Re: Ship swallowing pirates
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:22:50
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: UWP Cultural extention 

>From: CardSharks@aol.com
>Subject: UWP Cultural Extension
>
>We have an economic extension for the UWP in Pocket Empires.
>Should we do a cultural extension (about the same number of digits, etc).
What
>would that cover?
>

PE Culture Score, then Individuality, Income Distribution and I cant think
of a good fourth.

Culture in PE is a pretty good definition.

Individuality measures how group-dominated individuals in that society are.
1 is totally individual centered, 15 is totally group centered.

Income Distribution - 1 is total income inequality, 15 is total income
equality.

Used in combination with the UWP, you should get a good view of a society. 

For example, assuming Australia is 777, the US would be 855 and the old
Soviet Union would have been 5A9.

In conjuntion with the UWP government types and Law Levels, this should
give you people a better idea of what a society looks like.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:38:12 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions

"William F. Hostman" wrote:

> My "requests":
>
> 1) Xenophobia/Xenophilia scale

Concur.

> 2) Civil Law - Personal freedoms other than weapons
> 3) Weapons Law - what weapons are allowed
> 4) Criminal Enforcement - Chance of encountering LEnf, plus tenacity thereof.

Thats what the UWP Law Level does.  At least in T4 & MT.

> 5) (How to lable this one is a problem) a scale which indicates how much
> the locals are likely to accuse non-locals of crimes without obvious
> suspects.

I don't consider these four as "Cultural."  But I'm curious, have you
seen the "extra" 30 pages of Milieu 0 Hardcover?  There is a
Universal Law Profile?  It has 7 additional categories:

Armament: traditional weapons, CT law level scale.
Commerce: degree of business regulations, safety requirements, pollution, etc.
Communication: obvious
Congregation : obvious
Movement: obvious
Privacy: obvious
Process: the rules of law including standards of guilt/innocence, punishment,
and how the rule of law is established (precedent, case by case, statutes,
or arbitrary).

> 6) how much they appreciate the arts.
> 7) how much they appreciate/trust the sciences

I agree with these.  Although I would group them as Creativity.

> .8) how much they appreciate/trust the media...

How often is the media relevant to your campaigning?
It rarely comes up in mine.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:28:28 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Sensors and piracy

What would you use for mirrors and lenses
>for a Xray laser anyway?  Magnetic fields might work for lenses but what
>could you make a 100% mirror for xrays out of?

Magnetic fields don't work to bend X-rays, but there are certain surfaces
that will bounce them at particular angles.  There's an x-ray telescope up
there that uses an x-ray equivalent of a fresnel lens.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:34:24 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Starship Morgages (was Re: Pirates)

>What if getting a bank loan was a task and the jump number of the ship
>was a negative DM to the task.  Thus it would be harder to get a loan
>for a less commercially viable, easier to skip on, ship.  Marginal
>success on this task could mean the loan was at a premium intrest rate,
>required a higher % down, or both.

Skipping, mutiny, and piracy are big risks for a bank making a loan for a
ship.  If they even THINK the ship might skip, they'll forget the whole idea.

Here's my proposal: There's a reason the 'Merchant' career is pretty much
required in CT in order to get a merchant ship as a mustering-out benefit.
The banks only loan to people with a reputation in the industry, people
with references, people with a reputation to uphold.  Just getting the
money for a down payment together isn't enough... you've got to be part of
the 'old boy network'.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:30:42 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Ship swallowing pirates

>The transponders in GT also seem easily forgable....just record someone
>else's and broadcast it back.

That depends on whether there's some kind of time-dependent encryption on
them.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:26:17 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Sensors and piracy

At 12:47 AM 10/20/98 +0100, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>
>>A lasers beam spreads over great distances.  I typical comercial 1 watt unit
>>today would cast a circle about 1.5 feet in diameter on the moon.  Far
>>enough out and your much better ships laser would not have any effect <snip>
>
>Traveller laser weapons (post FFS1) have a handwave called grav focusing
>which improves their range etc.

It may be a handwave, but gravity manipulation is very much a part of the
Traveller universe.

Could gravity manipulation help with stealth, lowering IR signatures
somehow?  

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:47:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Macpherson <john35@wharton.upenn.edu>
Subject: Starship Mortgages

From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>
> Steven Hudson wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >If you tell them the ship will be used for mercenary operations won't
> >the high risk use of the ship make them need to charge you a higher
> >intrest rate?
> 
>   Realistically, yes, although the Traveller financial community doesn't
> seem to be very highly evolved.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
> This retarded evolution may be the direct result of communications
> limits. How highly evolved would our world financial community be if
> it took two years to just request someone's credit history, much less
> decide if they are credit worthy?
> 
> Locally, I see the financial community being quite well developed.
> This development will unravel quickly with parsecs of distance.

	This is why mega-corps and nobles are important to the economic 
management of the Imperium over these vast distances.  By internalizing 
transactions, the mega-corp faces much lower risks of default or 
self-interested behavior because all parties involved are part of the 
same profit/loss unit.  Nobles and other highly visible people carefully 
guard their reputations for reliability because this is what allows 
gov'ts and businesses to entrust them with sensitive tasks that must be 
conducted at great distance from headquarters.  Since its reputation is 
a noble family's most valuable asset, they will carefully monitor their 
own members for signs of deviance.  Those who demonstrate they are not 
worthy of acting on the family's behalf are the ones given yachts and 
told to see the Imperium (i.e. become PCs).  It is certainly possible 
for one part of a megacorp to be taking advantage of another part of a 
megacorp because of political or parochial interests, but it is less 
likely.
	Also note, Hortalez et Cie specializes in financing interstellar 
ventures.  It is likely that one of their chief advantages is credit 
files on as many significant players as possible.  Having an account with 
Hortalez et Cie could be the ultimate letter of reference to any local 
financial institution.  TAS may also play a similar, though much more minor, 
role.

- -JM

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:44:38 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions

At 01:26 PM 10/20/98 -0800, you wrote:

>2) Civil Law - Personal freedoms other than weapons
>3) Weapons Law - what weapons are allowed

I'd like to see the generic Law Level redifined to be an indicator of
personal liberty, with weapon limits being a by-product of that level.


- --

Douglas E. Berry
Templar Agent at Large.
dberry@hooked.net  
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/gateway.html 

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:39:52 -0700
From: dberry@hooked.net
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

At 01:13 PM 10/20/98 EDT, you wrote:
>In a message dated 10/19/98 11:00:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU writes:
>
><< My brother at Fort Bragg tells me of a piece of gear the US Army is
> doing some test deployments of now, it's called Shortstop.

>No offense, but I wish this stuff woundn't be posted on line. Why let the
>bad guys know what we're working on....

If its reached the point of giving it to the 82nd to,play with, it has
already been written up in about ten Army journals, been through three
Boards, and been handled by hundreds of troops.

They already know.

- --

+------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry dberry@hooked.net |
|   http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/   |
+------------------------------------+
|  111     Embrace Fascism.     111  |
|  |||  The uniforms look cool  |||  |
+------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:48:53 -0400
From: "Allen Shock" <ashock@gte.net>
Subject: Compendium I (was GT Kits)

>      Several very kind people have answered my post regarding the Advantage
> Fit and Very Fit.  The only problem I have with this now is that the book
> Compendium I is out of print.  How can I get one if they are not printing
> it?  Why would you use something from a book that is not in print, and not
> atleast list it in the G:T book or even the errata?

Compendium I was just reprinted not too long ago; it should not be out of
print. And if it is, it will be back in print before too long, and I'm sure
a copy can be obtained from somewhere.

Allen

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:11:29 PDT
From: "jim clem" <travmind@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: 4IWG pages and subscribe points

- ----Original Message Follows----
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: 4IWG pages and subscribe points
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:54:38 -0400
Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM

> There are now two pages for the Fourth Imperium Work Group:
> 
> My own:
> http://www.geocities.com/area51/dimension/7081/4I.html
> 
> and Keven Pittsinger's:
> http://www.glasscity.net/users/jamstar/traveller/4i/index.html
> 
> We are getting great response to this project, its exciting!!
> 
> There are signup boxes for the mailing list at each of these, any and 
> all are welcome (even those GURPS people) <grin>, and long live the 
New 
> Imperium!!!

Think we oughta start a 4IWG webring, too?  <ducking>

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction 
Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

=======================
DURN TOOTIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  I'll get on that tommorrow.

Jim





______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 19:26:29 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: UWP Cultural extention

Ian or Katts wrote:

> Individuality measures how group-dominated individuals in that society are.
> 1 is totally individual centered, 15 is totally group centered.

We've also got the left over of Vilani culture, which would be very high
on the scale you propose.  I think I like this one.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:28:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Capital Ships

David L. Pulver writes:
> 
> Anyone built any wet navy designs for Traveller lately? I've seen the
> "destroyer" from Traveller Book and recall some of the old megatrav
> articles published in Challenge, but I'm unaware if FFS2 had naval design
> (Gurps Vehicles does, but I don't recall seeing any TL9+ vessels).

Well, I listed underwater performance for my last fighter design, though that's
not quite the same idea...
> 
> Would a wet navy really exist at Traveller TL12+ (or GURPS TL10+) or at
> that point is it mostly SDBs doing the "run silent, run deep" situation?
> The second ever Trav adventure I ran was a submarine vs. SDB duel (on
> Ruie, I think, can't remeber for sure, though) and I recall some JTAS
> ("thing in the deep") but... I still wonder.

Well, I'd probably be willing to submerge an SDB if I _really_ needed to hide
it.  No point to a regular submarine most of the time.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 19:36:17 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>The ort cloud is beyond the orbit of pluto and completely circles our
>solar
>system.  Can you say too damned big to ever search in a 100 life times?

Bruce is an astrophysicist - he's talking about his specialty here.  Ships
will have to accelerate continually to get to the Oort base, or jump
there, and jump 'flare' is already part of Traveller canon.  Assuming
dedicated orbital sensor stations, it wouldn't be that long before the
visiting ships were detected.  We can detect planets around neighbouring
stars, after all, and Traveller starships (all Traveller tech, actually)
produce lots of waste heat.  
>
>Care to guess how long it would take the SDBs to get there on manuver
>drives?

Assuming continuous acceleration? Care to do the calculation? 

Yes, I can do it myself, and no, I'm not going to do it for you. I'm
getting a little tired of hearing guesses and assertions when a few
minutes thought or a bit of research would produce a different answer. 
This is a back-of-the-envelope calculation, strictly high school physics,
no calculus involved, clearly not a problem for an engineer.  

You say you are an engineer: then start doing your part by contributing
some thought and knowledge, and using that expensive training. You say you
are extremely busy: then post more reasoned messages less often. 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 19:43:31 -0400
From: Joe Pettit <jpettit@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Ship swallowing pirates

Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com wrote:

> I played with the numbers, and it doesn't look like you can get a surplus
> military streamlined ship <800 dt that will carry even a scout in a
> spacedock....you can however get a 600dt ship with J3, 3Gs, 15 staterooms
> and 71 cargo. (GTL 10) .  If you go for a new ship (GTL 12) it will have
> 151 cargo.... These ships cost 155/141MCr respectively....Anyone want to
> buy a fast trader?

Well, all you really need to do is get a jump field around them.  While
probably expensive, I can postulate some sort of grappling arm arrangement that
could project a jump field around it.  Considering the existance of battle
riders, this shouldn't be too out there.  Then you just need to extend your
jump field around your target ship and jump.  Probably inside the hundred
diameter limit, probably dangerous because of the extra ship involved.  I don't
know that I'd advise it, but if you kidnap an inbound ship, it probably doesn't
have the fuel needed to jump to safety.  So, once you've dragged them off to
your secret base, they're at your mercy for return fuel.  I'd recommend using a
nuclear damper to shut down your target's power plant before trying this stunt.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:54:09 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Charles Prevatte wrote:

>I do not have a problem with that.  I never said the escort HAD to be
small.
>I said I had a problem with a 5000 ships sector navy.  Your quote about
does
>NOT say that it ONLY included HEAVY escort.  The 'and some escort'
could be
>dismissive for several reasons such as they are few or have little
>firepower.  It does not say so.  You could be right that only heavy
escort
>are counted but you could also be wrong.  Just as that 1% could be all
navy
>ships including auxilleries.  IT does not say and we do not know for
sure.

based on FSSI the escorts included in the 1000 ship sector navy are
between 5000T and 20000T

>>The KINUNIR is not a real cruiser. The AZHANTI had a "print run" of,
what,
>>120? (My books are at home). Perhaps it was an atypical number. One
example
>>just proves that it is within the parameters but it dosen't say where.

>>
>
>It is classed a cruiser,  perhaps a light cruiser.  As for the AHL I am
at
>work but that number sounds right.  If memory is accuarate they were
built
>over a long time period and all of then were not in sevice at on time.
>There may be some extrapolatable data of ship down time in there some
were.
>I'll try to check tonight.

It is classed as a Colonial Cruiser which according to FSSI means that
it was to be used in the reserve fleet.

>>ambiguous. It could be the regular fleet stationed in a subsector, but

>>it is more likely to be the local fleet (also known as the reserve
fleet,
>>but that can be confused with the ships laid up in ordinary (if any).
>>I prefer 'regular' and 'colonial' fleet. That is unambiguous.
>>
>
>Who pays the bills for these?  Locals of IN?

the Imperium pays for the regular and reserve (colonial) fleets. system
squadrons are payed for by the locals.

>>>>However, FS states that CruRons are generally of 4 to 8 ships and
the
>>>>examples in it implies that 8 ship BatRons are the norm.
>>>
>>>2 battle ships and 6 escorts or 1 battle ship 2 cruisers and 5
escorts.
>>>Sounds very reasonable.  If you mean 8 battle ships in one formation
this
>>>is not reasonable.
>>
>>That's what the examples imply. 8 battle ships.
>>
>>>It would leave the formation to vunerable to fast attack ships.
>>
>>The example don't mention escorts. That dosen't mean they are not
there.
>>
>
>I never seen a TNS artical dealing with this size formation and
Fighting
>Ships production lists does not support it.  There are only a few names
on
>the list.  Not enough to cover a sector much less the Empire with these

>groups.  What am I missing here?

I would go with FSSI.
BatRon: 4 battleships, 1 tanker, 2 Auxiliaries, 2 Transports, 3 scouts
BatRon (riders TL 14): 1 Tender, 3 Riders, 1 Transport, 4 Escorts, 2
Scouts
Batron (riders TL 15): 1 Tender, 4 Riders, 2 TankerRiders, 1 Transport,
4 Escorts, 2 Scouts
CruRon: 5 Cruisers, 1 Auxiliary, 4 Escorts, 2 Scouts
CruRon (Carrier): 1 Carrier, 10 Fighter Squadrons, Tanker, Transport, 4
Scouts
AssaultRon: 1 Cruiser, 3 Transports, 4 Escorts, Tanker, Auxiliary, 2
Scouts
TankRon: 1 Cruiser, 4 Tankers, 2 Auxiliaries, 2 Transports, 4 Escorts, 4
Scouts

Charles R Hensley

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:54:35 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>First of all, the 1000 ships per sector is for the regular fleet only.
It
>dosen't include subsector fleets (which recieves the same amount of
funds
>as the regular fleet, though they spend them differently) and it
dosen't
>include planetary navies. Most especially it does not not include
auxiliaries.
>Yet most auxiliaries would be quite capable of giving a pirate a hard
time.
>

According to the Rebellion Sourcebook:
"Each SECTOR of the Imperium Theoretically has a group of fleets
numbering about 1000 ships."  The way I read this is that the total
number of major combatants in each sector should be 1000 if at full
strength.  "Reserve fleets are technically considered part of a named
fleet..."  This indicates to me that the reserves are included in this
number also.   "At thier lowest level, Imperial ships are organized into
squadrons (from three to 10 similar ships). Squadrons are grouped into
permanant numbered fleets (usually three to 10 squadrons per fleet)..."
This makes a Numbered Fleet between 9 and 100 major combatants.  With 16
numbered fleets and 16 reserve fleets this brings the number of ships
per sector to between 288 and 3200 ships.

FSSI shows that the average size of a squadron is 5 combat ships, 3
scouts, and 4 non-combatants.

The reserve fleets will be next to useless for anti piracy as they are
manned by reservists and thus spend most of thier time in orbit around
the high tech, high population worlds in the subsector they are
assigned.  Although these could be operated almost continously as
additional sensor platforms. This would have the benifit that pirates
would not visit these worlds very often.  Also the Navy would keep the
squadrons together so that they will be ready to fit as a group.  This
is good for both sides if the navy catches the pirate then it is a
search and destroy mission, for the pirate they know there is better
hunting elsewhere and leave.

Charles

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:54:50 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re Piracy and Parting Out

Steven Hudson wrote:

>>Anyway, any corsair design which is going to survive is going to look
like
>>a fairly typical hull of some other class(es). For example, typical
hulls
>...
>>built with multiple power plants: one PP to match "Target Profile",
and the
>
>  Physical observation (by security forces or dockyard staff) will note
this
>and flag it, if the authorities are interested in this intelligence.

Then they flag EVERY ship I design, normally I add a small power plant
that can handle life support or weapons.  several of my ships have 3 to
4 power plants.

Charles

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:52:19 -0700
From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

>ObTraveller: Using a TL16 version of this to explode enemy missiles a
>long way from your own ship - preferably, in the enemy's missile bay.

No kidding.  In fact, as I was reading through the original post (and
before it got to the description of how it's actually meant to be used),
I assumed that Shortstop was just such a system.  Point your transmitter
at the enemy and watch them get blown up by their own ammo.

Scary, man.

ObTrav:  You may be able to do this with nuclear dampers, depending on
how they work IYTU.  Just turn the knob up to "11"...

- --------------
Kelly St.Clair
kellys@efn.org

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:11:08 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

 
> Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> >The ort cloud is beyond the orbit of pluto and completely circles our
> >solar
> >system.  Can you say too damned big to ever search in a 100 life times?

Ships in traveller are *bright*. In terms of _detection_ (very
different from resolving a target) it doesn't really matter how far
away it is if it is bright enough*. You are scanning the whole sky
regardless of target distance. True you might simply see a single
bright pixel, hell the target might take a day to move out of that
one pixel, but the pixel will still be brighter than background. The
only way it takes more time to scan is if you decide to integrate
longer to see fainter sources. I could be wrong, but I'd likely scan
at the integration time needed for 100D defense, and add the frames
together to look for indications of fainter sources out in the void.
If I saw something in an added frame set that wasn't in the normal
scan, I'd know it was fainter. I could then dedicate a tighter scan
at higher resolution and longer integration time on that specific
area to get more data.

(* big caveat, it needs to be fairly bright--distance obviosly comes
into play in terms of square-law reductions, and masking a drive is
far easier when the sensor array subtends a very small angle)

The bigger problem is simply that the light will take so long to get
to your sensor that the data will be very old.

Bottom line is that if Bruce says it's bright enough, it likely is
:-)

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 20:13:13 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: TL 12 submarines

>Well, I'd probably be willing to submerge an SDB if I _really_ needed to hide
>it.  No point to a regular submarine most of the time.

A craft designed to be a submarine specifically would probably have better
performance than an SDB... hydrodynamics is different from aerodynamics,
and it would probably go faster.  It could tailor its stealth to the
underwater environment, and tailor its sensors.  If the SDB could take the
fight to space, it would have the edge.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 20:15:22 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Ship swallowing pirates

At 07:43 PM 10/20/98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com wrote:
>
>> I played with the numbers, and it doesn't look like you can get a surplus
>> military streamlined ship <800 dt that will carry even a scout in a
>> spacedock....you can however get a 600dt ship with J3, 3Gs, 15 staterooms
>> and 71 cargo. (GTL 10) .  If you go for a new ship (GTL 12) it will have
>> 151 cargo.... These ships cost 155/141MCr respectively....Anyone want to
>> buy a fast trader?
>
>Well, all you really need to do is get a jump field around them.  While
>probably expensive, I can postulate some sort of grappling arm arrangement
that
>could project a jump field around it.  Considering the existance of battle
>riders, this shouldn't be too out there.  Then you just need to extend your
>jump field around your target ship and jump.  Probably inside the hundred
>diameter limit, probably dangerous because of the extra ship involved.  I
don't
>know that I'd advise it, but if you kidnap an inbound ship, it probably
doesn't
>have the fuel needed to jump to safety.  So, once you've dragged them off to
>your secret base, they're at your mercy for return fuel.  I'd recommend
using a
>nuclear damper to shut down your target's power plant before trying this
stunt.

I thought nuclear dampers only shut down UNcontrolled nuclear reactions...
if not, how do you put power into a damper for any length of time?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 20:33:28 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop 

> >ObTraveller: Using a TL16 version of this to explode enemy missiles a
> >long way from your own ship - preferably, in the enemy's missile bay.
> 
> No kidding.  In fact, as I was reading through the original post (and
> before it got to the description of how it's actually meant to be used),
> I assumed that Shortstop was just such a system.  Point your transmitter
> at the enemy and watch them get blown up by their own ammo.
> 
> Scary, man.
> 
> ObTrav:  You may be able to do this with nuclear dampers, depending on
> how they work IYTU.  Just turn the knob up to "11"...

I was under the impression that the ECM program for starship computers was
supposed to do that very function.  I'm refering to the LBB 2, of course...

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #985
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 986



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
Re: Capital ships
re: Sensors and waste heat
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Product Searches
Re: Ship swallowing pirates
Nuclear dampers
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!
Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions
Re: Where's Lucan?
Re: Re Piracy
Re: UWP Cultural Extension
Re: Striker
Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
RE: Re UWP Cultural Extensions

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:39:19 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

>>TL8 Passive-light sensors can be visualized as taking a series of pictures
>>every ten seconds or so, each picture being about 10 degrees on a side,
>>with perhaps an 8192x8192 pixel detector with 4 arcsecond pixels.

>At that level you could spot a 100 meter lighted object at (thinking)
>5156km.  (1 pixel change at that range.)

>Now, what is the light sensativity threshold
>for one pixel?  How bright would that 100 mete object have to be the effect
>that pixel from 5156 km out?

The system can detect objects much further than 5156; objects don't need to 
be resolved (bigger than one pixel) to be detected - you can detect something
that's a tiny fraction of a pixel quite easily. (For example, Saturn is about 
a tenth of a pixel on your eye.) The PEMS described above, with ~2-3m telescopes,
can detect a 99% black scout-sized starship at about (if I recall correctly)
That's a 20-sigma detection - pretty unambiguous. Space is dark. Ships - even
black ships - are bright.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:40:17 +1300
From: pbroeder@wave.co.nz
Subject: Re: Capital ships

>>I would love to see a 1998 designed battleship.  I think the almost
>>60 years of advances in naval architecture could make a modern
>>battleship very impressive compared to WWII designs.

 > Maybe the 2010 versions will have the laser or other beam weapon
>installations they need - and their escorts can carry the ASW drones.

David Mace's book "Fire Lance" contains a modern cruise missile
battleship- USS Vindicator, a Nemesis warship designed to fight and
survive a nuclear war.
I never finished running up the stats for this for MT but I did for
Harpoon...

>Would a wet navy really exist at Traveller TL12+ (or GURPS TL10+) or at

>that point is it mostly SDBs doing the "run silent, run deep"
situation?
>The second ever Trav adventure I ran was a submarine vs. SDB duel (on
>Ruie, I think, can't remeber for sure, though) and I recall some JTAS
>("thing in the deep") but... I still wonder.

The "Wet Navy" rules from Challenge say that a navy at TL15 will mostly
consist of meson gun armed submarines

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:55:01 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: Sensors and waste heat

>>>A lasers beam spreads over great distances.  I typical comercial 1 watt unit
>>>today would cast a circle about 1.5 feet in diameter on the moon.
>>
>>God knows where you got this number from; to make a 1.5' circle on the
>>moon you'd need a diffraction-limited 800-meter telescope to launch the laser.
>>Perhaps 1.5 miles is closer to the mark? 
>>
>I'm aware of the arc angle.  Are you aware of the angle of deffusion
>available on lasers?  More than .001 second is a reject for good comercial
>positioning use today much less high percission stuff.  We are talking
>lasers (mono polar light) not telescopes.  They work very differently.  And
>you do not need a telescope to launch the laser.  Course target it yes, fire
>it know.  NASA uses a 2 foot relecter on the moon for laser distace
>mesurements.  It was put up there by one of the apolo missions.  I do not
>recall which one.


I'm not sure where you're 0.001 second (presumably you mean arcseconds?)
number comes from. It might be the mean positioning accuracy or stability of
the beam - though that sounds somewhat too good and I'd like a citation. 
That's *not* the amount the beam spreads out by. Spreading of any beam is
fundamentally limited by the diffraction limit of its launch aperture, with
the spread angle given by wavelength / diameter of the launch aperture.
That's why you need a telescope-like device to launch a beam and expect it 
to stay reasonably collimated; if you launch the beam from the 1-mm output
of a typical commercial laser, the beam will be spreading at about 10^-3
radians or a twentieth of a degree. By the time it reaches the moon it would
be 250 miles across. NASA's lunar rangefinding experiments are launched
from the earth through 0.5 - 3 m telescopes; by the time the beam reaches
the moon it is a few miles across. (Only the portion of the beam that hits
the 2 foot reflector is returned to the earth, of course, which might be what
is confusing you.) 

Trust me. I do this for a living. (Almost literally; one of the experiments
I'm involved in is projecting a laser (attached to the Lick 3-m telescope) 
to make a star-like spot on the mesospheric sodium layer 100km up.)

>>The trick to getting such accuracies is not to track the whole turret to
>>those precisions but to move the turret for coarse aiming and do fine aiming
>>with a smaller precision steering mirror in your laser.

>Quite true IF a multikilowatt xray laser weapon could and would be so
>equipted on a reguler basis.  I dought it.  Drives the cost way up and would
>not be needed for it's primary purpose.
It's certainly how real laser weapons will be designed - cf AvWeek articles
on the YAL-1. A precision steering mirror and closed-loop tracking system 
is only $50 - $100 K. (Again, I do this for a living - I'm involved with
the group building the AO system for the Lick and Keck telescopes - so I know
this for a fact.) 

>What would you use for mirrors and lenses
>for a Xray laser anyway?  Magnetic fields might work for lenses but what
>could you make a 100% mirror for xrays out of?
Magnetic fields don't bend light.

The question of mirrors for x-rays is more interesting; presumably the
fact that x-ray lasers don't come into use until TL-13 allows a certain 
amount of time to solve the problem.

>The lag time would also throw a nasty PID loop constant into your control
Details of the control loop can be left unspecified. The adaptive controllers
we use for tip/tilt correct out to 100 Hz and respond rapidly to changing
atmospheric turbulence; I doubt any maneuvers a spacecraft could make would
be a problem for them, since spacecraft typically vary their course somewhat
slower than that.

>If you assume a high efficency insulation
>and mininal power, just enough for life support and passive sensors your
>outside temp would be only a few degrees warmer than space.  Apollo could
>maintain life support, manuver, sensors, and comunications on 40 watts of
>power with body heat alone heat keeping the cabin at arround 20 degrees.

This is more a problem with Traveller overall, in that life support takes
really ludicrous amounts of power (megawatts) in most Traveller incarnations.
Still, even if life support is free, a pirate-quality passive sensor array
will take tens of kilowatts or more, the crew will generate a few kilowatts,
ten kilowatts leaking through a thousand square meters of hull still warms
it up to a moderately-detectable 100K. Much more problematical is the fact
that your pirate has to have a black hull (so as not to be seen in reflected
sunlight), which means it's absorbing a kilowatt per square meter of
solar heat - you'll need to actively refrigerate the hull and dump that heat
out somewhere, which requires more power - a nasty cycle.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:04:45 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

> Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> >The ort cloud is beyond the orbit of pluto and completely circles our
> >solar
> >system.  Can you say too damned big to ever search in a 100 life times?

>Bottom line is that if Bruce says it's bright enough, it likely is

Actually, I don't think I said anything - at least not Ex Cathedra - about
the Oort Cloud. Looking at the DSR numbers, really big military arrays - the
kind a pop-10 world will have - can see capital ships in the inner Oort
cloud (which was sort of deliberate; you want to be able to see the Zho's
doing ice refuelling out there, otherwise the FFW degenerates to fights only
at key worlds...). However, a typical backwater sensor array won't be able to
see a typical pirate in even the Kuiper belt, let alone the inner or outer
Oort cloud, so pirate bases in the clouds are semi-practical. Hard to catch
merchants from the Oort cloud, but that's a lesser issue. If microjumps only
require a small amount of fuel (canon is unclear on this issue) it might help.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 21:29:02 -0400
From: "Eric Freitas" <ericfreitas@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

Yep, SOP.  Only people who don't know are civilians.


- -----Original Message-----
From: Douglas Glatz <douglas@teleport.COM>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop


>>
>>No offense, but I wish this stuff woundn't be posted on line. Why let the
>bad
>>guys know what we're working on....
>>
>
>From the security briefings I attended before I left the service, I'd have
>to say that before we hear about it on this list "they" not only know it
>exists.  By now they probably have the maintenance manuals.
>
>douglas
>
>E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
>http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
>IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls
>The early bird gets the worm, BUT
>   the second mouse gets the cheese!
>
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 19:18:54 -0700
From: "Jesse LaBranche" <vanquer@softhome.net>
Subject: Product Searches

Hello All,

    First of all I'd like to apologize to those who are on
multiple lists and receiving this message more than
once.
    I have a business that does product searches for
people. Generally, if there's any TSR/RPG item that
you are looking for- I'll find it for you.
    Currently, I have several items on hand, and am
selling them as well. Please contact me (address is in
the sig) if you have any questions or interests.

Thanks.

Jesse.
vanquer@softhome.net
ICQ. 8004143

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 22:23:51 -0400
From: Joe Pettit <jpettit@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Ship swallowing pirates

>  I'd recommend
> using a
> >nuclear damper to shut down your target's power plant before trying this
> stunt.
>
> I thought nuclear dampers only shut down UNcontrolled nuclear reactions...
> if not, how do you put power into a damper for any length of time?

I think dampers are directional and take electricity for energy.  So, unless you
turn the damper on your own power plant, you should be set.

Of course, I really have no idea how a damper works, so this is just idle
speculation.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 23:05:59 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Nuclear dampers

At 10:23 PM 10/20/98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>>  I'd recommend
>> using a
>> >nuclear damper to shut down your target's power plant before trying this
>> stunt.
>>
>> I thought nuclear dampers only shut down UNcontrolled nuclear reactions...
>> if not, how do you put power into a damper for any length of time?
>
>I think dampers are directional and take electricity for energy.  So,
unless you
>turn the damper on your own power plant, you should be set.
>
>Of course, I really have no idea how a damper works, so this is just idle
>speculation.

The way I've always seen them described, it only works on nuclear warheads.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 10:35:49 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

At 01:48 AM 10/20/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Now enter Shortstop. It emits radio waves that confuse these proximity
>fuses, so they think they're close to the ground and explode.
>
>While they're still 500 meters away.
>
>You can make a shell that ignores Shortstop. It'll cost you about
>US$1000 each, instead of about US$25 to $50 each, so you won't
>have as many to shoot.
>
>Everything I've heard about the armed forces tells me that, of all the
>things to get attacked with, infantry hates artillery the most. The way
>it comes from out of nowhere to kill you, the way you can't do anything
>but hunker down and hope they run out of ammo. I'm imagining these
>grunts, if Shortstop works, fighting for the priviledge of wearing it
>(and thus being in the middle of the protection zone).

	Until I take a standard guided shell (such as the laser-guided Copperhead,
IIRC), and replace the laser designation guidance system with the
appropriate homing device. Now he's not in the middle of the protection
zone, he's in the middle of a zone soon to be spread all over the
neighborhood ...

	Although the shell WILL cost more than $25 to $50 ...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 23:50:41 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

> >>_Rebellion_ p. 27 states that each sector of the Imperium theoretically
has
> >>a group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships. This number includes combat
> >>vessels such as cruisers, carriers, battleships, and _some_ escorts
> >>(emphasis mine). It does not include auxiliaries, support ships, and
scouts.
> >
> >Now this is posible.  A 1000 ship sector Navy INCLUDING escorts is
> >reasonable. What I said was 1000 capital ships alone was not reasonable.

It should be noted that the colonial forces are taken out of that theoretical
1000 ships...  "Reserve fleets are technically considered part of the forces
of a named fleet, but are rarely moved out of their original subsector." -
Rebellion pg 27.  This drops your average 62.5-combatant fleet by half.   

> same general weight class as cruisers, carriers, and battleships. So I
> conjectured that some cruiser-sized escorts existed and that it was those
> that was meant. Ast it turns out, _Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium_
> (which I don't have) makes it clear that such ships do exist, so no

They're also in Battle Rider. : )  CT (Fighting Ships) makes no reference to
these larger escorts, defining escorts as "small ships of up to 5,000 tons"
meant to be support craft for larger ships, primarily cruisers.  You're the CT
guy, ain't you, Hans? ; )

> >Then the number of ships is out of line with CT history.  Look at the
> >production nubers for the two cruisers that have their own books.
> 
> The KINUNIR is not a real cruiser. The AZHANTI had a "print run" of, what,
> 120? (My books are at home). Perhaps it was an atypical number. One example
> just proves that it is within the parameters but it dosen't say where.

The production order of Azhanti's was 100.  92 were built. There is one more
example I know of...  Fighting Ships says there were 794 Atlantic class CRs
built of which ~500 remained in service c1100.   People think Azhanti names
were convoluted... like to see someone name 794 ships. ; )

>>If the 1000 ships are for a sector with a full sixteen sub-sectors, then the
>>average fleet has 1000/16 = 62.5 ships. Since there are 320 regular fleets
in
>>the Imperium, the total of combat ships for the Imperium would be around
>>20,000.

You'd have to cut that to 31.25 (combatant) ships due to a fuller and in-
context reading of Rebellion.  Note that the Midu's are described in Fighting
Ships as being in limited production.  Their purpose is to be an escort that
supplements fleet defenses w/ anti-fighter and anti-small craft ship.  They
were committed "to operations only with the Navy's major battle fleets."

> >Where is 'fleet' defines as the ships of one sector?  I have not seen this.
> 
> _Rebellion_ explains that the Imperium operates with two kinds of fleets.
> Numbered fleets are (roughly) one regular and one subsector fleet to a
> subsector (with a few extra for special cases; the Imperium have about 300
> subsectors and 320 regular fleets). The other kind is the named fleet. A
> named fleet is either a command structure for all the numbered fleets in
> a sector of a separate force. The evidence is conflicting, but I have
> chosen the first interpretation. In any case, there is a named fleet for
> each sector and provision for creating special named fleets for special
> occasions.

The Named Fleets are umbrella organizations.  One Named Fleet for each sector.
All regular and colonial fleets are member of the named sector fleet.  Fleets
can be pulled from their Named Fleet and assigned to named 'Special Fleets'
ala the "Vengeance Fleet", "the Loyal Fleet", etc etc. but there aren't
additional (numbered) fleets created for just that purpose.  The Special
Fleets forces are pulled from Named Fleets.  The only exception is Capital,
which keeps 4 numbered fleets as a reaction force or something like that.  The
Big Stick of the Emperor, maybe? (along w/ a couple regiments of the Imperial
Guard).

> >2 battle ships and 6 escorts or 1 battle ship 2 cruisers and 5 escorts.
> >Sounds very reasonable.  If you mean 8 battle ships in one formation this
> >is not reasonable.
> 
> That's what the examples imply. 8 battle ships.

The "Typical" BatRon from FSotSI has 4 BBs, 3 scouts, 1 tanker, 2 transports
and 2 auxilliaries (auxilliaries being noncombatant resupply/fuel ships in
FSotSI).  The Rider BatRon has 4 BRs.  The Typical CruRon has 5 cruisers.  In
fact, all the typical Imperial squadrons have about 4-5 core ships w/ a larger
number of scouts, escorts, and/or auxiliaries.

It seems your 'examples' are atypical and on the high end of the scale.

> >This is not a good squadron to use as it is a battle rider squad.  In CT
> >battle ridder are uncommon compared to jump warships.  For a jump capable
> >group to carry equaul firepower it would raise the cost quite a bit.
> 
> That was my point.

Mmm....it's mentioned in several places that the Imperium had gone over
heavily to Battle Riders...  Fighting Ships and Battle Rider both say that
Battle Riders dominated the Imperial Fleet.  Fighting Ships says that due to a
shifting to the Reserve Strategy and precisely because Battle Riders cannot
flee when things go bad, that Battle Riders were concentrated in the
"strategic reserve."  Jump capable ships were used in the "frontier areas."

> >>The other possibility is that a large number of ships are laid up in
> >>ordinary. That would require that part of the annual budget was used to
> >
> >The USA has more ship in mothballs than operating including several
carriers
> >and battle ships.
> 
> Unfortunately a huge reserve fleet gives other problems for the background.
> Right, Gary?

Nope.  : )   Possibly, if based on your (uncanonical) assumptions. According
to canon?  No. 


Gary

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 23:50:43 EDT
From: TravelrTNE@aol.com
Subject: Re: NO POLITICS ON THE LIST!

> << > with history or reality ( he was a major leader of the Crusades; rape
and
>  > pillage, because God is on your side)  But the rest of us are entitled to
> 
>  That kind of villifies the whole crusading movement, which is your right,
of
>  course...  Others might look to the heroism, chivalry and courage (on all
>  sides) of the movement.  >>
> 
> This is certainly true..it was directed at the whole overriding purpose of
the
> Crusades, as opposed to any specific people.  My point w/ the Crusades was
> simply that both sides believed that any excess was not only possible, but
> demanded by God.  and this has to be the stupidest thing in the world

I don't think so.  It just doesn't mesh w/ the historical events.  The
movement was denounced even in the West, though by a minority.  Atrocities
(such as Richard's massacre of his captives at Acre) were denounced.  In fact,
the painting I've seen of that massacre (made around the time IIRC) has the
Moslems depicted as martyrs while Richard's soldiers villified. It was also a
more brutal age.  Most of the massacres were initiated by the "pragmatic
adventurers on the make."  Notable exceptions like Antioch and Jerusalem can
be explained (though not excused) by madness caused by the ardors, suffering,
pain, and starvation of the long sieges as much as fanatacism.

OB Trav... How does the Imperium c1120 in G:T look back on the Pacification
Campaigns and the Ilelish Revolt?  There doesn't appear to be anything in the
way of judgement in the Imperial Encyclopedia or Rebellion...  how do the
citizens interpret the events?  Condemn, applaud or not judge?   And is it
likely the citizens of the areas (Darmine, the League of Antares, citizens of
Ilelish (the world), etc etc) put a different spin on it?

Gary

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 13:45:43 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions

At 01:26 PM 10/20/98 -0800, you wrote:
>>
>>We have an economic extension for the UWP in Pocket Empires.
>>Should we do a cultural extension (about the same number of digits, etc).
What
>>would that cover?
>>
>>Marc
>
>My "requests":
>
>1) Xenophobia/Xenophilia scale
>2) Civil Law - Personal freedoms other than weapons
>3) Weapons Law - what weapons are allowed
>4) Criminal Enforcement - Chance of encountering LEnf, plus tenacity thereof.
>5) (How to lable this one is a problem) a scale which indicates how much
>the locals are likely to accuse non-locals of crimes without obvious
>suspects.
>6) how much they appreciate the arts.
>7) how much they appreciate/trust the sciences.
>8) how much they appreciate/trust the media...

	I hate to reopen the gripefest about DGP products, but what about the
World Builders' Handbook? If I recall the way somebody explained it once,
while DGP owned the copyright to the actual *text*, the ideas and concepts
were created under license, and hence the license holder (then GDW, now
FFE) had free right to reuse those ideas and concepts. Sure, the text would
have to be rewritten or paraphrased, but the various profiles were
invaluable as a guideline and creativity jogger ...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 23:51:43 -0400
From: John H Bogan Jr <jbogan@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan?

At 01:23 PM 10/20/1998 EDT, you wrote:
>> I see Strephon as a rather mediocre ruler. Honourable and 
>>noble, yes. Capable under normal cirumstances, yes. But 
>>he failed to see or prevent the potential however remote) 
>>for a tragic disaster in his actions. And when the crisis
>>came he hesitated and "kicked for touch" by running to 
>>Usdiki. Even then he failed to act (he must have had 
>>the codes to prove he was Strephon, even in 1117
>>transmitting them could have stopped the rebellion).
>
>I rather see the situation as unworkable to begin w/.  
>Something *must* have been seriously wrong w/ the 
>Imperium for it to become unglued the way it did.

Ignore, for the moment, the fact that it flew apart
in the spectacular way it did was not due to fate,
destiny, or some inevitable process, but because
it was scripted to be a "Murphy's Law" come true:
everything that could go wrong _really did_ go wrong.

I'd argue that the Imperium became "unglued"
precisely because no one thought it could happen.
In every quarter, "temporary" measures were taken,
but the weight of all of them made them de facto
permanent.

>It was only looking for an excuse to fly apart.  
>That excuse was the lack of the One Clear Choice.

OK, here's my take on the Rebellion: The Imperium
was done in by three simultaneous crises -- a
major internal conflict (specifically Dulinor), a
major external conflict (the Solomani), and an
entrenched incompetant on the throne.

The Imperium could -- and HAS -- survive one (the Illelish
Revolts and the whole Solomani conflict; the Frontier
and Rim wars; Cleon the Mad; etc.), or even two simultaneously.
But with all three happening at once, it created
a dynamic which worked against solving any one of them,
and worked towards creating more.

Arguably, the spinning off of the Domains was what was
_supposed_ to happen in the event of the breakdown of
central authority and foreign aggression. Craig and 
Norris saw to their people first, as was their duty. 
Brzk did the same, even though his flirtation with 
the Julian Protectorate was a bit more questionable.
Vland's case is a bit fuzzier, but it was still 
ultimately a matter of choosing between duty to
the Emperor versus duty to their Domain, and
not choosing the fool.

>Maybe.  I might be unusually pessimistic, but I see very 
>little possiblity of the awesomely dynamic and complex 
>threads presented in TNE to be present in G:T. 

Sorry, you lost me here. What "awesomely dynamic and complex 
threads" would those be? And why wouldn't they be possible?
TNE (and characters presented within -- even remanats)
always had a hideously oversimplified view of the
Imperium. Gamewise, that's understandable. Characterwise,
it was a flaw that no one had a more nuanced view of
what happened, and settingwise, the greatest threat
to the RC was the view that if they were different
from the Imperium in one or two aspects, they were
somehow immune to all the myriad forces that shape
events, including the Collapse. What keeps the RC
together is the "example" of the Imperium and the fact 
that the wilds are howling around them on all sides.
What happens in ten years, when the Wilds have been
pushed back by a comfortable margin and the pressure to
"agree to disagree" is off? And what if they _didn't_
have an example to point to?

JB 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 23:13:37 -0500
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: Re Piracy

>And I've read a reference that Al Morai's route protectors sometimes turn
>pirate on opposing lines... During tradewars.


And this is not piracy, but privateering. ;-)

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:21:49 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: UWP Cultural Extension

In a message dated 10/20/98 2:02:23 PM Central Daylight Time,
stevedaniels@portcaddo.com writes:

<< A cultural extension is going to go a long way to defining
 the culture of a planet.  And consequently, diminsh or limit a referee's
 freedom of movement for creating within the constraints of that.  >>

Unless the referee himself/herself generates it. If we do the CulturalX for
every world, then we limit etc. If we show how to do one, then we enhance what
the ref can do.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:23:56 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Striker

In a message dated 10/20/98 4:51:58 PM Central Daylight Time, aramis@gci.net
writes:

<< If it says "Striker 2", it is the TNE version, which lacks the economica of
 the CT version (which has 3 little black books...)
  >>

There are also two printings of CT Striker, with some revision between the two
(these are both L:BBs).

Marc Miller

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:26:18 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions

In a message dated 10/20/98 10:54:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
goldendj@pcisys.net writes:

<<  If I recall the way somebody explained it once,
 while DGP owned the copyright to the actual *text*, the ideas and concepts
 were created under license, and hence the license holder (then GDW, now
 FFE) had free right to reuse those ideas and concepts.  >>

I believe that I explained it that way. And I am not adverse to making use of
the concepts. I am just investigating which ones are positive and which ones
aren't.

Marc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 22:52:30 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

 
> > >The ort cloud is beyond the orbit of pluto and completely circles our
> > >solar
> > >system.  Can you say too damned big to ever search in a 100 life times?
> 
> >Bottom line is that if Bruce says it's bright enough, it likely is
> 
> Actually, I don't think I said anything - at least not Ex Cathedra - about
> the Oort Cloud. Looking at the DSR numbers, really big military arrays - the

Sorry for any misattribution :-) I was thinking more generally in
terms of detecting a target within a resolution element, anyway. 

> kind a pop-10 world will have - can see capital ships in the inner Oort
> cloud (which was sort of deliberate; you want to be able to see the Zho's
> doing ice refuelling out there, otherwise the FFW degenerates to fights only
> at key worlds...). However, a typical backwater sensor array won't be able to

It'd be interesting to see if a custom-built tanker could be made to
(quickly!) mine off enough fuel so that a strike force could top off
before a micro-jump (even at J-1 fuel usage) in system. this would
give a TF longer legs, and the ability to escape (even back to the
tanker) if things were to go badly. And since the travel-time for
the data is gonna be far more than a couple weeks (10k plus AU or
so, right?) you can jump the tanker in, mine a couple weeks, refuel
the fleet, have 'em jump in, and even be able to top them on return
if need be.

> see a typical pirate in even the Kuiper belt, let alone the inner or outer
> Oort cloud, so pirate bases in the clouds are semi-practical. Hard to catch
> merchants from the Oort cloud, but that's a lesser issue. If microjumps only
> require a small amount of fuel (canon is unclear on this issue) it might help.

Obviously the lag is so long as to make it kinda useless unless
somebody is setting up shop out there, anyway. I'd say it might have 
more usefulness as rock-throwing prophalaxis (man, do I not wanna 
get that going again :-). Finding somebody out there, then doing 
something about it before they leave isn't too likely, anyway. 
The idea of backwater systems with pirate bases is kinda neat, 
though. That or a brown dwarf that isn't on the normal star charts 
(read: not on the jump routes provided by canon).

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 21:55:20 -0700
From: Douglas Glatz <douglas@teleport.com>
Subject: RE: Re UWP Cultural Extensions

The only bad thing I have to say about WBH is that I have to go to Book 6 
to get the stellar diameters (When I remember, I use the Stellar 100d as a 
jump point...)

I'd love to see it re-introduced!

douglas

- ----------
From: 	CardSharks@aol.com[SMTP:CardSharks@aol.com]
Sent: 	Tuesday, October 20, 1998 9:26 PM
To: 	traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: 	Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions

In a message dated 10/20/98 10:54:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
goldendj@pcisys.net writes:

<<  If I recall the way somebody explained it once,
 while DGP owned the copyright to the actual *text*, the ideas and concepts
 were created under license, and hence the license holder (then GDW, now
 FFE) had free right to reuse those ideas and concepts.  >>

I believe that I explained it that way. And I am not adverse to making use 
of
the concepts. I am just investigating which ones are positive and which 
ones
aren't.

Marc

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #986
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 987



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: Judge's Guild Products
Re: Question regarding Ley Sector
Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
Re: UWP Cultural Extension 
Re: The Imperial Fleet
DGP product (Was - Re: UWP Cultural Extensions)
Re: UWP Cultural Extension
Re: Question regarding Ley Sector
Re: Judge's Guild Products 
Re: Judge's Guild Products
Re: The Fourth Imperium:  was  Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964
Re: UWP Cultural Extension 
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Nuclear pumped x-ray lasers
Re Piracy and Parting Out
Re: Piracy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:51:33 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

At 18:54 20/10/98 -0500, Charles R Hensley wrote:

>>Who pays the bills for these?  Locals of IN?
>
>the Imperium pays for the regular and reserve (colonial) fleets. system
>squadrons are payed for by the locals.

_FSSI_ impplies in one place the Colonial Squadrons are payed for by the
Imperium, and just based at worlds that can support them, and in another
place says that worlds that can afford tham can raise jump squadrons that
then count as part of the subsector's Colonial Fleet.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:58:13 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet and auxiliaries

At 13:03 20/10/98 EDT, Sethkimmel wrote:

>This depends on an assumption that I have always made; ie. the squadron jumps
>in and the tender dumps off her riders and HIDES till the shooting is over.
>Outer system space is a large area to hide in. Thus I wouldn't have the
tender
>in the scenario (I use Mayday/HG so I have vector movement). I found (in a
>scenario with 16x25000ton BR's versis a Tigress that the Tigress gets
pounded.
>16 type T Meson guns just gets too many criticals. The vector movement helps
>the 'riders even more, as they tend to have agility 6 (mine do), and can zip
>around the map like fat frying on a hot plate. If the tender is in the
>scenario (to represent the unlikely event of the squadron jumping insystem
>next to the defending BatRon, then the tender just runs like hell. A million
>ton tender can absorb a LOT of criticals, and this means that the SDBs are
not
>being shot at. This arguement does not mean that Battleships are inferior to
>rider-tender combos. They have different roles. The tender-ron is more cost
>effiecient, but as has been said a zillion times before; the tender-ron is a
>concentrated force multiplier (my tender-ron - 16x25000riders and a jump4
>million ton tender), and thus can't be mission tailored; ie. it's the whole
>squadron or nothing. A squadron of Battleships can be broken up. Lastly, as
>has also been pointed out already, is the vunerability of riders to being
>marooned or overwhelmed when their tender is destroyed. A remedy to this
is to
>install as many defenses as possible on the tender. The downside is that this
>makes the tender large and expensive (I didn't make my tender so big for the
>heck of it). Thus the utility of Battleships contrasts nicely with the cost
>effectiveness of 'riders. This probably explains the Imperium's decision to
>procure both.... I just find it's more fun to design and fight 'riders...:-)

OK, what if the BB is jumping in and the Tender and 'riders are the ones in
the inner system - then they're in trouble because the BB(s) can wizz on
in, hit the Tender (and whatever else) and roar on by. BTW just how big is
a Tigeress and what TL? What TL is your Tender and 'riders? How about some
of the other CT/HG BB? Your Tender + BRs runs in at 1,400,000 DT, so a it
really should be coompared with, say three 500,000 DT BBs. Also how much
does the whole setup cost?

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:43:28 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

At 18:26 20/10/98 +0200, Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:
>Charles Prevatte writes:
>
>>>_Rebellion_ p. 27 states that each sector of the Imperium theoretically has
>>>a group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships. This number includes combat
>>>vessels such as cruisers, carriers, battleships, and _some_ escorts
>>>(emphasis mine). It does not include auxiliaries, support ships, and
scouts.
>> 
>>Now this is posible.  A 1000 ship sector Navy INCLUDING escorts is
>>reasonable. What I said was 1000 capital ships alone was not reasonable.
>
>Charles, you read the text the way the Devil reads the Bible. The text say
>"combat vessels SUCH AS cruisers, carriers, battleships, and some escorts".
>For those escorts to be metioned in the same breath as cruisers, carriers,
>and battleships it seems reasonable to assume that they would be in the
>same general weight class as cruisers, carriers, and battleships. So I
>conjectured that some cruiser-sized escorts existed and that it was those
>that was meant. Ast it turns out, _Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium_
>(which I don't have) makes it clear that such ships do exist, so no
>conjecture is needed. those escorts are capital ships without a spinal
>mount. The sloan Class is that kind of escort the same way the KINUNIR is
>a cruiser. 

_FSSI_ has this to say about the composition of BatRons: 

"BatRon: Battle squadrons are created from battleships and are intended to
meet the best of the enemy fleet, engage it, and destroy it. Their purpose
is battle. Battle squadrons are usually reinforced with large numbers of
auxiliary ships, including refueling shuttles, escorts and support
cruisers. In addition, they are accompanied by a number of fleet couriers
which carry commuunications between squadrons."

The organisation diagrams show a typical BatRon as consisting of 4
Battleships, 1 Tanker, 2 Transports, 3 Scouts and 2 Auxiliaries. It shows a
'rider BatRon as being 1 Tender, 4 Riders, 1 Transport, 2 Scouts and 4
Escorts. While, IMO, these diagrams are probably schematic rather than
exact I can't see why they would show 4 BB's if there is normally only one.
BTW they also show the flag of a 'rider squadron as being on the tender,
which implies (to me, anyway) that the tender can't be too far back from
the action.

FWIW Escorts in _FSSI_ range from 5,000 DT to 20,000 DT, with 10,000 DT
being the norm. Cruisers run at 100,000 DT. Battleships run from the BLs at
200,000 DT to the Dreadnaughts at 700,000 DT, with 300,000 DT being the
standard for a BB.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:50:34 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Judge's Guild Products

In mail you write:

> Anyone know the copyright status of Judge's Guild Traveller products.

The copyright is valid. 

Quick rules of thumb for anything written since about 1970 (and it
applies to *most* stuff written before then):

If the copyright is held by a company, it's good for *75* years from
when it got printed/copyrighted.

If the copyright is held by an author, it's good until the author has
been *dead* for 75 years.

If the copyright is held by more than one author, it's good until 75
years after *all* of them are dead.

So the *best* case has the Judges Guild stuff still being copyrighted
until (1975+75 = 2050). 

And even if the company that had the copyright went out of business
*someone* "inherited" the copyright as part of the company's assetts. 

So there's no point in hoping that copyright has expired on *anything*
that was published for RPGs. You'll have to get permission.
- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:40:10 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Question regarding Ley Sector

In mail you write:

> Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:
>
>> I'm currently reworking the Luriani in light of Jeff's revised data
>> for the Fornast Sector which ment that I have moved the Luriani to
>> the Ley Sector (which actually makes them more interesting IMHO). My
>> question is does anyone know when the Imperium moved into the Ley
>> Sector? I know that Fornast was brought in by around 120. But did
>> Artemesus immediately move on to Ley or did he turn his attentions
>> elsewhere?

> I don't know for sure.  I have the Judge's Guild Ley Sector Guidebook,
> but it has no details of the kind your looking for.

The 4 Judge's Guild sectors (Ley, Marantha-alkahest, Glimmerdrift
reaches, Crucis Margin) are *not* official. They've been replaced with
sectors where the stars don't even match (chech the Imperial Atlas).

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:25:37 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))

In mail you write:

>>> to design a non radiator ship powered be batteries to fool the sensors if
>>> they can 'see' your heat radiator.  The best solution is a directed
>>> (columated) radiator as discribed in the novel "Sun Diver".  The ship was
>>> cooled by dumping it's heat into a laser.  That laser could then be 
> directed
>>> into deep space and thus undetectable disposal of the heat if this tech.
>>> exist in the TU.
>>
>>It can't exist anywhere. Laser light is *low* (almost *zero*) entropy.
>>Heat is very high entropy. Thus you *cannot* convert heat to laser
>>light without creating far more heat than you send away. The trick in
>>Sundiver isn't allowed by the laws of thermodynamics.
>
> UH...heat IS light.  Inferred light.  That is want heat is.  And there are
> IR lasers avalable today.  The problem is convertion.  A chemical catalist
> laser could in theory convert waste heat to collumated IR.
First thing. The difference between "heat" and an IR laser beam is that
heat is spread over a *wide* frequency range and the radiation is *not*
coherent. An IR laser has *one* wavelength, and the radiation is
coherent. 

That makes a *big* difference. An IR laser beam, just like any other
laser beam, is *low* entropy. Heat is *high* entropy. Thus, as I said,
you *can't* convert raw heat into *any* kind of laser beam. Not without
creating even *more* heat than you started with.

Not even "in theory" can a laser convert heat to IR.

> Also there is
> the other question as to how much waste heat a TL12 Fusion reacter has.  If
> it's low and the insulation facter is high then there would be no need to
> vent heat at all.  The color temperture difference between the hull an space
> could be less than 1 degree.

It's not a matter of waste heat from the *reactor*. It's that all power
generated on the ship *will* wind up as waste heat sooner or later. If
you have a 100 MW power plant, and it is generating the full 100 MW
then your ship *will* be radiating 100MW of energy, mostly as heat. 

The heat is what the power winds up as *after* being used.

>>In fact, you have the problem that your *effective* radiator area is
>>equal to the area of the cone of radiation at the closest point to the
>>ship. So the narower the emission cone, the smaller the area, and thgus
>>the higher the radiator temp. 
>>
>>Thus there are some rather tight limits on how stealthy you can get.
>>
>
> Again it depends on the amount of waste heat.  You need some to warm the
> crew spaces to begin with.  If the waste heat is not greater than that there
> is no waste heat.

Wrong. That means that the crew spaces will be radiating heat at 300 K.
But the problem is that the crew *themselves* plus minimal amounts
of equipment generate *more* heat than is required to keep the ship at
a livable temp. Thus the need to *cool* the ship by using large
radiators.

Just consider the Space Shuttle. It doesn't have large power generation
capacity while in orbit. Yet it *has* to open the cargo bay doors to
expose the radiators that *cover* the inner surface, or else it will
*rapidly* become too hot to live in!

Remember, the *only* way energy can leave a spaceship is via radiation.
Which means that *cooling* the ship is a major consideration.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:06:12 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

In mail you write:

>>The pirate can't stay in front of the sun's disk for very long if it's
>>coasting (due to motion of the planet and of sensors orbiting the planet). 
>>(And even if it is on the disk, a seperate sun-watching telescope will see
>>it's silouhette.) Near the sun, the glare does indeed make it harder to see
>>(that's the -0.5 to signature) but not as much as one might think,
>>since these are space-based sensors and can be optimized for high contrast
>>and include coronagraphs to block out the sun. Still, the sun case isn't
>>one I've carefully modelled; perhaps the bonus should be more like -1.
>>
>>If the pirate uses its engines to stay close to the sun line-of-sight then 
>>it will be obvious to other sensor platforms in the system.
>
> Cold gas thruster could be used.

Remember that if they give thrust, they *aren't* all that "cold". I've
flown "cold gas" model rockets. The exhaust is a around 270 K (0 C).
Which is still rather visible in the IR in open space.

And the colder the exhaust, the *less* thrust it'll give. Meaning that
for the same thrust, you are better off using something that produces
very little exhaust, but has it move *fast*.

Thus for stealth ion thrusters *may* be workable, and mass drivers will
do quite well. Throw away multi-kilo chunks of scrap iron at a few
thousand km/sec, and your ship will move a little, while the chunks of
iron are hard to detect.

I just had this vision of a ship trying to be stealthy and having an
assistant astrogator standing in an airlock pointing a machinegun at
the right star and fire off a few rounds.... It *would* move the ship,
though slowly.

"Charly, that was good. Give me about half as much this time and we'll
be right on!"

"Ok, last was a 20 round bust, I'll fire 10 this time..."

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 01:13:13 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: UWP Cultural Extension 

> In a message dated 10/20/98 2:02:23 PM Central Daylight Time,
> stevedaniels@portcaddo.com writes:
> 
> << A cultural extension is going to go a long way to defining
>  the culture of a planet.  And consequently, diminsh or limit a referee's
>  freedom of movement for creating within the constraints of that.  >>
> 
> Unless the referee himself/herself generates it. If we do the CulturalX for
> every world, then we limit etc. If we show how to do one, then we enhance what
> the ref can do.

I'd go more for the 'how-to' than just a pregen, unless it was part of a 
supplement.

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 22:43:16 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

>From: "David L. Pulver" <dlpulver@kos.net>
>Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet
>
>The Kinunirs are very interesting vessels. Much of this is the result of
>being transition designs from Book 2 to High Guard, but nevertheless...
...
>and, most of all, it has one special edge: that puzzling little factor 1
>black globe generator.

  Perhaps more cynically, it's also a fairly small and cheap test-bed
for these experimental and poorly understood devices :>

  FWIW, something like that might be an answer to why (IIRC) these TL F ships
were built at Regina - perhaps someone was being subtly warned of Imperial
access to Ancient artifacts. Or it could just be another conspiracy...

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 01:39:22 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: DGP product (Was - Re: UWP Cultural Extensions)

"David J. Golden" wrote:

>         I hate to reopen the gripefest about DGP products, but what about the
> World Builders' Handbook? If I recall the way somebody explained it once,
> while DGP owned the copyright to the actual *text*, the ideas and concepts
> were created under license, and hence the license holder (then GDW, now
> FFE) had free right to reuse those ideas and concepts. Sure, the text would
> have to be rewritten or paraphrased, but the various profiles were
> invaluable as a guideline and creativity jogger ...

For legal clarity here (US copyright law anyway):
copyrights only protect particular expressions of original works of authorship.
For our purposes: something somebody created and wrote.

Copyright does not protect ideas at all.  Only patents protect ideas and they are
hard to get.

So, if you use someone else's words, without permission, you are infringing
their copyright. (BTW- Paraphrasing is a bad idea.  Use the idea, but create
totally
new language).  Some level of infringement is acceptable.  This is the "fair
use" doctrine.

So, you are mostly correct above.
Use DGP's words without their permission, you infringe their copyright.

The confusion comes from Trademark law.  Trademark's are source identifiers.
Anything that has "Traveller" on it, in the gaming market, had better be licensed
from Far Future Enterprises, or its in violation.  Trademark problems are
easy when you're talking about logos, symbols, names, etc. It gets hard
when you talk about "trade dress".  Trade dress can be a whole lot of
different things.  The shape of a Coke bottle, the windows start up sound,
even the red line and red text on a black cover that we all know and love.

If something about a product is so associated with a product and/or that
product's creator, that it functions as a "source identifier", it may qualify
for trademark protection.  An example:  The UWP.  Marc Miller has not
registered this nor asserted that it qualifies for any level of trademark
protection.  Would it qualify for trademark protection?  Maybe.
I could make a good case for it, but its a very close call.

It boils down to a question of confusion to the public and unfairness to the
creator of the original item and the 'goodwill" that has been generated.

Would it be fair to use this or that from a DGP product?

Answer?  Don't answer the question!  If there is any question about
the fairness, you don't touch it due to legal problems.  You don't
want to jury to ever have to deal with it.  Any legal dispute like
this simply isn't worth it in the gaming industry by and large.

The issue is complicated here because the DPG stuff necessarily
supplements previous Traveller stuff with a license.  So whether
a particular thing in  DGP product is more GDW or FFE than
DGP is a really confusing question.  However, though confusing,
it is strong support for allowing such things from DGP works
to be used in appropriately licensed Traveller (R) products.

Ok, things are looking up.  But they get brighter!

Trademarks are a "use it or lose it" operation, unlike copyright and
patent which have time limits.  You can't get a trademark unless you
use it in commerce.  Likewise, you stop using it, and you _probably_
abandon it after a period of time.

Abandoned Trademarks are gone.  Poof.

From the Lanham Act 15 USC Section 1125 (The Trademark Act):
"Abandonment: A mark shall be deemed to be 'abandoned' when
either of the following occurs:
     (1) When its use has been discontinued with intent not to resume
such use.  Intent not to resume may be inferred from circumstances.
Nonuse for two consecutive years shall be prima facie evidence of
abandonment. [Note here: that means that whoever abandoned the
mark would have to prove that he really did intend to resume use
of the mark and will have to do so by a preponderance of the
evidence.]  'Use' of a mark means the boa fide use of that mark
made in the ordinary course of trade, and not merely to reserve
a right in the mark."

[Bracketed material added; section (2) not relevant - it concerns
generic marks].

So, even if particular items (for lack of a better term) could qualify for
"trade dress" trademark protection (which is doubtful IMHO though
a case can be made depending on the particular thing in question),
they have been abandoned if they haven't been used in commerce
(i.e., products sold or bought) in the last two consecutive years.

The 100% legally correct thing to do here is identify the thing you
want to use which could conceiveable qualify for trade dress
protection, then seek a declaratory judgment that any potential
mark has been abandoned.

On top of everything, IMO, its going to be extremely difficult for
any producer of Traveller products (with the exception of GURPS/SJG),
to ever beat Far Future Enterprises in a trademark dispute about
game mechanics because they are going to have to prove in court
that consumers in the relevant market identify their products as
supplement producer first, e.g., DGP, and Traveller second.
For myself, until recently, I never even realized there were different
producers of Traveller products.  Its all about Traveller.  I see
"Traveller" I think 6 2d6 stats, Aslan, Zhos, career chargen, jump
ships, etc.  Not DPG, GDW, Imperium Games, etc.  (Although,
Judge's Guild products are so distinctive, you can't miss them.
And BITS/CORE has the "Little White Book" going for it.)

At absolute worst, in my mind, if a future Traveller product used
something from a DGP product (excepting direct expressions),
FFE might be required to protect the DGP product author's
right of attribution.  But that is easily taken care of by stating
on the copyright page "This work based on mechanics and
game systems developed by Eneri the First."

So if the DPG guy is simply holding out for money, as has been
reported on this list, he's doing a bad job of protecting his
rights.  The tighter you grasp a quantity of sand, the more falls out
between your fingers.

As long as you don't infringe his copyright, there seems to be a
great deal of lattitude in what you can use from DGP materials.
At least, IMHO.

Disclaimer: None of the above intended as legal advice.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 01:46:16 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: UWP Cultural Extension

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 10/20/98 2:02:23 PM Central Daylight Time,
> stevedaniels@portcaddo.com writes:
>
> << A cultural extension is going to go a long way to defining
>  the culture of a planet.  And consequently, diminsh or limit a referee's
>  freedom of movement for creating within the constraints of that.  >>
>
> Unless the referee himself/herself generates it. If we do the CulturalX for
> every world, then we limit etc. If we show how to do one, then we enhance what
> the ref can do.

Very true.  But . . . I would love it if about half to a third of the systems in
a published sector had a Culutural X included. ;-)  Or the paragraph per
system minimum that G:T Behind The Claw is using.

BTW: Are you still thinking of detailing Antares Sector for a Milieu 200?

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 01:55:58 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Question regarding Ley Sector

Leonard Erickson wrote:

> The 4 Judge's Guild sectors (Ley, Marantha-alkahest, Glimmerdrift
> reaches, Crucis Margin) are *not* official. They've been replaced with
> sectors where the stars don't even match (chech the Imperial Atlas).

Don't have the Imperial Atlas or any prospects on ever having.

Thats a shame.  They are licensed 1980 products.
Just when I was thinking of developing the Sydymic Empire in Ley
or staging a Pocket Empire fest in Glimmerdrift.  :-(

Oh well.  Not really much to the JG products but some
UWPs and an interesting name or two.

Long Live the Sydymites!

BTW: are these sectors with Imperial Atlas data available on the Web
anywhere?

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 01:49:10 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Judge's Guild Products 

> So the *best* case has the Judges Guild stuff still being copyrighted
> until (1975+75 = 2050). 
> 
> And even if the company that had the copyright went out of business
> *someone* "inherited" the copyright as part of the company's assetts. 
> 
> So there's no point in hoping that copyright has expired on *anything*
> that was published for RPGs. You'll have to get permission.

Or else we hold our breath til 2065 or so.  <grin>

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 01:59:39 -0400
From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
Subject: Re: Judge's Guild Products

Leonard Erickson wrote:

> In mail you write:
>
> > Anyone know the copyright status of Judge's Guild Traveller products.
>
> The copyright is valid.

[snip]

Thanks, Shadow, but I just finished law school with a heavy
emphasis on intellectualy property.  :-)
Although I'm sure some others on the list appreciate the data.

I should have said,
"Anyone know who own's the Judge's Guild copyrights?"
When businesses fold, someone gets them.

Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 22:40:03 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: The Fourth Imperium:  was  Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964

> From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
> Legate Legion wrote:
> > I can Psi-Cops like Al Bester from B5...  They police the Psis...
> No sh*t!! (I'm not a B5 fan, so this is the first time I've ever heard
> of this...) I was going to mention Alfred Bester's novel "The Demolished
> Man" for an example of how telepathic cops might work.

Well, that might work too, but Al Bester from B5 was a sick & twisted
man...  I liked him...  Made a great foil for the heros as they "were" on
the same side...

> Bruce Johnson

Legate Legion, Militant Jewish Terrorist
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

We are Microsoft of Borg.  Your distinctive capabilities will be adapted to
service us.  Resistance is futile.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:23:07 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: UWP Cultural Extension 

> BTW: Are you still thinking of detailing Antares Sector for a Milieu 200?

Millieu: 200 or Millieu: 2000?

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 23:39:26 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

...
>merchants from the Oort cloud, but that's a lesser issue. If microjumps only
>require a small amount of fuel (canon is unclear on this issue) it might help.

  Haven't microjumps been stated a couple of times as requiring LHyd per
a one parsec Jump?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:27:02 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Nuclear pumped x-ray lasers

I have been doing some research on these wonder weapons.  It seems that
those listed in TNE are comlete fanatsy (500kt mass .79, damage 79) at TL8.
 From the work and material I have been able to get, it would seem that it
is out by about 4 orders of manitude.  (Late 80s hopes suggested that at
pitifully short ranges about 1 MJ/m^2 was possibly obtainable with a 300kt
warhead)  (sources available upon request)

Question, does anybody have any more up to date information?

If these are indeed impossible, should they become TL 9 or 10, or, 
do we just assume that TL8 miltech is yet to develop such but will.  It
seems VERY unlikely that these sorts of weapons will be possible in the
near future.  We are nearly in the middle of TL8.

Curious

Colin

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:01:27 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re Piracy and Parting Out

...
>>>built with multiple power plants: one PP to match "Target Profile",
>and the
>>
>>  Physical observation (by security forces or dockyard staff) will note
>this and flag it, if the authorities are interested in this intelligence.
>
>Then they flag EVERY ship I design, normally I add a small power plant
>that can handle life support or weapons.  several of my ships have 3 to
>4 power plants.

  I was referring more to the auxiliary power to run the extended maneuver
performance implied in the previous post.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:01:31 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>They come in oposite the planet, use gravity breaking and catch their prize
>on the outward leg.  That is why they need a high delta V to start with.
>They come up behind the target as it is acelerating out.  Best posible time.
>They are far from the system and close to the jump diameter.  They have to
>be quick but then they have to anyway.  If the main world has or is a moon
>so much the better for the pirates.

  They also go right through the primary defense/detection zone, and they
will be going far too fast for gravity to decelerate them much. I doubt
that aerobraking will be practical.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #987
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 988



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges 
re: Economics of Piracy
Re: The Fourth Imperium:  was  Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964
Re: Capital Ships of WWII
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)
Re: Piracy
Re: The Fourth Imperium: was Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964 
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
re: Starship Mortgages
Re: Starship Morgages 
Re: UWP Culture Extension (long)
re: Piracy
Re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 03:02:31 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges 

> ...
> >merchants from the Oort cloud, but that's a lesser issue. If microjumps only
> >require a small amount of fuel (canon is unclear on this issue) it might help.
> 
>   Haven't microjumps been stated a couple of times as requiring LHyd per
> a one parsec Jump?

I remember reading in an old JTAS that a microjump uses up enough fuel for a 
Jump 1.  FWIW, that's canonical enough for me.  <grin>

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:35:18 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: re: Economics of Piracy

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: re: Economics of Piracy
...
>This is one of the fuzzier assumptions in the list. I'll assume (especially
>with CT "ice rot" low berth rules) that no one would want to travel
>low passage more than once, so these people may be bringing 
>all their money with them to start a new life. That businessman
>may have an attache case full of multi-MCr bearer bonds. Really
>rich people would probably ride on a high-jump liner that won't stop
>in places a pirate could lurk, but there would be exceptions.

  Bearer bonds would be rare due to the potential for various sorts of
security risks - mostly having nothing to do with piracy. More likely
would be instruments transferring funds to a specific account or for 
an individuals use which would be of no use to pirates as such.

...
>This kind of reasoning is why I didn't bother with the numbers for
>a subsidized liner or any of the big trade ships from the Traveller
>Adventure. They, IMO, won't be lonely often enough for a 400tn
>Corsair to plan on hitting one. Could happen, as a surprise to
>both parties..."What are _they_ doing here?!?"

  Remember, a 2 or 3 kt freighter (under HG) will toast a corsair
in short order unless it's spectacularly well fitted out.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 98 02:26:40 -0500
From: "Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: The Fourth Imperium:  was  Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964

On 10/20/98 at 11:16 AM,  Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> said:


>> I can Psi-Cops like Al Bester from B5...  They police the Psis...
>> 

>No sh*t!! (I'm not a B5 fan, so this is the first time I've ever
>heard of this...) I was going to mention Alfred Bester's novel "The
>Demolished Man" for an example of how telepathic cops might work.

Yeah, now somebody tell Bruce *who* plays Al Bester on B5. I haven't got the heart. ;->

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" <eris@gulf.net>    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:27:52 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Capital Ships of WWII

From:           	DustyLV769@aol.com
Date sent:      	Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:00:45 EDT

>In a message dated 10/20/98 2:17:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz writes:

><< >The Bismark was not destroyed by planes (or the British navy, the German
> >Scuttled her) but she was hunted and disabled by plane launched torpedoes as
> >I recall.

> Arghhhh. I have seen this argument so often and it annoys me every time. Their 
> is no evidence that the Bismark was scuttled. And even if it was all that ment 
> was her sinking was hastened. >>

>I am afraid I will have to annoy you again.  Dr Robert Ballard, after finding
>and photographing the wreck of the Bismarck, said that due to the way the
>wreck sat on the bottom and a # of other things, there was ample evidence that
>the Bismarck was indeed scuttled by the crew.

Ballard's findings (that the BIsmark had rolled over to port, dropped her turrets, 
righted her self and sunk on a relatively even keel) is entirely consistant with 
her being torpedoed in the port side (those fired by HMS Dorsetshire and HMS 
Rodney. Other than that Ballard found that the ships upper works were wrecked 
but her hull was relatively intact to external examination. This is consistant with 
HMS Rodney's close range battering and HMS King George V's fire penetrating 
her armour deck and bursting below. Ballard was unable to examine the armour 
deck itself. Therefore he was unable to find any evidence of penetration.

>I personally believe that the Bismarck would have sank eventually anyway, but
>the RN was close enough to have boarded the ship...maybe recieving valuable
>info in the process.

Apart from the fact that a detailed investigation of Tirptiz post war reveiled that 
the RN had nothing to learn from the Bismark (no way that could have been 
known in 1941). I somehow think it unlikely that even the most gungho British 
officer would have put a boarding party on a battered hulk ablaze from stem to 
stern settling slowly by the bow.

>The RN assertion that the HMS Dorsetshire torpedoed Bismark, causing her to
>sink, is nothing more than wartime morale-building propoganda:  Dr Ballard
>discovered no signs of any damage to the belt armor/waterline of the side of
>the ship struck by the "torpedoes".

HMS Dorsetshire fired three Mk IX torpedoes into the starboard side and then 
move round and fired another Mk IX into the port side (in itself very telling that 
she was able to do this). Ballard was unable to examine the port side and in 
any case the Mk IX was set to run deep and detonate below the belt. Therefore 
one would not expect to find any damage at the waterline or on the armour belt.

>You might try the National Geographic website...they should have all the info
>on the Bismarck expedition (they funded it)

I've studied Ballards Bismark expedition fairly extensively as well as the other 
evidence *> Ballard appears to have looked at the Bismark seeking to find 
evidence of scuttling. I doubt she was scuttled, there was just no way the order 
could have been transmitted to those poor souls trapped below, through deck 
communications were out (according to Bismark's survivors). But even if she 
was it is irrelevant. By the end of the action she was no more than a blazing 
hulk. She was dead in the water, settling by the bow. Her guns had been silent 
for over an hour. To put it bluntly she was sinking; if she was scuttled, then that 
only sunk her faster.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:32:38 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>For radiation protection at OUR tech level.  Who knows what methods they
>have at TL 10-12.
I do not think that the physics involved is TL dependent.  It may be that
we discover some putstanding radiation absorbent material, like various
isotopes of Boron or Carbon, but considereing armour as such, it seems
density is the primary consideration. for Gamma rays.   Who knows is no
argument.  I grant that such may be possible, but at the moment it seems
just like a 'handwave' solution to the problem.  (Not that there are not
many such throughout traveller!

>That's if the radiation is absorbed.  Perhaps they have a way of reflecting
>it?
>
Suppose we have a pirate and he has a 99.99% black hull and ....

:)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 01:10:15 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet (Was: Piracy)

>Does anyone know the current spending of the USA in the military compared
>the the GNP?  1% sound kind of high considering it is the GROSS national
>product.

  1% is _very_ low - no significant state has been that low since 1940, if
not rather earlier. The US ran 10-15% for much of the `50's, for example.
The USSR ran (estimates are very hard to make due to the internal accounts
problems the Sovs themselves faced) 20-25% or so for most of the Brezhnev
era, IIRC, and this was one major factor in their eventual collapse.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 01:10:40 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy

...
>>With a high Delta V and cold gas manuvering thruster it would not be a
>>problem.  As for matching velocities, you can finish that after you
disable him.
...
>One ton at most, 0 power, dirt cheep.  It's compress gas.  You could use
>your life suport reserves.

  I suspect that this will fall far short of the needed performance envelope.
Let's assume that the target has been running at 1-G for an hour or so (d=
65kkm, v= 36 kps). A souped-up Far Trader may have a similar vector, having
taken off intending to intercept, and could follow until it's far enough away
to feel safe from intervention* or drops off the indigs lousy sensors.

 *under CT (B:2) this is likely past the planetary 100-d limit.

  OTOH, a 800-ton purpose-built SOTA corsair is _extremely_ unlikely to have
anything like a similar vector (and if it can come in from the other side of
the planet - _through_ its' core COACC zone - then the pirate leader may as
well thumb through "Space Viking" and decide to land instead); so it follows
just how much "cold" gas is required to significantly alter the course of a
vessel travelling at tens or hundreds of kps in aid of intercepting another
starship doing a similar speed, keeping in mind that the first ship likely
masses 10-20 metric tonnes per displacement ton, and that the ISP of your 
specified thrust agent sucks beyond all rational* belief?

 *in a thruster universe, which admittedly ain't all that rational :>

>OR mabe the writter goofed and left out some obvious point like the military
>ships were 'down' for repairs or R&R 50% of the time like the US military is
>with it's planes. /...

  Modern warplanes seem to have little in common with Trav starships wrt
maintenance requirements. Besides, I've seen seemingly endless discussions
of why warships would be down 50-75% of the time (compared to <2% for civs
using the identical tech), and no mention of just why these new rules
wouldn't apply to pirates.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:02:51 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: The Fourth Imperium: was Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #964 

> >> I can Psi-Cops like Al Bester from B5...  They police the Psis...
> >> 
> 
> >No sh*t!! (I'm not a B5 fan, so this is the first time I've ever
> >heard of this...) I was going to mention Alfred Bester's novel "The
> >Demolished Man" for an example of how telepathic cops might work.
> 
> Yeah, now somebody tell Bruce *who* plays Al Bester on B5. I haven't got the heart. ;->

Walter Koenig.  Doesn't ring a bell?  Try 'Ensign Chekov(TM)' from 'That
Nameless Paramount/Desilu Sci Fi Hack of Wagon Train(TM)' circa 1964. <grin>

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 01:31:05 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
...
>>>The sensor ship could not maintain constant readiness.  It would have to out
>>>mass the pirate 10 to one or more to stand a chance.
>>/...
>>
>>  What's the basis for that 10:1 assertion?
>>
>Guesstamate.  The ships would take at least one broadside as the weapons
>were unmaned and probably a second before the crew made it to stations and
>got up to snuff.  How many ship could fight effectively after receiving a
>broadside from an equal weight ship with max weaponry?  I'd target the
>weapons and drives on the first pass if I were that pirate.

  You'll forgive me for pointing out that this is hardly an authoritative
citation?

  So, at maximum sensor range (IIRC?) a single "broadside" will inflict
damage equal to the survival capacity of a ship 2-4 times its' size? I
shall not bother to address the concept of a sweep conducted with all
weapons crews off-duty.

  If I've been paying attention properly pirates IYTU tend to be large
(400-1000 tons) high-performance (high-G, high end electronics, mil-spec
weapons, Mil-Black hulls).

  At what range do you need to be to reliably disable the drives and weapons
of an armoured target? 

  Just for fun, where do they build them, and who paid for them?

...
>>  Little traffic except the occasional patrol by SDB's practicing warfighting
>>routines for their Oort cloud withdrawals.
>
>The ort cloud is beyond the orbit of pluto and completely circles our solar
>system.  Can you say too damned big to ever search in a 100 life times?
>Care to guess how long it would take the SDBs to get there on manuver drives?

  I know perfectly well where the Oort Cloud is in our system. I never
implied that such a search would be meaningful, or even intentional -
although _eventually_ sensor readings will propagate to remotes left 
there by local SDB elements (or sub-sector/sector forces) simply to
keep an eye on their own refuelling fallbacks (although the distances
will prevent detection of casual use - a base elsewhere would be best).

  In CT maneuver drives didn't have cutoffs, and given many months of
fuel it is in practical range for many SDB's; Jump vessels could be
used otherwise.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 01:47:45 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: re: Starship Mortgages

>>  Realistically, yes, although the Traveller financial community doesn't
>>seem to be very highly evolved.
>
>This retarded evolution may be the direct result of communications
>limits. How highly evolved would our world financial community be if
>it took two years to just request someone's credit history, much less
>decide if they are credit worthy?

  I meant in the Darwinian sense - there seems to be an assumption
that bankers will put out for anyone with a down-payment, without
regard for due diligence* or even any concept of risk.

  *we shan't discuss Bre-X, OK?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:39:04 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Starship Morgages 

Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net> wrote

> >What if getting a bank loan was a task and the jump number of the 
> >ship was a negative DM to the task.  Thus it would be harder to get a 
> >loan for a less commercially viable, easier to skip on, ship.  
> >Marginal success on this task could mean the loan was at a premium 
> >intrest rate, required a higher % down, or both.
> 
> Skipping, mutiny, and piracy are big risks for a bank making a loan 
> for a ship.  If they even THINK the ship might skip, they'll forget > the whole idea.

But _ANY_ ship might skip.  The bank is in business to make money.  If
they do not loan to ships that might skip other more lending
tinstitutions will.  The trick is to balance the risks of the loan with
the profit to be made on it.

> Here's my proposal: There's a reason the 'Merchant' career is pretty 
> much required in CT in order to get a merchant ship as a mustering-out 
> benefit. The banks only loan to people with a reputation in the 
> industry, people with references, people with a reputation to uphold. > Just getting the money for a down payment together isn't enough... 
> you've got to be part of the 'old boy network'.

So banks do not loan to people with good business plans showing their
ship will make money & who will have an exmerchant serving as purser if
the leader of the group happens to be exnavy or exnoble?

How about the following task profile [Which has more modifiers than MT
tasks are supposed to & might better be moddeled as a series of tasks.]

To get a starship morgage:

[This task presupposes that you have already located a specific prebuilt
ship that you wish to buy.  If the ship has to be constructed the task
is +1 Difficulty, or +2 difficulty if you do not have a set of Naval
Architects plans.]

Average, Trader, Soc [possibly CHR if used], 2 hours, safe

[Task duration is expressed in the banks working days which are usually
about 8 hours a day 6 days a week.]

[if world is no law half task duration, if world is high law double task
duration, if world is extreme law quadruple task duration]

[To obtain a bank loan from any given bank is fateful but most non low
pop worlds with Starport type A or B will have multiple banks.]

Modifiers

If applicant is an not an ex Merchant officer, Noble (ie Soc 11+ from
any career), or retired Imperial Naval officer of rank 5+ the task is +1
difficulty.

[Implicit social assumptions the bank makes -  Merchants know what they
are doing, nobles are honorable & usually have money, retired Imperial
Naval Captains & Admirals are gentleman & leaders who are honorable
enough to pay off the morgage & good enough at running ships that the
ship will probably be profitable.]

If the applicant is a retired Merchant of rank 4+ task is -1 difficulty.

If the applicant is an ex rogue, ex Pirate (unless Pirate includes star
mercs in your universe) a further +1 difficulty. 

If applicant is an ex Criminal (TNE career) +2 difficulty

If the applicant is not an Imperial citizen (if in the Imperium) task is
+1 difficulty.

If the applicant is a non human +1 difficulty.

If the applicant is a Vargr  a further +1 difficulty (figure it out).

If the ship is commercially non viable or the charecters have not done a
business plan proving the ship is viable +1 difficulty.

If the ships business plan is to be a mercenary or other high risk role
the task is not more difficult but (if sucessful) will require a
slightly higher intrest rate on the starhip loan as a risk premium.

[Constructing a business plan with false assumptions about prfitability
_proving_ that a non viable design will be viable is an opposed test of
Admin & Int with the bank official (who has -1 difficulty to their task
do to the banks resources.]

If the ship is of a standard merchant design & the design is generally
profitable -1 difficulty. 

If an optional sucessful Carousing task is made with the bank official
- -1 difficulty (Difficulty of this task is at the refs discression
depending on the personality of the loan officer & the banks policies
but Difficult would be a typical difficulty)

If the above Carousing task failed +1 difficulty.

If the down payment is 40% or more of the ships cost -1 difficulty.

If the down payment is less than 20% of the ships cost +1 difficulty for
every 5% short, thus buying a starship with no money down is +4
difficulties (despite this fact Buying a Starship With No Money Down
books are popular).

If the players hire a Broker to deal with the banks loan officer the
task modifiers may use the Brokers skill modifiers.

Bank is owned by a Vilani Corporation +1 Difficulty. (Vilani
conservatism)

It is often a good idea to have a lawyer look at your Starship Morgage
deal before you sign it.  Most Starship Morgages use standardized
paperwork and [in the Imperium] this task is Average, Legal, Edu, 10
minutes, Safe.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:55:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: neo@total.net
Subject: Re: UWP Culture Extension (long)

Marc,

You should pop this question to Kenji on the TLDL - he's the manic
ethnocultural expert, and I suspect he's not monitoring the TML these days.

Personally, I'm not sure about the usefulness of a Culture extension to the
UWP. "Culture" is a pretty broad term, covering a vast amount of
information, including economics, social relations, language, customs,
norms; it's the whole hairy field of cultural anthropology. An extension
could only clarify a very few of the most important aspects.

Some of the Culture Extension codes suggested thus far seem to me almost
uselessly vague, especially "Creativity". How does one measure a culture's
"Creativity"? Are some cultures really more creative than others? Every
culture has visual art, crafts, architecture, music, etc. I suppose the
Arts are more highly valued in some cultures than in others, but this
doesn't mean the culture is less creative. And how would a planet's
"Creativity Code" influence game play?

I favor something like Nancy Parker's brilliant article in TD16, a system
for generating and describing a large number of cultural attributes. Her
system covered such attributes as:

        Gender Discrimination
        Social Mobility
        Physical Mobility
        Wealth Distribution
        World View
        Personal Honor
        Honesty
        Emotionalism
        Privacy
        Social Distance
        Modesty
        Value of Human Life
        Value of Other Life

...and so on. I liked most of her system, but felt that it was incomplete.
I added a bunch of ideas of my own, largely cribbed from textbooks on
cultural anthropology.

When anthropologists describe a society, the first things they talk about
are: 1) Lineage System; 2) Food Production Practices. For instance, they
describe the Sarakatsani of Greece as "patrilineal pastoralists", or the
Mundurucu of Brazil as "matrilineal hunter-gatherers". To anyone with any
anthropological training, these two pieces of information instantly tell a
lot about a culture. (Patrilineal cultures tend to be male-dominated,
practice strict monogamy or polygyny, and so on; matrilineal cultures tend
towards egalitarianism, lax sexual restrictions, etc.).

True, most game players don't have any anthro training. But I think that a
relatively detailed culture generator/descriptor for Traveller could be an
opportunity to educate people about anthropology, and open their eyes to
the incredible variety of cultures _this_ planet has to offer.

At the very least, a clear and detailed cultural description for a PC's
homeworld would provide immeasurable insight into the character, and thus
fuel better role-playing. It will also provide endless adventure kernals
(NPCs trying to escape from arranged marriages, or trying to acquire enough
wealth to pay a steep bride-price, and so on). Further, a diversity of
planetary cultures will stop those annoying claims that Traveller is all
about "Americans in Space." ;]

Along with Parker's original system, my modifications include:

Marriage and Family Customs
 Lineage System          - patrilineal, matrilineal, cognatic, bilineal, etc...
 Dominant Marriage Type  - monogamy, polygyny, polyandry... (see below)
 Child Rearing           - by village, both parents, father, mother, etc...
 Marriage Custom         - exogamy, endogamy... also 
 Inheritance             - primogeniture, ultimogeniture, egalitarian...
 Gender Discrimination   - male-dominated, female-dominated, egalitarian...

Economic Structure
 Primary Food Production  - hunting, gathering, agriculture, food synthesis...
 Economic System          - see below
 Special Economy          - see below
 Predominant Social Groups - age sets, moeities, clans, fraternal societies...

Social Structure
 First Colonists          - what kind of people first settled the world
 Subsequent Colonists
 Recent Immigrants
 Age Distribution         - demographic profile
 Oppressed Group          - who's on the bottom of the heap?
 Form of Oppression       - what form does the oppression take?

...and so on.

I won't post my Culture Generation system here, because it's way too long.
Also it contains chunks of Nancy Parker's system, and I don't want to
violate copyright. And it would mostly make sense only to me; I'd hate to
have to write explanatory notes for the whole thing (unless of course
someone were to pay me to do so... ;)  

Sorry, folks, I'm not going to post it on the Web, either, so don't even ask!

But I will share a few bits here....

Note that the numbers are NOT intended as UWP-style codes, and things are
arranged in a somewhat arbitrary order, NOT in any kind of progression
(i.e. increasing state control of the economy). Many of the terms are
purely arbitrary, intentionally left vague and undefined.

Economic System         (2D, -4 if TL 5 or less)

0  Generalized reciprocity; mandatory gifting ceremonies.
1  Generalized reciprocity; non-mandatory gifting ceremonies.
2  Decentralized communalism; competing mutual-aid collectives
3  Laisser-faire free-enterprise capitalism
4  Mercantile capitalism.
5  State communism, centralized collectives.
6  State socialism; some private production.
7  Corporate capitalism; dominated by local corporations.
8  Megacorporate capitalism; dominated by offworld corporations.
9  Socio-corporate welfare enterprises.
10 Socio-capitalist welfare state.            [i.e. Canada]
11 Monopolist capitalist cartel state.
12 Social credit capitalist welfare state.

NOTE that this is intended to supplement, not replace, the UWP Government
code. Thus, a Gov-7 Democracy might be communist, or capitalist, or
whatever. Probably a Gov-0 Anarchy should be limited to 0 thru 4 above. I
deal with any conflicts on a case-by-case basis, just as one deals with
bizarre UWP codes.


Special Economy         (D6)

1  Gifting ceremonies on holidays.
2  Economy controled by guilds, unions, or other institutions.
3  Economy controled by clans, kinship groups, or other familial organization.
4  Some class or caste supported by charity (i.e. priests, beggars).
5  Special purpose money (i.e. rare goods, drugs, livestock, shells...).
6  Thriving black markets.


Marriage Type   (2D)

2  No marriage standards (or marriage discouraged).
3  Arranged serial monogamy; limited term marriages. Betrothals rare.
4  Arranged permanent monogamy; divorce illegal. Betrothals common.
5  Chosen permanent monogamy; divorce discouraged or illegal. Some arranged.
6  Chosen permanent monogamy; divorce discouraged but legal. 
7  Chosen serial monogamy; divorce common. 
8  Chosen serial monogamy; limited term marriages; divorce common. 
9  Chosen polygyny; divorce common.
10 Chosen polygamy; any number of males and females per marriage.
11 Arranged polyandry, polygyny, or polygamy; divorce discouraged or illegal.
12 Same sex marriage the norm; heterosexual marriage rare and discouraged.

NOTE: Arranged marriages may be negotiated by parents, grandparents,
religious authorities, matchmakers, or others. Sometimes one of the
participants will have a choice in the matter. "Chosen" marriages are
mostly the decision of the participants, or at least one of them, though
parents often have veto power.

[NOTE that in the real world, polyandry is extremely rare, practiced in
less than 1% of cultures or something. And usually it's fraternal
polyandry, where brothers marry the same woman (because they can't afford
the bride price individually, or because of a shortage of marriageable
women, or to consolidate land holdings in a small number of heirs).]


Lineage System          (2D)

2  Bilineal or Parallel. Cousin marriage prohibited.
3  Exclusively matrilineal. "Fatherhood" may be an alien concept.
4  Mostly matrilineal.
5  Mostly matrilineal.
6  Cognatic: descent traced through all ancestors.
7  Cognatic: descent traced through all ancestors.
8  Mostly patrilineal, with clan system. Bridewealth may be expected.
9  Mostly patrilineal. Bridewealth or bride-service often expected.
10 Exclusively patrilineal. Bridewealth or bride-service expected.
11 Ambilineal: child (or parent) chooses descent group.
12 Descent lineages not recognized. No inheritance by birth.

[NOTE: I've cut out my various notations regarding kinship-naming systems
and "cross-cousin marriage", which are too obscure to bother with here.
Lineage systems are of prime importance because they determine who you are,
and who can pass on wealth and status to their children. In a purely
matrilineal system, such as a pre-contact aboriginal Australian society,
the concept of "fatherhood" as we know it might not even exist.]

Anyway, if I had to choose a few categories for a UWP Culture Extension, I
would suggest:

        Xenophobia/Intolerance
        Marital Type
        Lineage System
        Food Production Practice
        Economic System
        Wealth Distribution   (as per Parker's system)

...and possibly Aggression, or Militarism (although this could be subsumed
into Xenophobia).

Best,

Glenn

    -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                         <neo@total.net>
    Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
    "Sex times Technology equals The Future." -- J.G. Ballard

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:23:25 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: re: Piracy

>You're not worried about all the patrol boats. You're worried about
>the patrol boats that can intercept you.
>
>Some are in the shop. Some are on the pad. Some are hiding at the
>bottom of the oceans, or deep in the asteroid belt, or way out in the
>oort cloud, or in close orbit (or inside) the local gas giants. Some are
>docked with ships that required extensive search (and seizure?). Some
>are on maneuvers with the Subsector Fleet five parsecs from here.
>Some are simply assigned to traffic patterns that take them too far
>away from the current location of the disguised pirate to be a factor
>for the time frame involved.

  All it takes is a cutter doing a boarding (or even a close pass)
to serve the traffic control/inspection role - which vessels could
be 100-200 times cheaper than a 1000 ton SDB.

  Also, while the pirates talk a big game about using SOTA (and large,
very expensive) ships to sneak about near the targets 100-D limit, I
wonder how they'll react to the idea of SDB's lying doggo in close
proximity _outside_ the Jump limit? Now that could get nerve-wracking.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:23:36 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)

>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>Subject: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)
...
>Even if a pirate has to hunt for an entire year to bag one Fat Trader,
>he's still making reasonable money. I believe this answers some 
...

  The variant (if cash flow, etc., permits) is to spend that whole
year (or however long) in backwaters or outsystems waiting for a
starship (and getting by on small craft and belters), nailing it
(which may require a _lot_ of follow-up) and then possibly even
spending the year or two that Ian mentioned in sneaking it out of
the state you're in to a market where you can get 25-40% for it
and simply retire (probably selling your own ship as well).

>There may be more efficient uses for a starship than piracy, but there are
>people who cannot do legal careers for various reasons and ships they'd
>not be able to use legally. Combine the two, and you get Corsairs.
> I believe my analyses show that a pirate can make money, if the setting
>IYTU allows them to survive and travel.

  Good points and decent analysis, IMHO. Thanks!

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #988
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 989



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: UWP Cultural Extension
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Warship upkeeps, etc. (was Re: Piracy)
re: various piracy bits
Re: Piracy 
Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Starship Morgages 
Re: Striker
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Where's Lucan?
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Where's Lucan?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 23:37:20 +0200
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <greimann@geocities.com>
Subject: Re: UWP Cultural Extension

At 13:12 20.10.98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>We have an economic extension for the UWP in Pocket Empires.
>Should we do a cultural extension (about the same number of digits, etc). What
>would that cover?
>
DGP´s World Builders Handbook had three different stats:
Progressiveness, Aggressiveness and Extensiveness. These were subdived into:

P: Radical, Progressive, Conservative, Reactionary
A: Expansionistic, Competitive, Unagressive, Passive
E: Monilithic, Harmonious, Discordant, Fragmented

In addition to that, you also had a local customs table,
and a religious profile
Volker
- ---
Volker A. Greimann, greimann@geocities.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:37:35 +0400
From: Andy Long <andyl@icluae.co.ae>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

On Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 01:31:05 -0700 shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca
(Steven Hudson) posted:
<Snip>
>  If I've been paying attention properly pirates IYTU tend to be large
> (400-1000 tons) high-performance (high-G, high end electronics,
mil-spec
> weapons, Mil-Black hulls).

You're right. This sounds more like Boskone than pirates. Someone send
for Kim Kinnison.

(Sorry. Couldn't resist. I'll shut up now)

Andy

================================================================
smtp Email:			andyl@icluae.co.ae OR
						andylong@emirates.net.ae
x400 Email:			c=ae;a=emdan;p=icl;ou1=abu0101;
						s=Long;i=AG;
						o=International
Computers Ltd;
A.G. Long, c/o ICL	Phone:	+971 (2) 335200/338066
PO Box 7237			Fax:	+971 (2) 338724
Abu Dhabi
United Arab Emirates
================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:54:56 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Warship upkeeps, etc. (was Re: Piracy)

>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: Piracy
...
>Also the upkeep of 10% per year may be a bit low.  Check the cost of crew
>for the ASH and the Kenunier in their adventure books.  Neither of these
/...

  A Kinunir is 80 crew (incl. 35 marines); call it KCr 3.5 each (1 for
gunners, quite possibly less for pongoes) as an average including pensions
(which don't apply to those under 20(?) years service, anyway. Bulk it
up _again_ and it's only MCr 4 per year - less than 4% of the ships TCS
abstracted upkeep cost. An AHL is 620 (incl. 150 troops), call it maybe
35 MCr for a 40+ (?) BCr(!) ship with an upkeep also in the billions.

>>By the way, earlier in the Piracy debate, I proposed bits of the Imperial
>>Intelligence structure arrange for the news that so and so might be able to
>>be got at, just to see which dogs bark in response.
>>
>A sting.  Good idea but that too can work both ways.

  Could you eleborate on that?

...
>>Pirates require at least 3 gees of acceleration. More if they want to play
>>with competantly-built SDBs. 3 gees of acceleration pushes your power plant
>>size up, as does the additional weaponary.
>
>Or a good head start.  Also what if the pirate used SDBs or equivalent
>carried by battle transports?

  What's the budget for your "pirate" organization - it's beginning to
sound a lot more like a Zhodani Colonial force battle-rider squadron.
Which begs the banker issue...

...
>>Atrocity warfare is not a habit of any of the Interstellar states in Known
>>Space. Except for the K'kree, and during the Second Civil War.
>
>That's true but the missles could be duds...

  I recall someone pointing out that these missile would be very hard
to intercept due to neglible signature (therefore ballistic?) - what
if the target doesn't detect them?

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:55:01 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: re: various piracy bits

>Subject: re: various piracy bits
...
>>  They use SDB's for revenue cutters?
>
>Why not? They've got the G's to intercept traffic easily (so the traffic
>can stay on a good course, rather than having to vector to meet them),
>they can stay on station a long time, and they have to be out there
>anyway. Not all of the SDB's will be used for this - most are probably
>lying doggo somewhere - but it's good for your well-patrolled system
>to _look_ well patrolled, it keeps the riff-raff out.

  I have to comment that this only makes sense if the system has _lots_ of
SDB's - rational economy would likely have diversified ships for this.

...
>  How tiny is this agricultural colony such that its' main export crop is
>sufficient to fill one small trader? How poorly developed is its' economy
>such that there's no middlemen with export contracts (and freight, rather
>than speculative trade shipping arrangements made) already in place - are
>the locals bringing in their harvests in horse-drawn carts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>(Hand-wave mode, *on*):
>The agricultural colony has ironclad laws that all it's produce must
>be sold directly to the main world. There is one loophole: On the first
>day of harvest, the farmers are allowed to sell what they reap to anyone
>with the credits - bypassing the state-appointed buyers the farmers get
...
>There isn't a lot to buy, 100tons or so (one day's harvest), but these will 
>probably be the only Busava melons going outsystem without spending 
>two months in a government warehouse - therefore the High-pop planet
>two parsecs from here will pay astronomical prices for this delicacy.
>(handwave mode, *off*)

  A nice adventure idea, but of no real meaning in the context of explaining
why piracy might be viable as a widespread phenomena.

>There will be many situations where a single free trader can make
>ten times (or hundreds of times) more profit at a particular port
>simply by getting there first. The next trader will still find goods, but
>the one cargo bay full of an incredible, once-in-a-lifetime deal will
>be gone.

  How do they know which is which without (near-) instantaneous
interstellar commo? Luck and good planning will have their place,
but even rumour should still be STL unless ship-borne.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 05:46:51 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy 

> >You're not worried about all the patrol boats. You're worried about
> >the patrol boats that can intercept you.
> >
> >Some are in the shop. Some are on the pad. Some are hiding at the
> >bottom of the oceans, or deep in the asteroid belt, or way out in the
> >oort cloud, or in close orbit (or inside) the local gas giants. Some are
> >docked with ships that required extensive search (and seizure?). Some
> >are on maneuvers with the Subsector Fleet five parsecs from here.
> >Some are simply assigned to traffic patterns that take them too far
> >away from the current location of the disguised pirate to be a factor
> >for the time frame involved.
> 
>   All it takes is a cutter doing a boarding (or even a close pass)
> to serve the traffic control/inspection role - which vessels could
> be 100-200 times cheaper than a 1000 ton SDB.

Thing is, your average 400 ton pirate boat can toast that 50 ton cutter in a 
heartbeat.  And if the cutter is the only boat within 6 hrs flight time, the 
pirates get away.

>   Also, while the pirates talk a big game about using SOTA (and large,
> very expensive) ships to sneak about near the targets 100-D limit, I
> wonder how they'll react to the idea of SDB's lying doggo in close
> proximity _outside_ the Jump limit? Now that could get nerve-wracking.

Definitely something to make your ulcer grow.

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:59:46 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions

>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:38:12 -0400
>From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
>Subject: Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions
>
>"William F. Hostman" wrote:
>
>> My "requests":
>>
>> 1) Xenophobia/Xenophilia scale
>
>Concur.
>
>> 2) Civil Law - Personal freedoms other than weapons
>> 3) Weapons Law - what weapons are allowed
>> 4) Criminal Enforcement - Chance of encountering LEnf, plus tenacity
>>thereof.
>
>Thats what the UWP Law Level does.  At least in T4 & MT.
>
>> 5) (How to lable this one is a problem) a scale which indicates how much
>> the locals are likely to accuse non-locals of crimes without obvious
>> suspects.
>
>I don't consider these four as "Cultural."  But I'm curious, have you
>seen the "extra" 30 pages of Milieu 0 Hardcover?  There is a
>Universal Law Profile?  It has 7 additional categories:

No, I haven't. If there is aalready a law-extension, it should be  included
as part of  a larger cultural extension...

>Armament: traditional weapons, CT law level scale.
>Commerce: degree of business regulations, safety requirements, pollution, etc.
>Communication: obvious
>Congregation : obvious
>Movement: obvious
>Privacy: obvious
>Process: the rules of law including standards of guilt/innocence, punishment,
>and how the rule of law is established (precedent, case by case, statutes,
>or arbitrary).

The law extension looks too broken down for my tastes ( I use the four I
listed above, based upon 2d6-7+LL). I remeber seeing discussion of this
last year on the list....

>> 6) how much they appreciate the arts.
>> 7) how much they appreciate/trust the sciences
>
>I agree with these.  Although I would group them as Creativity.

I wouldn't... creativity is another aspect entirely. There have been some
incredibly art-valuing cultures that were anything but creative (the same
art over and over again), and a very few that value sciences but not the
arts. And of course, some where both are highly valued, but creativity is
suppressed (like most of the communist block did). Altho, creativity would
be a good addition, especially if marc carries forward a separate law
extension.

>> .8) how much they appreciate/trust the media...
>
>How often is the media relevant to your campaigning?
>It rarely comes up in mine.

It often becomes an issue in mine. Usually trying to blow the covers of my
PC's, or leading them on wild goose chases, or capturing them at their
absolute worst. In one game I ran, (TNE, last time I ran an RC game, some 5
years ago) one of the PC's was a Vargr Journalist (don't even start asking
about it... lets just say "Refugee Enclave" and ignore realism of Vargr in
the RC) who also happened to be a spy for the RC Central command, with the
party going on StarViking runs. Between his press releases and his private
reports, the party not only got decorated, but also threatened with
"Intentional Accidents" by high command, and got stuck with Jim-Boy, the
hiver tech-rep and terran historian.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 05:57:28 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

At 03:32 PM 10/21/98 +0800, you wrote:
>>For radiation protection at OUR tech level.  Who knows what methods they
>>have at TL 10-12.
>I do not think that the physics involved is TL dependent.  It may be that
>we discover some putstanding radiation absorbent material, like various
>isotopes of Boron or Carbon, but considereing armour as such, it seems
>density is the primary consideration. for Gamma rays.   Who knows is no
>argument.  I grant that such may be possible, but at the moment it seems
>just like a 'handwave' solution to the problem.  (Not that there are not
>many such throughout traveller!

I guess we have come to the point where we have to agree to disagree... I
don't think that expecting miracles out of advanced technology is a
'handwave'.

There were many earlier this century that thought that the sound barrier
was a law of nature, that the turbulence of transonic speeds would only
increase, and that supersonic flight was therefore impossible.  We learned
otherwise.  

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 06:05:43 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Starship Morgages 

At 12:39 AM 10/21/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net> wrote
>
>> >What if getting a bank loan was a task and the jump number of the 
>> >ship was a negative DM to the task.  Thus it would be harder to get a 
>> >loan for a less commercially viable, easier to skip on, ship.  
>> >Marginal success on this task could mean the loan was at a premium 
>> >intrest rate, required a higher % down, or both.
>> 
>> Skipping, mutiny, and piracy are big risks for a bank making a loan 
>> for a ship.  If they even THINK the ship might skip, they'll forget >
the whole idea.
>
>But _ANY_ ship might skip.  The bank is in business to make money.  If
>they do not loan to ships that might skip other more lending
>tinstitutions will.  The trick is to balance the risks of the loan with
>the profit to be made on it.
>
>> Here's my proposal: There's a reason the 'Merchant' career is pretty 
>> much required in CT in order to get a merchant ship as a mustering-out 
>> benefit. The banks only loan to people with a reputation in the 
>> industry, people with references, people with a reputation to uphold. >
Just getting the money for a down payment together isn't enough... 
>> you've got to be part of the 'old boy network'.
>
>So banks do not loan to people with good business plans showing their
>ship will make money & who will have an exmerchant serving as purser if
>the leader of the group happens to be exnavy or exnoble?

I stand corrected.  Ex navy officers and nobles could concievably have
similar opportunities to gain reputation, connections, and skills.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:54:35 +0100
From: pbendal@ibm.net
Subject: Re: Striker

CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> There are also two printings of CT Striker, with some revision between the two
> (these are both L:BBs).

Presumably these were fairly minor revisions? I've not seen the second printing.

Paul Bendall

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 06:32:23 -0400
From: "johannes" <johannes@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

- -----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 3:04 PM
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop


>Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:
>>
>
>> No offense, but I wish this stuff woundn't be posted on line. Why let the
bad
>> guys know what we're working on....
>
>hey those dirty rat bastid Zhos _already_ know all about it....oh,
>_other_ bad guys...
>
>What, you were thinking maybe foreign agents listen in to the TML so
>that they can learn about current miltech???
>
>"Comrade...ve haf nothink to fear from the Amerikanskis...they'll still
>arguing about pirates. All our intelligence indicates that the running
>dogs will be arguing about it for the next year or so, so our glorious
>invasion plans can proceed!"
>


Did you ever wonder what someone would think who was monitoring this list
and had no idea what Traveller or RPGs were?  And suppose Nuclear Dampers
(for example) really DID exist, but as a deep dark secret weapon?  We'd
probably have our own desk at the NSA by now!

John

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 23:40:25 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan?

From:           	TravelrTNE@aol.com
Date sent:      	Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:23:06 EDT

>> >Did Dulinor raise a loyal daughter?

>> Doesn't matter. No matter what, would you trust the daughter of a trator
>> with that much power, or assuming Isis ratted on Dulinor would you trust
>> someone with so little honour?

>Sure it does... Strephon has apparently decided to make Isis Archduchess of
>Ilelish.  Unless she's been "reprogammed" as well...  Still people that
>powerful.  I'd think it'd be difficult for even the Emperor to get at her w/o
>a fight (even if just a counter/intelligence type one)...

><snip>
>> My apologies. No offence was intended. It was intended merely as a humerous
>> expression of my opinion and dislike of the Virus et al. I apologies
>> unreservedly for any offense

>*MY* apologies.  There's venom apparent there, which wasn't my intention.
>Sarcasm yes.  Venom, no.  Mea culpa.

Given the frequency and ease with which flamewars start here, I thought it 
better to "kick for touch" :*>

>>>> Make no mistakes Strephon may have been honourable, but he was an
>>>> honourable fool.

>>>The situation blew up out of his control.  The only real fault (aside from
>>> not spotting Dulinor's rather extreme disatisfaction) was not immediately
>>> trying to regain the reigns at Capital, but going to Usdiki and letting Lucan
>>> consolidate his position.

>> I have no doubt that Strephon's presence was required elsewhere. What I see
>> as Strephons failures are:

>> 1 - He failed to prepare Lucan (3rd in line) for the throne. This was an
>> unforgivable error. Lucan was most definitely not too far from the throne to
>> be ignored. If Strephon and Iphegina had died (unlikely, but a definite
>> possiblity) he becomes 1st in line; or if Varian dies he becomes 2nd in line.
>> There are no excuses for this failure of judgement.

>I'd expect Iphegenia is in somewhat of a ivory tower.  Very isolated and
>protected (and cloned).  ; )  She's 28 in 1116 and apparently childless and
>unmarried... Social mores of the imperial family?

I'd put this down to an Imperial tradition of late marriage. BTW here in NZ the 
average age for marriage is 26 and first child is 28-29, so I don't see that as too 
unusual.

>Why is Iphegenia the only child of Strephon and Iolanthe anyways?  Unless
>they're quite... careful in trying to avoid dynastic struggles maybe.
>Strephon has been married to Iolanthe since 1079...  in over 30 years of
>marriage they only have one issue (surviving in 1116 anyways)?  There has to
>be something up there. 

Good point, I hadn't noticed that. I'd suspect that the Emperor married for 
reasons other than love (al la PE). However given the nature of the Imperium, 
not having a "backup heir" or two does seem more than a little unusual.

>It is interesting that Strephon has Iolanthe's ova stored away... ala the
>creation of Avery in the OTU timeline.  Does Strephon have any little swimmers
>stored away in case of his own demise?

I think that is a fairly safe bet. Remember IIRC Margaret was able to get her 
hands on some to "make" Paulo.

>> 2 - When he absented himself from Capital he failed to make adequate
>> preperations for a crisis. As far as we know he did not inform anybody of
>his

>I see it as more of an immediate "oh shit, gotta go" type event that causes
>Strephon to leave for the Longbow observations.  There were some serious
>issues that demanded the Emperor's personal attention.  The clone was only
>supposed to be for ceremonial purposes... smile and wave and make people
>*think* the Emperor is there.  It was an issue of "Imperial Security."  I
>would imagine there's a chain of command that Strephon would let know...
>probably not Tranian (for fear of a possible power grab or something), but who
>would anticipate the Emperor's ceremonial dummy being shot up by a visiting
>Archduke who's supposed to be a friend of the Emperor?  What kind of crisis
>can reach Capital in less than 7 weeks that the dummy can't "fake the funk on"
>till the Emperor gets back?  Aside from him getting wacked by a certain
>disastified Archduke of Ilelish?    ; ) 

Exactly my point. The chances of the clone and Iphegina both dying were low, 
but the consequences of it were potentially so huge. And the way to avoid it 
was _so_ simple. All that was need was for Iphegina to be absent for a few 
months (until the real Strephon got back). A quick vaccation to a resort 
somewhere on Sylea would have been more than sufficent. The key thing was 
to make that the Clone and Iphegina could not be taken out (by accident, 
assassination, falling meteor or whatever) at one go.

>> absence. Assuming he informed Iolanthe and Iphegina, that was not sufficent.
>> Both of them were regulary in the same place. At the very least several well
>> trusted members of the moot should have been in the know (including
>> Archduke Tranian). They obviously weren't because Tranian supported Lucan's
>> claim to the throne. His failure was not leaving Capital, but in not telling
>> people he was going.

>The last person i would tell I was leaving my ceremonial dummy in charge would
>be an Archduke.  All high nobility (at least down to the sector level) do the
>cloning thing, so all know of their existence.  An Archduke is entirely too
>powerful...  so would anyone in direct line for the throne (except maybe the
>Grand Princess).   Politics in the Court, SolSec and maybe Zho spies...  There
>was an urgency probably of "i'll be back before anyone knows I'm gone..."

Now that would be _very_ telling of the state of the Imperium. Here you have 
Tranion, a man who's honour and morals are above reproach, the paragon of all 
the Empire values; and this man can not be trusted with the fact that the 
Emperor has to be absent from Capital for a few months on State business. 
Very Very telling indeed!

>> 3 - When the crisis blew up he failed to act swiftly and decisivly to
>> restore order. Strephon was just 6 jumps from Capital. He had the
>>authorisation codes to confirm his identity (if not refer to point 2). He should
>>have transmitted them immediately to all fleet commanders, doing so would
>> not have compromised Longbow but it would have prevented the
>> disintergration of the Imperium. He must have known what Lucan's
>> personality was like. The crisis came and he hesitated. If he acted
>> decisively and quickly he could have stopped the war. It
>> would have in all likelyhood cost him and his family the throne, but it
>> would have saved the Imperium.

>Supposedly he's in shock and being sedated by his doctor (Survival Margin pg
>9) and the crew decides for the safety of the vacation palace at Usdiki.
>Strephon goes along (despite the doc's impression of Strephon's "instinct")...
>but from the description i see him in a depression/shock state. "We are going
>to Usdiki.  Usdiki is a good place."

Great, thats all you need. The Empire is falling apart around you and the 
Emperor crawls into bed and refuses to come out. Yes Strephons wife and 
child have been murdered, but thats the time when the truely great standout 
from the merely mediocre.

>Otherwise this is the main flaw I see... it lets Lucan consolidate his
>position.

>> I see Strephon as a rather mediocre ruler. Honourable and noble, yes.
>Capable
>> under normal cirumstances, yes. But he failed to see or prevent the
>potential
>> (however remote) for a tragic disaster in his actions. And when the crisis
>came
>> he hesitated and "kicked for touch" by running to Usdiki. Even then he
>failed to
>> act (he must have had the codes to prove he was Strephon, even in 1117
>> transmitting them could have stopped the rebellion).

>I rather see the situation as unworkable to begin w/.  Something *must* have
>been seriously wrong w/ the Imperium for it to become unglued the way it did.
>It was only looking for an excuse to fly apart.  That excuse was the lack of
>the One Clear Choice.

Look at the situation of 1116. It is very telling.

You have the 2nd and 3rd in line to the throne allowed to lay about being spoilt 
brats. The smart thing to do would have been to ship them out to the military 
(discipline, responsibility and a modicum of management experience) and find 
them some minor official duties so that if worse come to worse they are not 
_totally_ unprepared. The only reasons for not doing this would be Strephon 
was an incompetant OR the succession was sufficently insecure that he had to 
keep an eye on them.

You have the Emperor removing himself from Capital without telling anyone 
other than his consort or immediate heir. Again this is either incompetance OR 
nobody could be trusted not to make a power grab in his absence.

You have an Emperor who reacts to a crisis by pulling the covers over his head 
and hoping it will all go away.

>The premise of G:T is that the instability and undercurrents are still
>there... it's just Strephon doesn't get wacked.  Note that Project Jumpstart
>was started in 1103 due to information received from Longbow.  The disaster
>was seen as coming...  it was just a different and earlier disaster due to the
>assassination.

I believe that Strephon has got a second chance and he knows it. If Imperial 
Intelligence did bump Dulinor off then he would see just how vulnerable the 
situation was OR if somebody else blew up the gig he would see just how 
vulnerable the situation was while he was absent. Either way I think he would 
get to see just how close it was.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:15:41 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

In mail you write:

> ..
>>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>>Subject: Current Tech: Shortstop
> ..
>>You can make a shell that ignores Shortstop. It'll cost you about
>>US$1000 each, instead of about US$25 to $50 each, so you won't
>>have as many to shoot.
>
>   I suspect that cheaper work-arounds will be found; the obvious one is
> using teensy-weensy digital timers to replace the mechanical timer fuzes
> that were replaced by radar proximity units.

But timers were replaced with proximity *because* timers can't be set
accurately in advance. To have the timer set properly you have to know
flight time and what ground level at the target is *very* accurately. 

The way to get proximity fuzes that *aren't* susceptible to "Shortstop"
would be to use radar units that are multifrequency and that use
"random" pulses. That way you *can't* jam them. But it'd take a while
to get these more advanced units to be cheap.

>>it comes from out of nowhere to kill you, the way you can't do anything
>>but hunker down and hope they run out of ammo. I'm imagining these
>>grunts, if Shortstop works, fighting for the priviledge of wearing it
>>(and thus being in the middle of the protection zone).
>
>   Nah, the guy beside you, in case of snipers...

The heck with snipers! A few HARM rounds mixed in with the proximity
ones will make wearing that pack *very* unpopular!

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 00:02:11 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan?

From:           	"Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Date sent:      	Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:46:08 -0700

>>I have no doubt that Strephon's presence was required elsewhere. What I see
>>as Strephons failures are:
>
>>1 - He failed to prepare Lucan (3rd in line) for the throne. This was an
>>unforgivable error. Lucan was most definitely not too far from the throne
>to be
>>ignored. If Strephon and Iphegina had died (unlikely, but a definite
>possiblity) he
>>becomes 1st in line; or if Varian dies he becomes 2nd in line. There are no
>>excuses for this failure of judgement.

>Lucan and Varian were the cadet line, right?  If Strephon died, the Iphegina
>assumed the rule (provided the Moot concurred), and would be followed by
>Iolanthe.  (This assumes I have the names of the Empress and the Grand
>Princess correct... :)

No Iolanthe is not in line at all. She is Strephon's consort. The sucession goes:
  Iphigena
  Varian
  Lucan
  Margaret

>I'd have to say that not only do you not want to encourage the cadet line by
>giving them the training to assume the Imperium - you would not want to
>embitter them by forever denying them it once you have prepared them.

All that would be required would have been to find them some relatively minor 
government job (the military would be ideal) and some minor official functions. 
Just enough so that they get some discipline and purpose in life, and to ensure 
that if they ever are dumped into the Iridium Throne they have at least some 
idea of what the job involves. You don't have to train them to be Emperor, but 
you can not afford to let them lounge about being spoilt brats. Give them some 
disciple, a sense of duty and some management experience; thats all that was 
needed.

>>2 - When he absented himself from Capital he failed to make adequate
>>preperations for a crisis. As far as we know he did not inform anybody of
>his
>>absence. Assuming he informed Iolanthe and Iphegina, that was not
>sufficent.
>>Both of them were regulary in the same place. At the very least several
>well
>>trusted members of the moot should have been in the know (including
>>Archduke Tranian). They obviously weren't because Tranian supported Lucan's
>>claim to the throne. His failure was not leaving Capital, but in not
>telling people
>>he was going.

>The Imperium was not at war, and there was no reason to assume (other than
>basic precautions) that the entire ruling house would be wiped out in a
>single blow.  Only treachery made that possible, and IMHO, no normal
>security would have sufficed when the blow comes from someone who was
>trusted to the extent that Dulinor was.

Yes its unlikely, very unlikely even. But the consequences are just so 
potentially disasterous. And the solution is just so simple. Make sure that the 
clone and Iphigena can't be taken out (by accident or design) at the same time

>I would say that it is very likely that his wife and daughter were very much
>aware that he was away from the Capital, and were probably supporting the
>clone to maintain the pretense.   It is very likely that he felt that his
>departure would cause some ruffled feathers, and chose to use the clone and
>secrecy to avoid that.  I rather imagine that the p&c surrounding an
>official visit by the Emperor may have been a consideration, since Longbow
>was supposed to be a secret.

I'd agree that Iolanthe and Iphigena knew. Its an entirely reasonable 
assumption. But that seems to be as far as the knowledge went. Take Tranion. 
A man of impecible honour and morals, an Archduke of the Imperium. And this 
paragon of Imperial virtue can not be trusted with this fact! Something was 
_very_ seriously wrong with the Imperium.

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #989
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 990



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Judge's Guild Products
GT transponders
Re Striker
Judges Guild
Terrorism (was: Current Tech: Shortstop)
Re: The Fourth Imperium
Re: Ship swallowing pirates
Re: Economics of piracy
Re: Where's Lucan
Re: Piracy
Re: The Imperial Navy

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:08:54 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

On Wed, 21 Oct 1998, johannes wrote:
>Did you ever wonder what someone would think who was monitoring this list
>and had no idea what Traveller or RPGs were?  And suppose Nuclear Dampers
>(for example) really DID exist, but as a deep dark secret weapon?  We'd
>probably have our own desk at the NSA by now!

The TML-files, huuuummmmmm......

Didn't someone make some NPC based on Mulder and Scully

>John

Tommy Grav
- -------------------------------------------------------------
tommy.grav@astro.uio.no     http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/  
Institute of Astrophysics, UiO, No  
IMTU tn++t4+tg+ ru+ge++ !3i jt+au+st+ls hi++dr-so++zh-sy-sw++ 
 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:46:39 +0100
From: "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Judge's Guild Products

Bloo wrote:
> Anyone know the copyright status of Judge's Guild Traveller
> products.


I don't know the status of specific items but Robert Bledsaw  may
be trying to resurrect Judges Guild.  I found the JG web site the
other day at http://www.judgesguild.com  Its little more  than  a
dummy page at  the moment, but ...



Regards PLST
"Rome wasn't burned in a day"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:52:32 -0400
From: Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com
Subject: GT transponders

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:30:42 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Ship swallowing pirates
>The transponders in GT also seem easily forgable....just record someone
>else's and broadcast it back.
That depends on whether there's some kind of time-dependent encryption on
them.
************
doesn't seem to be...just a wideband radio message...

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:21:08 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Striker

><< If it says "Striker 2", it is the TNE version, which lacks the economica of
> the CT version (which has 3 little black books...)
>  >>
>
>There are also two printings of CT Striker, with some revision between the two
>(these are both L:BBs).
>
>Marc Miller
>
How do I tell which I have of the Striker I LBB's?

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 03:46:30 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Judges Guild

>I should have said,
>"Anyone know who own's the Judge's Guild copyrights?"
>When businesses fold, someone gets them.
>
>Bloo

You might check with the IRS. From what I've read on the list and
elsewhere, the IRS has a tax lien against JG's owner DBA Judges Guild for a
large (and long unpaid) tax debt.


William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:11:32 +0100
From: "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Terrorism (was: Current Tech: Shortstop)

Kelly St.Clair wrote:
> > ObTraveller: Using a TL16 version of this to explode enemy
> > missiles a long way from your own ship - preferably, in the
> > enemy's missile bay.
>
> No kidding.  In fact, as I was reading through the original post
> (and before it got to the description of how it's actually meant
> to be used), I assumed that Shortstop was just such a system.
> Point your transmitter at the enemy and watch them get blown up
> by their own ammo.
>
> Scary, man.


As a variant of that strategy, it might interest you to know that
the security forces in  Northern  Ireland  have  for  many  years
routinely equiped their vehicles with random signal transmitters.
The idea is that if a terrorist (of either  side)  is  trying  to
place a bomb with a remote control detonator the  random  signals
would cause it to explode prematurely.  If that happened the bomb
may not be at its designated target (or if it were then the wrong
time), and you would also get the bomber.  This  strategy  forced
the bombers to use timers or boobytraps only.

ObTrav: Similar situations are bound to occur on  may  worlds  in
the Traveller universe.  Efate with the Ine Givar  prior  to  the
5FW springs to mind.  The NI example described above was TL7  ...
they may be othe "Shortstop" style devices by TL13 (Efate's TL at
the time).



Regards PLST
"Rome wasn't burned in a day"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:23:48 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: The Fourth Imperium

>> > I can Psi-Cops like Al Bester from B5...  They police the Psis...
>> No sh*t!! (I'm not a B5 fan, so this is the first time I've ever heard
>> of this...) I was going to mention Alfred Bester's novel "The Demolished
>> Man" for an example of how telepathic cops might work.
>
>Well, that might work too, but Al Bester from B5 was a sick & twisted
>man...  I liked him...  Made a great foil for the heros as they "were" on
>the same side...

Read the B5 novel about psicorps ("Dark Genesis", I think). It's actually
fairly well written, with attention to characterization and such, not just
a 'hack' job like some of the earlier ones. Should give you some good
ideas and characters to use.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:32:15 +0000
From: "Jens Maskus" <Jens.Maskus@stud.uni-hannover.de>
Subject: Re: Ship swallowing pirates

On Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:21:25 -0400, Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com wrote:

>
>someone said that this would push the limit for a star to 4 AU (leaving 3
>AU to maneuver to the mainworld).
>this will take about 4.5  days.  call it 5 days total transit (have to move
>out to 100d to jump). Will this break the 2 jumps every 30 days economic
>analysis?
>

My player are used to running jumps nearly every time. Refuelung Points at the 
Gravity Jump limits.

Jens Maskus

Jens.Maskus@stud.uni-hannover.de

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:38:27 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Economics of piracy

Walter Smith writes:

>I'm working on the numbers at home, but I thought I'd give a little
>preview of the ideas I'm working with. To wit: what a pirate gets
>for his troubles.

Now, this is more like it. Well done, Walter.

>Let's assume we're using a 400tn _Nishemani_ class corsair, the classic
>example pirate ship - probably a refitted armed merchant or paramilitary
>ship. It's got a 110tn cargo bay that can, among other things, hold a
>100tn ship. Like a type-S Scout, or a Seeker, or an X-Boat, or any one
>of those small craft that are all over an inhabited system.

Keep in mind that 10% is not much slack. If it is shaped to be able to take
one class of ship, odds are that many other classes won't fit.

>Now, I've got some assumptions about piracy that I'd like to
>reiterate, just so critics know my basis and can kibbitz properly.
>
>1. Pirates need to clear out quickly; for most targets, the patrol
>will be on the way.

This is too vague for my liking. I'd like some reasonable figures for how
long you have. Are you sure 60 minutes is likely? I'm not saying they're
not -- I just don't know. But did you pull them out of a hat or did you
base them on anything?

>This limits what you can take. Small craft (the big profits). Vehicles. 

Just a notion: Wouldn't the victims be able to escape in a ship's boat by
keeping the ship between them and the pirate?

>This will not apply if you've hit the target in an unpatrolled system, and
>that's good - you may well have taken a hit or two from a target well-
>equipped enough to be in an unpatrolled system alone, you'll need all
>the booty you can get.

I'd say! Weapon hit: -3MCr. Fuel hit: I don't know. Drive hit: Megacredits.

>Small Craft: 25% of value. They are more ubiquitous, and tend not to
>be kept track of in interstellar databases as much. (note: one lifeboat
>taken will pay all maintenance, life support and salary costs for a
>400tn corsair for about three years).

In that case one lifeboat lost would have paid for a 400 T patrol vessel
for about 12 years.

>Ship's Safe: Ships need to carry cash, they can't remain on-planet long
>enough for credit to clear in a crisis - whether it's a fine that needs to
>be paid or an opportunity speculative cargo.

This may be true for rootless freetraders, but any established company will
have local representatives with local funds. at the very least they will be
able to get a short-term loan at a local bank. Money carried around in a ship
safe is idle money; it will be kept to a minimum.

>Figure as an estimated average, Cr25000 per 100tns of ship. Note that my
>only real source for this is the Cr100,000 the _March Harrier_ had on hand
>at the start of _The Traveller Adventure_, it may be much higher.

FYI the type A2 far trader _Empress Nicholle_ from TWILIGHT'S PEAK had
Cr40,000 when the adventure started.

>With the above numbers, I've hit a tentative conclusion as to what a
>pirate needs to do to keep going: 
>
>A Far or Free Trader will get him about Cr100000. A Fat Trader will get
>him about MCr3 and change. Small craft are worth several MCr each.

>Not counting the value of the ship, the pirate needs to spend about
>MCr1 a year in maintenance, salary and expenses. 

OK. Why not count the value of the ship? If it is a business venture, then
you most certanly have to count it. And if it is a stolen ship, why can't
he sell that and retire?

>One starship taken in the course of a corsair ship's career will pretty
>much amortize the entire value of the pirate ship for five years or
>more.

No argument there.

Therefore:

>Even if a pirate has to hunt for an entire year to bag one Fat Trader, he's
>still making reasonable money. I believe this answers some arguments that a
>pirate loses too much money by lying in wait for targets, or by having to
>transit several systems to get from a base to a good hunting area.

Not really. You still have to show that he can expect to catch one Fat
Trader per year.

William F. Hostman writes:

>Kidnapping for any purpose could trigger imperial attentions. Something
>pirates would want to avoid.

Piracy tends to attract Imperial attention anyway.

Walter Smith also writes:

>William F. Hostman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>What you can't take: Ship components. Bulky cargo items. Fuel.
>>Starship weapons. Valuable things, but you simply don't have the
>>time to get them.
>
>Actually, "Standard" (FF&S Socket) turrets and barbettes could quite
>possibly be grabbed, if they aren't slag by the time you get there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Nothing you have to unbolt, chop cables and otherwise disconnect.
>Remember, a patrol ship is vectoring towards you - you have to load
>up and burn rubber for jump point _right now_.

No you don't. The merchant started at the jump limit and you have already
chased it some way inside the limit. You are not going to get outside the
limit anyway. You'll have to make an unsafe jump. (I wonder what that does
to your profit margin?) But it does mean that you can stay in the shadow of
your victim until a few minutes before the patrol ship arrives (Note: the
patrol ship will have some topugh choices of its own. Does it go for the
earliest possible shot and overshoot the merchant or does it decellerate to
match vectors?) Unless there are more than one patrol ship coming at you,
that is...

>I'd considered a "chop shop" as a way of disposing of starships. I think
>your 25% may be a close number in that case (figure 50% of value after
>the shipbreakers chop it up, then take half of that for middlemen and
>transport losses). I'll stick with 10% for now, until my example pirate's
>criminal empire gets big enough to support a shady salvage yard. <G>

The (fiction only) sources I have for fencing gives you 10% for most stuff,
20% for really movable stuff. I'd accept your original figures, but I don't
think you should increase them.

>Another bit about the _Nishemani_ (and, most probably, other corsair
>craft) - it doesn't always seem to be the same craft, especially at a
>distance, so it might even be able to spend some time being watched by
>the good guys, as long as it didn't get too close.
>
>Variable emissions arrays. A variable transponder. Even external modules
>that can be deployed as fake fins and such (it only has to fool a radar).
>Maybe enough to make the locals think the ship is a harmless Fat Trader
>or legit Impie Patrol Cruiser, just for a critical few hours or so.

That's accepted. But will you accept in return that the _Nishemani_ would be
taking a suicidal risk if it ever actually landed at any starport large
enough to have a patrol ship hanging around? This means it can't eke out it's
piracy earnings with a little legitimate trading in between.

>I'd like to come out with a deck plan for this baby, but the design of the
>bay is hard to match up with my esthethic senses. Mebbe pirate ships are
>supposed to be ugly. ;)

If it is a conversion job, then the original hull is still some basic
configuration. If it is purpose-built, then it still can't be too strange
a shape or it would not be able to disguise itself.

>If YTU has an Imperium with a (relatively) infallible ability to detect,
>identify and track every ship at every location in every system, then
>you'll have no pirates. If YTU has no ships worth anything straying
>away from patrolled space, or a patrol cruiser stationed within easy
>interception range of every belter's workshack and lumbering supply
>shuttle, then you'll have no pirates.

But that's not what we're arguing about, is it? We're arguing about whether
the underlying assumptions of the OTU have ships worth _enough_ straying
away from patrolled space.

>Of course you're not _using_ the ports, or getting close to patrol craft.
>Agreed, suicidal. You might, however, still be able to *hunt* near such
>areas, *if you can look harmless for a long enough period of time*. That's
>what these features are for - to let you look like normal traffic until
>you find a target.

OK. You jump into a system at the jump limit looking and sounding like an
innocent merchant. You spend a few minutes there while system control finds
out you are there, wishes you welcome, and assigns you an approach vector.
You now have the choice of acting like a merchant and hurry on towards the
planet as fast as your maneuver drive will take you or to stay where you
are. If you stay where you are you are acting suspiciously. Now what?

>Jump in-system, to a system that hasn't enough patrol craft to stop everyone
>immediately.

Too vague. How many ships arrive every [time period it takes a patrol ship to
inspect a ship] and how many patrol ships are there? How do you make sure you
are not one of the lucky ones that gets inspected right away? Say every fifth
ship is examined (I just grabbed that figure out of my head). You now have
20% chance of getting caught every time you enter a new star system. Bad odds
to beat.

>Emit and transpond like an innocent Fat Trader, with an ID code that looks
>right but will eventually (days/weeks later) twig suspicious, if anyone
>decides to look carefully at the records. Point your ship towards some outer
>system destination,

Suspicious behavior. If you are going to somewhere else in the system, why
did you jump to the mainworld in the first place? 

>...or into normal traffic, whatever vectors you nearer other ships and
>farther from patrol ships.

What makes you think you won't be assigned a vector by system control? If
pirates are a concern, then you definitely will. It's a cheap, easy way of
making the odds worse for pirates and it also improves traffic safety.

>Check vectors carefully, ready for a strike & grab on a ship you can match
>with, or ready to rabbit when your turn on the board & search queue gets
>close.

Which assumption are you using, arrival at random point on jump limit shell
or arrival at whatever point of shell you aimed at?

>There it is...a Fat Trader, kind of new looking, vectoring into the
>ecliptic traffic pattern on a laborious parabola after a minor 
>realspace jump error.

How many ships arrive per day at this system? What are the odds that you
will get such a chance? Lot's of unspoken (and unwarranted) assumptions
here.

>The Pirate Captain gives the order. Precious minutes are wasted by
>the authorities, as  junior patrol crewman on boring sensor watch tries 
>to figure out if his equipment is malfunctioning. Where did that Trader 
>go? There it is...pulling how many G's? Call the Captain, alert! But
>we're hard aside a merchantman, with a third of our crew not
>aboard...the nearest backup is where?!? More time lost...he's
>a patrol captain, not a front-line Imperial Navy warship commander.

>The hapless Fat Trader is easy pickings.

It is? It pulls 1G, you pull perhaps 3G. It will be going towards the
nearest patrol vessel full speed. Is there one stationed in close orbit?
It and the Fat Trader will be closing at 4G. Even if you chase down
your prey and match vectors, you're still going inwards at whatever speed
it was pulling when the captain and crew disabled the engines and left in
the ship's boat.

>The patrol captain makes a hard choice - chase a pirate, or ensure the
>safety of the drifting crew?

If a ship's boat or even a rescue ball can't keep the crew alive until the
next ship arrives then there's something wrong.

>Records will add the mysterious trader to the attack and seize list, but
>that radar profile and transponder signature will never be seen again.
>Perhaps a taunt over the radio from the fleeing pirate before his ship
>sought sanctuary in jump space, nothing more will be known... until the
>pirate makes a mistake.

A fair start, Walter, but still far too many unspoken assumptions.


William F. Hostman writes:

>As for parting out ships, many parts will be resaleable to others at low
>control ports, "Starmerc Moots", pirate hangouts, etc, and probably without
>too many middlemen.

The thing about stolen property is that even if no one can prove it is
stolen, you can't prove that you got it legitimately. So you get lower
prices for it. That's why you get low prices from a fence: Since you can't
go elsewhere (except to another fence), he can lowball you.

>Basically, even with cautious assumptions of revenue capability, the key to
>piracy inthe late 3rd imp isn't technology.... it is whether or not the
>Imperial Gov't gets enough outcry in a given area to actually put a stop to
>it.

Not just the Imperium. Starships are much more valuable than cars. It dosen't
take the loss of very many ships to justify a private protection effort. 

>This crucial threshold seems to be the key hangup in the discussions
>(I'll skip names). If the threshold is particularly low, the 3i will be
>spending most of it's naval budgets to patrol;

That's another problem. The Imperium won't need to spend very much of it's
budget to button down the entire Imperium. Some of the pro-piracy people
believe that however little it takes, it will always take more than people
will be willing to pay. Maybe that's so, though I doubt it. But in absolute
terms the cost will be relatively low.

>...so that's reducing hostility chances to 33/36 of 1/36 or less (11/432)
>chance of a viable pirate encounter, before applying the commonsense
>approach of making a reaction roll!

Why is it common sense to make a reaction roll to see if a pirate is in the
mood to attack you today?

>Sounds about like the chances of being carjacked while driving in a bad
>neighborhood.

A lost car represents, what, 1 man-year? A lost starship represents thousands
of man-years. There's a significant difference.

>Also note that the encounters are significant encounters

How many insignificant encounters you have in between dosen't alter the fact
that you appear to have about 2.5% chance per jump to run into a pirate. That
works out at 47% risk per year for a free trader (OK, it will be less than
that since even free traders visit Class A and B starports once in a while).

>As for pirates vs starmercs: if the imperium leaves anti-piracy (except
>large scale operations like the kforzueng) work to local and private
>concerns, starmercs will exist in areas where piracy, privateering, etc is
>occuring. If starmercs can be built. most of them make excellent pirates,
>too.

Yes, but starmercs are paid by someone to fight. Pirates have to make their
living by capturing ships.

>If the economic costs of piracy are borne by ship-owners (rather than
>governments or powerful insurance corporations), neither the government
>nor the corporations are going to consider the occasional loss of a cargo
>or 2 a year per system too terribly bad, so long as the taxes get paid.

Round and round we go...

I hardly know where to start. OK, here goes:

The owner of a multi-million credit asset is not just an average joe.

A cargo or two a year per system will not keep a pirate in beans.

The insurance companies _will_ be the ones that bear the cost.

>Only when it becomes CHEAPER to hunt and capture/kill/erradicate the pirates
>than to ignore them will a government do something about it.

Wrong. When it becomes cheaper to hunt them down than to ignore them, the
private sector will pay for it themselves. Until then they will try to get
the government to do the job (and also after, of course).

A government that can't afford the assets to suppress even a particularly
high-profile type of crime, I can readily accept. But I find the notion that
any government that _does_ have sufficient assets would not use them to be
bizarre. Some crimes do become extinct. When was the last time buccaneers
captured and ransomed a Carribean city?


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:51:46 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Where's Lucan

Andrew Moffatt-Vallance writes:

>Now that would be _very_ telling of the state of the Imperium. Here you have 
>Tranion, a man who's honour and morals are above reproach, the paragon of all 
>the Empire values; and this man can not be trusted with the fact that the 
>Emperor has to be absent from Capital for a few months on State business. 
>Very Very telling indeed!

It's worse than that. As was pointed out, Tranian knows the dummies exist. If
he is never told that "today Strephon isn't here in person", he'll know that
Strephon dosen't trust him. Heck, there will be times when he will know for
certain (albeit after the fact) that he has been meeting a dummy. Talk about
insults!

And there is one person it is even more odd wasn't informed: Dulinor! D. has
met the real Strephon many times. What are the odds that he is not going to
detect the imposture after a few minutes' talk? Not good. And he has grown
up with the system. He knows that the Emperor can't always be there (Come to
that, he must have know that the Strephon he was meeting _could_ be an
imposter. Why didn't he wait a few minutes and make sure?). Informing him
ahead of time may miff him a bit, but its nothing to the outrage he'd feel
if they tried to pull a fast one and he detected it.
 

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8


 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:53:26
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@orac.net.au>
Subject: Re: Piracy

>From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
>Subject: Re Piracy
>
>obviously, the Imperial government has set prices at CrImp 1000 per ton
>freight. Which is why it would seem most shipping would be done via
>speculative cargo... where net take per ton can usually run aroun 1200-1500
>cr/ton. Likewise, Cr8000 and Cr10000 for mid and high passages. These costs
>are per jump. Per jump makes no sense, so it is an obvious pricefix
>designed to discourage high-jump merchants.
>
>Since it is obvious that there is price-fixing, if the Impies say "You
>can't charge more", and catch you doing so, you lose. So you simply don't
>go, unless you have a really good speculative cargo with an excellent
>trader roll, and can afford the protection or the risk.
>

Quite frankly, the entire idea of Imperially fixed freight rates is a
stupid, lazy handwave. It is the economics equivalent of completely
ignoring recoil in combat using firearms.

No, it's worse. Some weapons dont have appreciable recoil, so I guess you
could ignore recoil at times.

Incidentally, taking this position will mean planetary governments will be
absolutely paranoid about in-system security, because *anything* that
increases risk of loss in the system will be more effective in blockading
that system than a squadron of battlewagons. Why get paid Cr1000 a ton and
take a risk of getting shot when you can get paid Cr1000 a ton somewhere
safe ?

The pro-piracy faction dont want this. You really, really want risk
premiums to apply to freight rates and speculative cargo margins, because
that will encourage traffic to go to objectivly dangerous places. You
should be able to make good money going to dangerous places. Heck, somebody
ask FedEx how much it would cost to send a 100 kilo parcel to Kabul.

If you check the historical records, increased piracy is actually a sign of
*good* times economically. There is no point to standing watch for merchant
ships when there are none, because trade has dried up.

>Hmmm... maybe there should be a table of loading and unloading times.... I
>know battletech has one (somewhere in the rules <G>)... I'll see if I can
>find and adapt the Battletech one.

Completely agreed.

Ian Whitchurch

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:26:05 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Navy

Gary (TravelrTNE@aol.com) writes:

>>>>_Rebellion_ p. 27 states that each sector of the Imperium theoretically
>>>>has a group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships. 
> 
>It should be noted that the colonial forces are taken out of that theoretical
>1000 ships...  "Reserve fleets are technically considered part of the forces
>of a named fleet, but are rarely moved out of their original subsector." -
>Rebellion pg 27.  This drops your average 62.5-combatant fleet by half.   

That would be one possible interpretation if it wasn't for the fact that
_Rebellion_ also says that fleets range from 50 to 200 ships. With a lower
bound of 50 ships it is kinda difficult to get an average of 31.25...

>>same general weight class as cruisers, carriers, and battleships. So I
>>conjectured that some cruiser-sized escorts existed and that it was those
>>that was meant. Ast it turns out, _Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium_
>>(which I don't have) makes it clear that such ships do exist, so no
> 
>They're also in Battle Rider. : )  CT (Fighting Ships) makes no reference to
>these larger escorts, defining escorts as "small ships of up to 5,000 tons"
>meant to be support craft for larger ships, primarily cruisers. You're the CT
>guy, ain't you, Hans? ; )

Not except insofar that I consider it a Bad Thing for a later author to
invalidate previously published material gratuiously (If the change is
deliberate and for a good reason it's another matter). So whenever two
pieces of canon contradict each other, I lean towards the original version.
That often happens to be the CT. But other than that I believe that all
Traveller material is equally canonical.
 
>>>If the 1000 ships are for a sector with a full sixteen sub-sectors, then the
>>>average fleet has 1000/16 = 62.5 ships. Since there are 320 regular fleets
>>>in the Imperium, the total of combat ships for the Imperium would be around
>>>20,000.
> 
>You'd have to cut that to 31.25 (combatant) ships due to a fuller and in-
>context reading of Rebellion. 

Gary, even if _Rebellion_ didn't say that fleets range in size between 50 and
200 ships, your interpretation would merely be equally reasonable. Do try to
restrain your defensive instincts.

>>A named fleet is either a command structure for all the numbered fleets in
>>a sector of a separate force. The evidence is conflicting, but I have
>>chosen the first interpretation. In any case, there is a named fleet for
>>each sector and provision for creating special named fleets for special
>>occasions.
> 
>The Named Fleets are umbrella organizations.  One Named Fleet for each sector.
>All regular and colonial fleets are member of the named sector fleet.

That's what one part of the text says. But the one Named Fleet they actually
describe is "The Corridor Fleet" and none of the four fleets named is the
same as any of the 16 regular fleets shown for Corridor on the map. So the
one example of a named fleet we have is NOT an umbrella organisation. As I
said, the evidence is conflicting.

>The "Typical" BatRon from FSotSI has 4 BBs, 3 scouts, 1 tanker, 2 transports
>and 2 auxilliaries (auxilliaries being noncombatant resupply/fuel ships in
>FSotSI).  The Rider BatRon has 4 BRs.  The Typical CruRon has 5 cruisers.  In
>fact, all the typical Imperial squadrons have about 4-5 core ships w/ a larger
>number of scouts, escorts, and/or auxiliaries.

>It seems your 'examples' are atypical and on the high end of the scale.

Could be. But to stick to my abovementioned principle, I'd prefer an 
explanation that validated both sets of information. Maybe the typical
BatRon for the Rebellion era is just smaller than the typical BatRon from
the previous era, the one that _Fighting Ships_ detail? 4 BBs, you say? That
could be an 8 BB squadron that had been split in two or reduced by combat
losses. What is the in-game date of _FSSI_? Long enough into the Rebellion
for combat losses to have affected the composition of the typical squadron?  
 
>>Unfortunately a huge reserve fleet gives other problems for the background.
>>Right, Gary?
> 
>Nope.  : )   Possibly, if based on your (uncanonical) assumptions. According
>to canon?  No. 

Really? And here I thought that we had had a long discussion where you
argued that the Imperial peacetime navy wouldn't have a huge reserve,
because a huge reserve would provide Norris with scores of extra fleets
once they became reactivated. Was I mistaken? You actually believe that
the Imperial Navy propably have huge numbers of ships laid up and that
that is the reason the peacetime navy is so comparatively small? 


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #990
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 991



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Piracy
Re: Ship swallowing pirates
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #932
re: Current Tech: Shortstop
re: Current Tech: Shortstop
re: Economics of Piracy
Re: Re Striker
Re: Judges Guild
Re: The Imperial Navy
Re: TL 12 submarines
Re: Piracy and parting out
Re: The History of Medicine
Re: Judges Guild
re: Warship upkeep
RE: Piracy and Parting Out
Re: The imperial Fleet

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:43:45 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Charles R Hensley writes:
 
>"Each SECTOR of the Imperium Theoretically has a group of fleets
> numbering about 1000 ships."  The way I read this is that the total
>number of major combatants in each sector should be 1000 if at full
>strength.
>
[...]
>
>FSSI shows that the average size of a squadron is 5 combat ships, 3
>scouts, and 4 non-combatants.

See my reply to Gary.

>The reserve fleets will be next to useless for anti piracy as they are
>manned by reservists and thus spend most of their time in orbit around
>the high tech, high population worlds in the subsector they are assigned.

This is a totally unwarranted assumption. Nowhere in the rules do I find
any support for the idea that the colonial fleets and the system defense
forces are not trained to the same standard as the regular navy. On the
contrary, the character generation implies (I put it no higher than that,
the CGR being a tricky thing to draw evidence from) that there is no
difference at all.

>Although these could be operated almost continously as additional sensor
>platforms. This would have the benifit that pirates would not visit these
>worlds very often.

You're not kidding!

>Also the Navy would keep the squadrons together so that they will be ready
>to fit as a group.

That may be a reasonable way to do it, but _FS_ specifically mentions that
some _BatRons_ are split up and placed in different systems during peacetime.
It may or may not be a silly thing to do (I don't care to argue that), but it
definitely is the way the IN does it.

Charles R Hensley also writes:

>>Physical observation (by security forces or dockyard staff) will note
>>this and flag it, if the authorities are interested in this intelligence.
> 
>Then they flag EVERY ship I design, normally I add a small power plant
>that can handle life support or weapons.  several of my ships have 3 to
>4 power plants.

It's not the number of power plants, it's the total size of them. A legitimate
merchant is less competetive if his ship is filled up with unnecessary extras.
So if your maneuver drive is too big or you have PA barbettes installed, the
inquiring security captain will want to know how you plan to turn a profit.


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:46:07 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Ship swallowing pirates

Those must be REALLY big pirates...


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
                "I am a jelly doughnut."
                        J.F. Kennedy

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:54:49 +0200
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>I guess we have come to the point where we have to agree to disagree... I
>don't think that expecting miracles out of advanced technology is a
>'handwave'.
>
>There were many earlier this century that thought that the sound barrier
>was a law of nature, that the turbulence of transonic speeds would only
>increase, and that supersonic flight was therefore impossible.  We learned
>otherwise.

What then DO you consider a handwave? Traveller is (the only besides
T2300?) SF RPG that tries to be hard SF ie the physics has to be explained,
either with real world physics or invented physics but at least some
physics that more or less has to be described and then we live with the
consequences. (like those darn near-c rocks, ooops ;-)

About your example about soundspeed I'm afraid you're a bit wrong there.
According to aerodynamics theory at the time it would require infinite
energy to cross the soundbarrier which was a bit perplexing to the
engineers as they KNEW that bullets, grenades and later even V2 rockets etc
were able to break the speed of sound. They knew their theory was wrong
just as our scientists KNOW that something is fishy with quantum mechanics
and/or general relativity as the two theories are incompatible.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:58:45 +0200
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

>Everything I've heard about the armed forces tells me that, of all the
>things to get attacked with, infantry hates artillery the most. The way
>it comes from out of nowhere to kill you, the way you can't do anything
>but hunker down and hope they run out of ammo. I'm imagining these
>grunts, if Shortstop works, fighting for the priviledge of wearing it
>(and thus being in the middle of the protection zone).
>
>Walt Smith

Well a radio transmitter strong enough to fool the stupid short range
microwave prox fuses seem like the kind of radiator to build radiation
homing missiles against, all depending on how cheap those transmitters will
be of course.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:54:55 -0400
From: Greg Smith <gsmith@helot.arl.mil>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1998 #932

> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:30:17 +0200 (MET DST)
> From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no>
> Subject: Re: Star Wars Democracy
> 
> On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Phillip McGregor wrote:
> 
> >On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 17:07:29 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> >Nope, but its made plain that the Empire was founded on the bones of the Old
> >Republic. There's no reason why you can't have an elective monarchy, anyway.
> >Look at the Holy Roman Empire and its system (no, its not even close to a
> >perfect example, with nobles electing another noble, but the principle is
> >there).
> >
> >Phil
> 
> But how do you hold elections in an Imperium which spans sectors. The canditates
> put forth their program which then is shipped throughout the Imperium. This
> takes years to reach the fringes. Now the people there has questions on what the
> candidate means with parts of his program, and how does this affect them? They
> send questions back (more years pass), the candidate answers but under the years
> there has been a recession so he has some new views that he has to send out.
> 
> When you get multisector covernments democarcies are not an option.
> 
> Tommy Grav
> - -------------------------------------------------------------


IIRC, each member world elected a sitting representative that met in a
huge (kilometers long) building, thousands of reps who voted for the
ruler and governed as a senate.  HRH Leia was elected as a Senator
representing Alderaan.  In the New Republic anyway...

Greg

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:05:12 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Current Tech: Shortstop

Kevin R. Pittsinger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> I assumed that Shortstop was just such a system.  Point your transmitter
> at the enemy and watch them get blown up by their own ammo.
> 
> Scary, man.
> 
> ObTrav:  You may be able to do this with nuclear dampers, depending on
> how they work IYTU.  Just turn the knob up to "11"...

I was under the impression that the ECM program for starship computers was supposed to do that very function.  I'm refering to the LBB 2, of course...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'll bet the CT ECM program only works to blow up missiles that are
already armed - and the missile won't arm until it gets to safe distance.

Shortstop may have the same limitation - don't proximity fused rounds
have to arm themselves in flight before the fuse can set them off?
Otherwise, the round would go off in the mortar tube all by itself.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:09:29 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Current Tech: Shortstop

Tommy Grav wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Did you ever wonder what someone would think who was monitoring this list
>and had no idea what Traveller or RPGs were?  And suppose Nuclear Dampers
>(for example) really DID exist, but as a deep dark secret weapon?  We'd
>probably have our own desk at the NSA by now!

The TML-files, huuuummmmmm......

Didn't someone make some NPC based on Mulder and Scully
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
IIRC, the FBI has investigated players of T$R's Top Secret game -
someone overheard the players discussing an op and called the feds.


Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:15:45 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Economics of Piracy

Steven Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  Remember, a 2 or 3 kt freighter (under HG) will toast a corsair
in short order unless it's spectacularly well fitted out.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I didn't think so...most of the freighters in TTA, even ones this big, had
at most a turret or two and no armor. They may have had more hardpoints
fitted, but no weapons on them - perhaps they were prepared to be
upgunned if called out for Naval Auxiliary duty.  Their computers may be 
better, as HG had a computer capability related to size as well as jump
capability. The Corsair may have an agility and crew quality
advantage, as well as the desperation benefit - the pirates are
desperate men, the freighter crew (on a ship this size) may not
be as dedicated - it's not like they own it or anything.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:34:08 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Re Striker

In a message dated 10/21/98 6:58:40 AM Central Daylight Time, aramis@gci.net
writes:

<< How do I tell which I have of the Striker I LBB's?
 
  >>
Look at the copyright page to see which printing the book is.  (the string of
numbers 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10) The lowest number shown is the
printing.

If the 1 shows, it is first printing. I know that 5th printing is second
edition.

I'm unsure at which printing the change to 2nd took place.

Marc Miller

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:34:09 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Judges Guild

In a message dated 10/21/98 6:59:20 AM Central Daylight Time, aramis@gci.net
writes:

<< 
 You might check with the IRS. From what I've read on the list and
 elsewhere, the IRS has a tax lien against JG's owner DBA Judges Guild for a
 large (and long unpaid) tax debt.  >>

In all probability, Bob Bledsoe still holds the copyrights.

Marc Miller

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:37:14 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Navy

Charles Prevatte writes:
>I never said the escort HAD to be small. I said I had a problem with a 5000
>ships sector navy.  Your quote about does NOT say that it ONLY included
>HEAVY escort.

No, but it does say _some_ escorts, indicating that not all escorts are
included and it also says that it does not include auxiliaries, support
ships, and scouts. The most reasonable interpretation of this seems to
me to be that small ecsorts are considered auxiliaries and only big escorts
are considered combat vessels.

>Just as that 1% could be all navy ships including auxilleries.
>IT does not say and we do not know for sure.

Charles, the next time you write something that indicates that you haven't
read, or at least not thought about, the thread your are "contributing to",
I'm going to ignore you. I DID INCLUDE THE AUXILIARY VESSELS IN MY ANALYSIS!

>>>It does not fit the numbers in the histories of the frontier and false wars.
>>
>>Well, most of the histories deal with the movement of fleets, so I don't
>>see why it makes a difference whether it is 8 battleship fleets or 64
>>battleship fleets. It's true that the number of squadrons in FFW is far
>>too low, but FFW was a boardgame. My take on that is that the forces were
>>reduced proportionally to make for a playable game. But trot out your
>>evidence. Maybe I missed something somewhere.
>
>Some of the TNS articels included the names of the ships and their classes
>that were in those fleets.  Also some mention total ship losses as well.
>The production information for the Marches in in the AHL and Kinuneer books
>as well as some more combat history. 

How about a few quotes and an in-depth analysis of them? So far you haven't
exactly contributed much to the discussion except questions, unsubstantiated
guesses and "feelings".

>From those I'd say that 1000 ships including escorts sounds about right.

From the level of support you provide for your arguments I'm not inclined
to take your say-so for it.

>>>I think they would have to be.  More than likely the 'missing ship' are
>>>auxilleries and 'coast guard' ships belonging to well to do planets.
>>
>>Those count against a different budget.
>
>Is there canon saying aux. ships are in a different budget. I'll give you
> the 'coast gaurds' are.  There is canon to support that. lots of canon.

Sorry. I meant the 'coast guards', not the auxiliaries.
 
>>The KINUNIR is not a real cruiser. The AZHANTI had a "print run" of, what,
>>120? (My books are at home). Perhaps it was an atypical number. One example
>>just proves that it is within the parameters but it dosen't say where.
> 
>It is classed a cruiser,  perhaps a light cruiser.

No, it is _called_ a "Frontier Cruiser". A real cruiser has a spinal mount
(Quick, somebody, I'm sure I've seen that definition somewhere, but I can't
recall the reference. Am I wrong here?).

>As for the AHL I am at work but that number sounds right. If memory is
>accuarate they were built over a long time period and all of then were
>not in sevice at on time. There may be some extrapolatable data of ship
>down time in there some were. I'll try to check tonight.

As Traveller Gary wrote, the Atlantic Class cruiser ran to around 800.

>>>Those numbers and their service dates does not make sense for a 1000 capital
>>>ship navy per sector but does make sense for a 250-300 crusier heavy capitol
>>>ship navy.
>>
>>Would you explain your reasoning here, please?
> 
>The AHLs production run and lossed if memory serves would have kept a
>minimum of 30 on line at any one time.  (I've got to reread it.  I got it
>out for this reason)  AHL was being replace while in production with heavier
>ships with less jump capacity.  It's long legs made it a bit of an ugly
>duckling so its' numbers could be scued.  The Kenineer could be one of the
>special escorts you mentioned through now that I think it through.  It has
>some ver interesting features.

In other words, you just feel that they don't make sense, but you can't
explain your reasoning?
 
>>ambiguous. It could be the regular fleet stationed in a subsector, but
>>it is more likely to be the local fleet (also known as the reserve fleet,
>>but that can be confused with the ships laid up in ordinary (if any).
>>I prefer 'regular' and 'colonial' fleet. That is unambiguous.
>
>Who pays the bills for these?  Locals of IN?

As a matter of policy I don't answer questions that has already been answered
three or more times in the previous two week period. The management couldn't
care less about the inconvenience this may cause any posters too lazy to read
for themselves.

>I never seen a TNS artical dealing with this size formation and Fighting
>Ships production lists does not support it.  There are only a few names on
>the list.  Not enough to cover a sector much less the Empire with these
>groups.  What am I missing here?

That the Imperium is a big place and can easily build more ship types than
can be fitted into one little black book.
 
>>If you want to suggest some numbers and sizes for auxiliaries, then you
>>are more than welcome.
> 
>There is not nearly enough canonical data to try.

Cop-out. There may not be enough to prove anything (though the information
various kind people have provided from FSSI will give me some happy hours
trying. Thanks, friends), but that shouldn't keep you from coming up with
something that you think is reasonable. You certainly have firm enough
opinions about what _isn't_ reasonable. Why don't you put a few hours work
where your mouth is. I'm tired of getting nothing but vague "feelings" for
arguments.

>The above is based of my knowledge of WW2.

Try basing it on your knowledge of the Traveller ship-building and combat
rules. That'd be a lot more germane.
  
>>The equipment AND the personnel to service a ship will cost roughly what it
>>costs to maintain 25 ships of that size. Which is what the 0.1% maintenance
>>fee goes to.
> 
>Not posible.

It is not possible that this would not be the case. If it cost more to
service a ship, annual maintenance would cost more.

>The size of the dock alone would be half again as big as the biggest ship
>it could hold. 

What dock? These are space ships, not surface ships. They don't need a dock
to support them while they have the barnacles scraped off.

>Plus all the equipment and spare parts.  It does not make sense.

But it makes sense to you that a shipyard would charge less than their own
costs to perform an overhaul?

>Also the naval base is equivalent to a type A star port in canon.

Not any canon I can recall.

>Look at the cost in T4 to build a class A! It take 20 years of planetary
>level income!

Did you ever stop to consider that maybe it's the T4 figures that are off?
 
>>Unfortunately a huge reserve fleet gives other problems for the background.
>>Right, Gary?
>
>Can you explain?  I missed this discussion.

A lot of it was conducted by e-mail. Basically I believe that if the Domain
of Deneb have a huge number of ships laid up in ordinary, then Norris will
get enough reinforcements to secure the borders against the Zhodani (who are
not activating their reserves) in time to kick the Vargr and the Aslans out
of the Domain far faster than canon says he did. Gary disagrees with me on a
number of counts. IIRC 1) The reserves aren't that big. 2) They can't be
activated that fast. 3) They will all be needed at the Zhodani border,
because the possibility that the Zhos may invade is much more serious than
the killing, robbing, enslavement, and land-grabbing that the Vargr and the
Aslans are actually performing at the same time. 4) The Aslans can provide
enough strength to outfight anything Norris can afford to send against them.
Am I forgetting anything or misrepresenting you in any way, Gary?

>Or just send me a copy of the last bruehaha about it.

I don't keep much in the way of back files. If one of us is going to use his
time digging it out of the archives, I guess it will have to be you.
  
>>>Where are these numbers coming from?  I have not seen them and would love to
>>>have this resource to analize.
>>
>>_Striker_. See above.
> 
>I saw a second edition striker in my local hobie shop.  Is this the one you
>have?  I missed the first release years ago.

No, I'm referring to the original version. The TNE version didn't have the
economic information. 


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:41:04 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: TL 12 submarines

Fred and Evelyn Wolke wrote:

> A craft designed to be a submarine specifically would probably have better
> performance than an SDB... hydrodynamics is different from aerodynamics,
> and it would probably go faster.  It could tailor its stealth to the
> underwater environment, and tailor its sensors.  If the SDB could take the
> fight to space, it would have the edge.

Not if you armed the sub with a big meson gun. This has been proposed
before; with _mobile_ deep meson sites roving about the ocean, you can
put planetary defense into a whole new ballpark.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:44:25 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Piracy and parting out

Douglas Glatz

>The IMTU code for piracy is pi
>
>         pi++    Piracy exists and is rampant.  Anyone may commit piracy.
>                 Ship tracking and ID are uncommon.
>         pi+     Piracy exists.  Antipiracy is mostly political or economic,
>		  and is inadequate. Transponders may be changed or masked, or
>		  are not widespread or sufficient.
>         pi      Piracy only exists in the vacuum of government or corporate
>                 morals.
>         pi-     Piracy is not sustainable.
>         pi--    Piracy is impossible.

What's the code for "Piracy is implausible, but it's also a neat plot device,
so I use it anyway"?


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "This gives a possible range of 56 to 178 starships
         total  in the three Terran starport facilities,  a
         believable quantity for such a star system."

        "We have a maximum of 178 ships in port, and (as it
         is a busy star system)  we will say that there are
         70 docking berths at the Phoenix facility."

                        ---Journal of the Traveller's
                           Aid Society # 22

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:41:53 -0400
From: Greg Smith <gsmith@helot.arl.mil>
Subject: Re: The History of Medicine

Traveller-digest wrote:
 
> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 03:40:25 -0400
> From: steve daniels <stevedaniels@portcaddo.com>
> Subject: Re: The History of Medicine
> 
> At law school, the good joke we learned for doctors who hate lawyers is
> just to say:
> 
> Over two hundred years ago your professional ancestors were bleeding people
> 
> with leeches, while my professional ancestors were writing the United
> States Constitution.
> 
> I usally add that the Constitution, great as it is, might have been better
> if those 'doctors' hadn't been bleeding some of the founding fathers to death.
> 
> George Washington had 4 doctors all doing independent bleedings of him
> before he finally gave up the ghost.
> 
> Bloo
> 

Yes, you have a point, but now it is the Lawyers who are bleeding us to
death!

Cheers,

Greg

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:56:30 -0700
From: Kristian Miller <travellerne@3rd-imperium.com>
Subject: Re: Judges Guild

You can run a copyright search through the Library of Congress (if I
remember right).  It costs about twenty dollars.  Otherwise your
local library might have the published books of copyrights.  (Check 
out Traveller--it's kind of fun.)

Kristian

William F. Hostman wrote:
> 
> >I should have said,
> >"Anyone know who own's the Judge's Guild copyrights?"
> >When businesses fold, someone gets them.
> >
> >Bloo

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:47:19 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Warship upkeep

Steve Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>Atrocity warfare is not a habit of any of the Interstellar states in Known
>>Space. Except for the K'kree, and during the Second Civil War.
>
>That's true but the missles could be duds...

  I recall someone pointing out that these missile would be very hard
to intercept due to neglible signature (therefore ballistic?) - what
if the target doesn't detect them?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Simple. At the appropriate time - say, when the interceptor has moved
so far towards you that they'll have to backtrack, instead of being
able to intercept the missiles along the way - you tell the authorities
about the missile launch. Threatening hostages, even a planet full,
does no good if the authorities are unaware of the threat.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:10:39 +0100
From: "Jason" <JBrowne@palmstech.com>
Subject: RE: Piracy and Parting Out

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Walter Smith
>
> I've seen some nice Q-ship designs. A 400tn armored beast, same lines
> as a Fat Trader but twice the turrets and a lot more legs. Even has a
> small cargo capacity for vital freight. Nasty last thing a Corsair
> crew will see.
>
> The 400tn Patrol Cruiser design in CT seems to suggest that this craft
> is seen in the hands of private security forces, and the Al Morai
> Route Protectors (I have heard) are a canonical group of
> privately-owned
> Gazelle Close Escorts, used for escort duty.
>
> No one said being a pirate was easy, or even smart.
>
> Walt Smith
>
Anti-pirate techniques - How about a weapon( missile? ) emplacement
behind the airlock that will bypass the outer hull when the pirates
board?

This has been suggested by 1 of my players and I can't think of any
problems with it.  The airlock will be a 90 deg for normal access.  With
the thinner inner walls, most of the interior will be demolished and the
explosion will break the connection between the 2 ships before it kills
the firer.

So, for a trashed airlock, you get a dead pirate.  Has anybody heard of
this before and can anybody think of any down sides/problems?

Jason
- --
Reply to : Jason@PalmsTech.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:18:47 +0200 (METDST)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: The imperial Fleet

Aerron Winsor
>Unfortunately a huge reserve fleet gives other problems for the background.
>Right, Gary?
>*******************
>wasn't there some refernce to ships still being pulled out of mothballs
>*years* into major interstellar wars?   sounds like huge reserve fleets to
>me.

And to me. I used that to argue that this was indeed the case. I thought that
Gary disagreed with me, but he has just stated that he has no problem with
huge reserve fleets. I wonder what all the arguing was about, then...

Keven R. Pittsinger writes:

>Delta-V is the *rate* of change.  A 4G ship has 4 times the Delta-V of a 1G
>ship.

Thanks for the correction. I hope the argument was intelligble despite the
error.
 
Charles Prevatte also writes:
>Subject: Re: Piracy
> 
>>Cold gas maneuvering thrusters? What is the cost, in both money and tonnage
>>of a cold gas thruster system?
> 
>One ton at most, 0 power, dirt cheep.  It's compressed gas.  You could use
>your life suport reserves.

The thing is, Charles, that the merchant will be carrying two or three snub
pistols and they will of course make it impossible for the pirates to board
him, since he can shoot them to pieces while they approach.

>>>As for matching velocities, you can finish that after you disable him.
>>
>>You miss my point. Matching velocities will take time and all the while
>>the merchant is bulleting towards safety and one or more patrol vessels
>>are speeding towards you. Also you are getting deeper and deeper into a
>>gravity well. Once you do chase down the merchant and plunder him, you
>>will have to make an 'outside 10-diameter' jump.
> 
>I get it very well but as you say later, give them some credit for brains.
>They come in oposite the planet, use gravity breaking and catch their prize
>on the outward leg.

Brains?!? ROTFL!

"Captain, we're are being chased by a bogey."
"All hands! Prepare for premature jump!"

>That is why they need a high delta V to start with. They come up behind the
>target as it is accelerating out. Best posible time.

Would you care to explain how they managed to time their approach to
coincide with the victim leaving? And you still haven't told me how long
they spend on the approach.

>>Landing point? Surely the actual landing spot on the planet would not mean
>>more than a few minutes' difference in arrival time. Especially since the
>>ship will arrive with a plus or minus of up to a day.
> 
>Depends on planetary day lenght and relative entry point.

I don't understand your reasoning at all. My interplanetary navigation skills
are weak, but I believe that getting from any spot on the 100 diameter limit
to any spot on the planet will take almost the same time. Can anyone who
actually know anything about this help us out?

>>>IF the pirate knew these thanks to spies or surveilance he could be johnie
>>>on the spot.
>>
>>Since this is determined when the astrogator makes his astrogation plot, the
>>pirate would have no way of getting advanced notice of it. Try to allow the
>>victims a few brain cells to knock together, Charles.
> 
>Plotted courses, as in the traveller adventure.  Remember the ship was 'due
>in'.

This is the last time I'm going to mention the variation in jump time. You
can maintain a scedule for outbound ships at the expense of losing about a
day per jump (which comes to several jumps per year, which is why I don't
think it would be used), but there's no way you can time an arrival closer
than plus/minus a day or so.

>>First of all, the 1000 ships per sector is for the regular fleet only. It
>>dosen't include subsector fleets (which recieves the same amount of funds
>>as the regular fleet, though they spend them differently) and it dosen't
>>include planetary navies. Most especially it does not not include
>>auxiliaries. Yet most auxiliaries would be quite capable of giving a
>>pirate a hard time.
> 
>Last time I looked the subsector fleet were just accounting units and part
>od the IN.

You actually looked? Well, last time _I_ looked (In _Striker_) the colonial
fleets recieved half the Imperial military budget.

>>No I don't. I have accounted for planetary armies, because I have assigned
>>70% of the canonical 3% to planetary forces (No, I tell a small lie: I have
> 
>but does canon say thats the break down?

Yes.
 
>>>These are all assumtions not canon.
>>
>>Most of it is canon.
> 
>Sorry I have not seen that.  What book is it in and I look it up?  If you
>are right then we can drop this line of reasoning.

I'm sorry, that information has been posted too often during the last 14 days.
The Bandwidth Police will get me if I answer it again.
 
>>>The only canon we have is cross version. Is there enough canon in any one
>>>version of the TU to figure the budget for that version?
>>
>>Yes. CT. Though I don't quite agree with your point, which seems to be that
>>the four Traveller versions constitute four distinct canons. My approach is
>>to accept anything official as canon provided it 1) makes sense and 2) does
>>not contradict any other canon. 
> 
> What is true in CT is not always true TNE.  You have to watch for the
> changes.  The transponders are a good example.

"My approach is to accept anything official as canon provided it 1) makes
sense and 2) does not contradict any other canon. 

>>You're referring to PE, aren't you? I must confess that I simply hhaven't
>>had the energy to try to integrate PE economics with earlier versions. 
> 
>It's pretty good but it will play hell with your economic of the military.
>Spend to much and you get a recession.  Oh, and all military spending come
>out of the same pot not just the navy.

OTOH, I did read it. IIRC it gives military budgets far higher than 3%.
 
>>>Maybe they are spending the money in 'infrastructure'.
>>
>>They are. Annual maintenance is 0.1% of ship's cost (1% of annual budget).
>>Salaries run to about 0.25% (2.5% of annual budget). 2.5% goes to building
>>replacements (that's an assumption on my part based on a 40 year life
>>cyclus for the ships. Since there is canonical evidence of ships lasting
>>for over a century that may be quite a bit too high). I presume the remaining
>>71.5% of the budget goes to "infrastructure".
> 
>Maintainence would go up with ship and base age.

The highest mountain in Scotland is Ben Nevis.
 
>Then how much time do the crew get for leave?  Two weeks a year?  Talk about
>moral problems.

Me, I'd talk about morale problems instead. There are ways to deal with those
pronlems. Blue and Gold crews, perhaps? Anyway, if you want to postulate that
it takes several ships to keep one ship permanently on station, I'm
perfectly agreeable.
 
>Also those ships can't do jack while IN jump. Have to figure that as part of
>the down time.

For those ships that are stationed away from their base, yes indeed.
 
>>I hope there is, but there don't _have_ to be. Sometimes a background just
>>contains a contradiction. I have canonical statements that the _Maghiz_
>>took place in -927, -925, AND -924. There is no simple answer to explain
>>that. Two of them are just plain wrong. But go ahead. I wish you luck.
> 
>Also a good point but I'll keep hoping for a solution.  Maybe Marc will
>'speak from on high' and give us the word on this and the transponders and
>the sensors and ....

Marc certainly has the authority to decide once and for all when the _Maghiz_
really took place. I'd prefer if he decided on -924 (my favorite), but I'd
accept any of the three. But if he were to tell me that it took place on all
three dates, I wouldn't accept it, even from him.
 
>>That was addressed last time around (or was it the round before that?). 
>>Annual maintenance takes two weeks, not four. And most systems have a
>>Class A or B starport on a high-population world within one or two jumps.
> 
>Would the navy let civilians do the maintainence on a Battle ship

Propably yes, if they have the proper security clearances, but who says that
civilians are involved at all?



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #991
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 992



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Economics of Piracy
Anti-Pirate Techniques (was re: Piracy and Parting out)
Capital Ships
Mutiny
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: Judges Guild
Re: Piracy and Parting Out
Re: Piracy
Re: Capital ships
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Sensors and waste heat
Re: Piracy and parting out
Re: Capital Ships of WWII
Re: Judges Guild
Star-Gypsies

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:57:30 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Economics of Piracy

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<snip>
>1. Pirates need to clear out quickly; for most targets, the patrol
>will be on the way.

This is too vague for my liking. I'd like some reasonable figures for how
long you have. Are you sure 60 minutes is likely? I'm not saying they're
not -- I just don't know. But did you pull them out of a hat or did you
base them on anything?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I've pulled them completely out of my hat. I'm trying to give a low
estimate of plunder time, something between thirty and ninety
minutes. If the pirate doesn't think he can get at least that much
time, he'll pass. If he can get more, he may be able to get more
cargo, ship components and such and have to hit fewer ships.

When my toddlers are a little bigger I'll pull out my Mayday game
and see how much time some different patrol scenarios would give you.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>This limits what you can take. Small craft (the big profits). Vehicles. 

Just a notion: Wouldn't the victims be able to escape in a ship's boat by
keeping the ship between them and the pirate?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They probably could. Since a 20tn lifeboat is 1G and worth more than
what can quickly be stripped from a starship, the corsair may
go after the launch instead. This could be dangerous for the crew
packed away in low berths on the lifeboat.

Here's an idea for a starship crew - eject the lifeboat (empty) along
a different vector, make the pirate choose between boarding your
starship (and threatening your passengers) and getting his mitts on
the launch. Getting both launch and starship may take longer than
the incoming patrol vessels will allow. Now the pirate never has to 
find out about the MCr10 lot of radioactives in your cargo bay.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Small Craft: 25% of value. They are more ubiquitous, and tend not to
>be kept track of in interstellar databases as much. (note: one lifeboat
>taken will pay all maintenance, life support and salary costs for a
>400tn corsair for about three years).

In that case one lifeboat lost would have paid for a 400 T patrol vessel
for about 12 years.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The lost wages of people murdered in the US every year would pay for
quite a few more police officers, no?

Crime losses do not transfer directly into crime prevention budgets.
Regardless, the pirates will not hang out as much in systems that
can afford to pay for more patrol craft.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Ship's Safe: Ships need to carry cash, they can't remain on-planet long
>enough for credit to clear in a crisis - whether it's a fine that needs to
>be paid or an opportunity speculative cargo.

This may be true for rootless freetraders, but any established company will
have local representatives with local funds. at the very least they will be
able to get a short-term loan at a local bank. Money carried around in a ship
safe is idle money; it will be kept to a minimum.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think there's some evidence that "established companies" won't have
as many ships along routes where a pirate has a chance. Regardless,
there will be some cash on board. We have it as canon that Imperial
Military are paid in cash, as per long tradition - what if a similar 
tradition applies to merchant enlisted crew?

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Not counting the value of the ship, the pirate needs to spend about
>MCr1 a year in maintenance, salary and expenses. 

OK. Why not count the value of the ship? If it is a business venture, then
you most certanly have to count it. And if it is a stolen ship, why can't
he sell that and retire?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think there are enough situations where an ethically-challenged captain
has a ship that is easier to use than it is to sell. My analysis was
based on keeping the ship running, the pirate will not have bank
payments to make on a regular basis. I also think my analysis shows
that there is enough profit, at least on an irregular basis, to pay for
the ship as well - if you survive.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Even if a pirate has to hunt for an entire year to bag one Fat Trader, he's
>still making reasonable money. I believe this answers some arguments that a
>pirate loses too much money by lying in wait for targets, or by having to
>transit several systems to get from a base to a good hunting area.

Not really. You still have to show that he can expect to catch one Fat
Trader per year.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
To break even, you only need to take one every three years. If there
aren't enough cracks in the local patrol nets for a pirate to take 
a ship a year, your area is very well patrolled and should have no
piracy problems at all.

We don't need to discuss surviving as a pirate in the Imperial Core,
or in high-pop Class A starport systems - we need to find the regions
where there is enough traffic, but not yet enough patrols for a pirate
to prosper.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's accepted. But will you accept in return that the _Nishemani_ would be
taking a suicidal risk if it ever actually landed at any starport large
enough to have a patrol ship hanging around? This means it can't eke out it's
piracy earnings with a little legitimate trading in between.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
None of my analyses included legitimate trading by the corsair, just
for this reason. If you do get into a situation where you could do
such trading, it's most immediate effect would be to boost your
return on stolen craft, vehicles and cargo above the figures I guessed at.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
OK. You jump into a system at the jump limit looking and sounding like an
innocent merchant. You spend a few minutes there while system control finds
out you are there, wishes you welcome, and assigns you an approach vector.
You now have the choice of acting like a merchant and hurry on towards the
planet as fast as your maneuver drive will take you or to stay where you
are. If you stay where you are you are acting suspiciously. Now what?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Remember that you'll be "hurrying towards the planet" at a whopping
one G acceleration - you're pretending to be an average merchant.
You keep your three to four G capability under wraps until you've
selected a target, or determined that the system is too tight for you
to play in.

I'm going to the star's 100D for most incoming traffic, rather than the
main world, because I like what it does to populating the rest of the
star system. 100D of whatever you're leaving for jump entry I think
I'll keep.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Jump in-system, to a system that hasn't enough patrol craft to stop everyone
>immediately.

Too vague. How many ships arrive every [time period it takes a patrol ship to
inspect a ship] and how many patrol ships are there? How do you make sure you are not one of the lucky ones that gets inspected right away? Say 
every fifth ship is examined (I just grabbed that figure out of my head). You 
now have 20% chance of getting caught every time you enter a new star 
system. Bad odds to beat.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Deliberately vague. I don't have the figures, or any way I can think of
to know these for every star system in the Imperium. The "anatomy of
a strike" I presented assumed a system where traffic was at a level
higher than the current patrol capabilities could efficiently handle.
Look at the build time for a 400tn patrol cruiser/SDB - if something
has happened to increase trade, or something bad happened to a
significant fraction of the local patrol force, it could be a while until
force availability is sufficent again.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Emit and transpond like an innocent Fat Trader, with an ID code that looks
>right but will eventually (days/weeks later) twig suspicious, if anyone
>decides to look carefully at the records. Point your ship towards some >outer system destination,

Suspicious behavior. If you are going to somewhere else in the system, why
did you jump to the mainworld in the first place? 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm using stellar 100D for incoming - but haven't you been one of the
people postulating traffic control-designated jump entry zones?

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>...or into normal traffic, whatever vectors you nearer other ships and
>farther from patrol ships.

What makes you think you won't be assigned a vector by system control? If
pirates are a concern, then you definitely will. It's a cheap, easy way of
making the odds worse for pirates and it also improves traffic safety.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You'll be assigned a vector by system control, but it's up to you
what destination you want to ask for.  And as I mentioned to another
responder, traffic control will space ships based on starport handling
capacity and the capabilties of 1G merchants, they won't space them
based on any one of them possibly being a 4G pirate that has to be kept
from intercepting any other ship.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
How many ships arrive per day at this system? What are the odds that you
will get such a chance? Lot's of unspoken (and unwarranted) assumptions
here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Enough will arrive to make it worth your while to hunt here, or you won't 
take the risk and will hunt elsewhere. The odds that you will get the
chance will depend on the system you hunt in, and you will select
your hunting grounds on this basis. You seem to want me to present
you with an analysis for each individual system in known space, and
call my assumptions unwarranted because I don't see how to do that.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>The patrol captain makes a hard choice - chase a pirate, or ensure the
>safety of the drifting crew?

If a ship's boat or even a rescue ball can't keep the crew alive until the
next ship arrives then there's something wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The ship's boat can take the crew all the way to safety on it's own.
The ship's boat is also the biggest easily available prize, that pirate
will want to keep it - and will be tempted to do uncomfortable things
to the crew that goes against his desires and tries to make off with it.

A rescue ball, IMO, isn't designed for long duration use. Leaving 
people in them in open space while chasing a pirate might be
akin to leaving life-jacketed people in the water while the Coast
Guard cutter chases the pirates - the cutter won't do it, not at least
without sending a boat or helicopter to the rescue.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
A fair start, Walter, but still far too many unspoken assumptions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I hope I've spoken some of them then. But I think you keep confusing
"unspoken assumptions" with "variables". A lot of things I didn't
specify are things that will differ from situation to situation by quite
a bit, and the successful pirate will act (or run like mad) accordingly.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Why is it common sense to make a reaction roll to see if a pirate is in the
mood to attack you today?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Maybe a reaction roll isn't the best way to go. We'll have to come up
with some kind of table to see if the pirate will attack you. Do you
appear too well armed? Is the pirate's cargo hold full and he's just
transiting to a place where he can transfer cargo? Would intercepting
you take too long, or place the pirate too far inside the interception
envelope of system patrol? Does the pirate captain have a superstition
about attacking ships named after older women?  ;)

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes, but starmercs are paid by someone to fight. Pirates have to make their
living by capturing ships.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And by my (IMO somewhat conservative) analysis of per-ship profits,
the pirate doesn't have to take very many.

Hans again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some crimes do become extinct. When was the last time buccaneers
captured and ransomed a Carribean city?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
When was the last time a Carribean city was in a situation where it
would take two weeks or more to call for help?


Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:08:08 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Anti-Pirate Techniques (was re: Piracy and Parting out)

Jason wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Anti-pirate techniques - How about a weapon( missile? ) emplacement
behind the airlock that will bypass the outer hull when the pirates
board?

This has been suggested by 1 of my players and I can't think of any
problems with it.  The airlock will be a 90 deg for normal access.  With
the thinner inner walls, most of the interior will be demolished and the
explosion will break the connection between the 2 ships before it kills
the firer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Scariest one I've seen yet was an airlock with a fake door in line with
the outer door, and a concealed real door off on the side of the airlock.
Behind the fake door was one honkin' big laser cannon, all ready
to vape the pirate boarding party and blow a big hole through the
innards of the pirate ship.

I am _never_ boarding a hostile ship through an airlock again! <G>

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: 21 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0000
From: lars@orplid.shnet.org (Lars Becker)
Subject: Capital Ships

Hi David,

 > Would a wet navy really exist at Traveller TL12+ (or GURPS
 > TL10+) or at that point is it mostly SDBs doing the "run
 > silent, run deep" situation? 
 
Most likely there wouldn't be a wet navy at TL 12+ since Antigrav Vehicles
become commonplace at these levels of technology, so it's not neccessairy
anymore to build vehicles for a special type of environment (air, water,
ground).  If i remember correctly there was some discussion about this in
the megatraveller refeeres companion.

If the world is not balkanized i would say that there aren't many ground
forces and it's quite likely that a few sdb's hide out in the sea. 

- - Lars.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:20:43 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Mutiny

I've been wondering: considering that mutiny is one of the more
sensible sources of pirate ships we've discussed, how big a ship
could a mutiny believably take place on?

I recall a Traveller adventure in JTAS where a corrupt company
official managed to get all the bad apples in the company
assigned to his ship, and they stole the Leviathan variant
(50+ crew). This would, of course, be a relatively unique occurence.

Is a 400tn _Gazelle_ Close Escort or _Luuru Kilaalum_ (sp?) 
Patrol Cruiser too big? How about an 800tn _Broadsword_
Mercenary Cruiser? A 1200tn _Kinunir_ Battle Cruiser?

Then there is the question: you've offed the Captain and a senior
officer or two, as well as any loyal crew. Where do you get
replacements? I don't see too many crew mutinying as a unit - 
unless we're talking Vargr of course.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:24:41 -0500
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:

> So I conjectured that some cruiser-sized escorts existed and that it was those
> that was meant. Ast it turns out, _Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium_
> (which I don't have) makes it clear that such ships do exist, so no
> conjecture is needed. those escorts are capital ships without a spinal
> mount. The sloan Class is that kind of escort the same way the KINUNIR is
> a cruiser.                                                             

The Sloan actually is just barely that kind of escort, at the low end (the
EM-15, I believe, is pretty close to a Sloan in design).  It'd be more
accurate to say that a Valor missile corvette is that kind of escort in
the same way the Kinunir is a cruiser.  FSSI suggests that 5000 tons is
about as small as the Fleet Escorts go.  

> The KINUNIR is not a real cruiser. The AZHANTI had a "print run" of, what,
> 120? (My books are at home). Perhaps it was an atypical number. One example
> just proves that it is within the parameters but it dosen't say where.     

I'd say the numbers are reasonable.  The Kinunir isn't a great example, as
it's too early in Traveller development, but is easy enough to retcon.  For
one thing, supposedly they only built twenty of them.  For another, they
had, as David Pulver said, "that puzzling little factor-1 black globe
generator".  It could make the Kinunir useful as a light escort for forces
that are all black globe equipped.  They're 4FW-vintage ships, so they were
getting black globes (and defective General Products computers) at the same 
time as the Lightnings.

<TravelrTNE@aol.com> wrote: 
> The production order of Azhanti's was 100.  92 were built. There is one more
> example I know of...  Fighting Ships says there were 794 Atlantic class CRs
> built of which ~500 remained in service c1100.   People think Azhanti names
> were convoluted... like to see someone name 794 ships. ; )    

The Atlantics are interesting.  As I recall, they're jump-4 5G heavy cruisers 
of about 75000 tons built at early tech-15 (1020s), and look like a flattened
Azhanti without the gooseneck.  J4-5G makes them BatRon companions, and the
low maneuver supposedly was getting them shifted out of first-line use in
favor of newer J4-6G designs.  By comparison, the Azhantis are specialized,
late tech-14 (990s) jump-5 2G fleet intruders of 60000 tons that came into
service just as tech-15 designs rapidly started appearing.  

At about 20 sectors, that'd be only five Lightnings and forty Atlantics per
sector if spread evenly at their peak numbers.  (They weren't spread evenly
of course; for instance, most of the Lightnings saw service in the Solomani
Rim War, and the few remnants left after that and the 4FW-era CF conversion
were assigned to the Marches, Core, troubled Gateway domain, and the Rim.)

Given the number of cruiser classes in Imperial service and given about 
1000 major combatants per sector including heavy escorts, I'd say that's a 
reasonable number of those particular ships.

  -- Steve Bonneville

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:57:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Conley <estar@wrench.toolcity.net>
Subject: Re: Judges Guild

On Wed, 21 Oct 1998, Kristian Miller wrote:

> You can run a copyright search through the Library of Congress (if I
> remember right).  It costs about twenty dollars.  Otherwise your
> local library might have the published books of copyrights.  (Check 
> out Traveller--it's kind of fun.)
> 
> Kristian
> 
> William F. Hostman wrote:
> > 
> > >I should have said,
> > >"Anyone know who own's the Judge's Guild copyrights?"
> > >When businesses fold, someone gets them.
> > >
> > >Bloo
> 

The City-State of the Invinicble Overlord went to Mayfair Games and then
from there to TSR. I think Mayfair bought all the Judges Guild copyrights.
TSR then sued and settled with Mayfair and all the judges guild AD&D
copyrights went to TSR.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:15:03 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Parting Out

Jason Browne wrote:

>Anti-pirate techniques - How about a weapon( missile? ) emplacement
>behind the airlock that will bypass the outer hull when the pirates
>board?
>
>This has been suggested by 1 of my players and I can't think of any
>problems with it.  The airlock will be a 90 deg for normal access.  With
>the thinner inner walls, most of the interior will be demolished and the
>explosion will break the connection between the 2 ships before it kills
>the firer.
>
>So, for a trashed airlock, you get a dead pirate.  Has anybody heard of
>this before and can anybody think of any down sides/problems?

This was suggested in an issue of White Dwarf many moons ago - Certainly
before issue 100.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:43:26 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Charles Prevatte wrote:

>>That was addressed last time around (or was it the round before that?). 
>>Annual maintenance takes two weeks, not four. And most systems have a
>>Class A or B starport on a high-population world within one or two jumps.
>>
>
>Would the navy let civilians do the maintainence on a Battle ship or store
>the nucs for them in their lightly gaurded warehouses???

Current wet navies do the former now - when a ship docks for
maintainence, it's civilian dockyard workers who fix it.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:53:33 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Capital ships

pbroeder@wave.co.nz wrote:

>The "Wet Navy" rules from Challenge say that a navy at TL15 will mostly
>consist of meson gun armed submarines

He he he. This takes `we hide with pride' to a whole new level. To
invade a world with deep meson sites is bad enough; to invade one where
they move around...

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:12:34 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

Walter Smith wrote:

>I'll bet the CT ECM program only works to blow up missiles that are
>already armed - and the missile won't arm until it gets to safe distance.
>
>Shortstop may have the same limitation - don't proximity fused rounds
>have to arm themselves in flight before the fuse can set them off?
>Otherwise, the round would go off in the mortar tube all by itself.

Good ones, yes - typically an acceleration or velocity arming mechanism.
Today, these are mechanical devices. But what if some TL13 smart alec
uses an electronic safety as well as an electronic fuse - i.e. a line of
code in the missile's controller says:

ARM_MISSILE when VELOCITY > 1000 km/h

If this is the way it's being done, you can attack the controller. Being
a higher tech level helps.

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:15:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Sensors and waste heat

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:
> This is more a problem with Traveller overall, in that life support takes
> really ludicrous amounts of power (megawatts) in most Traveller
> incarnations. Still, even if life support is free, a pirate-quality
> passive sensor array will take tens of kilowatts or more, the crew will
> generate a few kilowatts, ten kilowatts leaking through a thousand square
> meters of hull still warms it up to a moderately-detectable 100K. Much more
> problematical is the fact that your pirate has to have a black hull (so as
> not to be seen in reflected sunlight), which means it's absorbing a kilowatt
> per square meter of solar heat - you'll need to actively refrigerate the
> hull and dump that heat out somewhere, which requires more power - a nasty
> cycle. 

Hm...to be honest, _why_ should ships have black hulls?  There's actually an
argument for a white (or off-white) hull -- something with a reflected spectrum
reasonably close to random garbage which might be spotted in a system.  There
are very few hot objects within your average solar system, while there are
probably many cool moderately reflective ones.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:21:25 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: Piracy and parting out

>Douglas Glatz
>
>>The IMTU code for piracy is pi
>>
>>         pi++    Piracy exists and is rampant.  Anyone may commit piracy.
>>                 Ship tracking and ID are uncommon.
>>         pi+     Piracy exists.  Antipiracy is mostly political or
economic,
>>   and is inadequate. Transponders may be changed or masked, or
>>   are not widespread or sufficient.
>>         pi      Piracy only exists in the vacuum of government or
corporate
>>                 morals.
>>         pi-     Piracy is not sustainable.
>>         pi--    Piracy is impossible.
>
>What's the code for "Piracy is implausible, but it's also a neat plot
device,
>so I use it anyway"?
>


Hans, if it will get it into your IMTU, I'll heartily support changing the
pi code to read:
"Piracy only exists in the the vacuum of government/corporate morals, or as
a plot device for the GM"

:^D

douglas

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:29:35 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Capital Ships of WWII

 "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com> wrote:

>The Bismark was not destroyed by planes (or the British navy, the German
>Scuttled her) but she was hunted and disabled by plane launched torpedoes as
>I recall.

I assume that you are responding to my post - I think that I'm the only one
who mentioned the Bismarck. So just to recap I wrote:

>Bismarck May 1941 *Crippled by air attack, then finished off by battleships*

Which, if you read ever so closely, you may notice *doesn't say that the
Bismarck was destroyed by planes*.

However - attacks by Swordfish torpedo bombers from HMS Victorious on the
night of 24/25 May and damage from the 14" guns on the Prince of Wales
caused sufficient damage for the Bismarck to turn for Brest. On 26 May a
Swordfish from the Ark Royal torpedoed the Bismarck and jammed her
steering. She was then sunk by the Britsh Home Fleet using torpedoes and
guns.

I have never seen anything on her being scuttled, but even if she was, it
only advanced the inevitable. And, in my mind, if the RN posed such a
threat (and had inflicted substantial enough damage) to lead the Captain of
the Bismarck to scuttle her, the RN had achieved a mission kill - the
Bismarck had accepted that it could not win or escape the engagement. All
of which is interesting, however, with respect to my original post....

...the point is that the aircraft attacks were critical in obtaining the
kill, as was the aircraft spotter who relocated the Bismarck after 32 hours
of lost contact.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:25:45 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: Judges Guild

Which means the WOTC has them now, right?

douglas

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls 
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!
- -----Original Message-----
From: Robert Conley <estar@wrench.toolcity.net>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Wednesday, October 21, 1998 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: Judges Guild


>
>
>On Wed, 21 Oct 1998, Kristian Miller wrote:
>
>> You can run a copyright search through the Library of Congress (if I
>> remember right).  It costs about twenty dollars.  Otherwise your
>> local library might have the published books of copyrights.  (Check 
>> out Traveller--it's kind of fun.)
>> 
>> Kristian
>> 
>> William F. Hostman wrote:
>> > 
>> > >I should have said,
>> > >"Anyone know who own's the Judge's Guild copyrights?"
>> > >When businesses fold, someone gets them.
>> > >
>> > >Bloo
>> 
>
>The City-State of the Invinicble Overlord went to Mayfair Games and then
>from there to TSR. I think Mayfair bought all the Judges Guild copyrights.
>TSR then sued and settled with Mayfair and all the judges guild AD&D
>copyrights went to TSR.
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:50:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: William Prankard <cmdrx@magicnet.net>
Subject: Star-Gypsies

Greetings!

I and a few players had an interesting idea last night.  I do not know if
this had been mentioned on the list before.
We came up with the possibility of "Star Gypsies" in Traveller.

Imagine a constantly roaming people who basically live by jumping system
to system, setting up shop on the mainworld until they work out the debt
they owe the starport, or find whatever materials they need to keep their
ships functioning, or until the locals get tired of them and kick them off
the planet, only to head out to the next system to do the same thing.

Now I understand that starships are expensive business, therefore I am
assuming the star-gypsies will prolly have "Family" ships that are
centuries if not millennia old.  We can say that some of the Star-Gypsies
are actually descendants of merchants who basically continued to ply the
space lanes even after the fall of the RoM (Hmmm... Rule of Man acronyms
to "RoM", interesting <G>)  Star-Gypsy ships must take engineering into
almost religious levels, the ship is their life!  Part of what the gypsies
do is search every square hectare on the planet they happen to be on for
replacement parts to keep the ship running, they should be excellent
scroungers.  While on the world, some families provide entertainment
services.  Travelling gypsy shows are very popular on those worlds which
tolerate them.

But since Star-gypsies have a reputation for "taking anything that is not
nailed down, and taking a crowbar to that which is" Imperial Society
regards them as little more than tramps and thieves.   Therefore a Star
Gypsy will never have higher than average social class and (for GT) social
stigma almost on par with that of psions or cyborgs.  Some worlds regard
them as worse than psions for part of a gypsy show is a "magic" or
"fortune telling" act.  Some psionophobic societies think this really IS
psionics. (Tramps, thieves, and psionic?  KILL THEM!)
The Star-Gypsies will tell you it's all an act, or is it? ;-)

The fact of the matter is that yes, Star-Gypsies do have the knowledge of
psionics, and it is a closely guarded secret.  It has been so even BEFORE
the psionic suppressions.  If you think a Star-Gypsy caravan may be a good
place to look for psi training, think again.  They would quicker trick you
and leave you robbed and naked then tell any of their family secrets to a
"gadje".  Unless....you prove yourself otherwise and join up with them.
;-)


This could provide beucoodles of adventure hooks!

Awaiting comments.



 


\\  // Commander X
 \\//  CEO X-TEK Industries of Deneb, LIC
T E K  Military & Civilan Starship Contractor
 //\\  High Energy Weapons Research
//  \\ http://www.magicnet.net/~cmdrx/xtek/xtek.htm

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #992
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 993



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Traveller Software Survey for the FAQ
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Inspection: Small craft vs SDB's (was Re: Piracy)
Re: Sensors and waste heat
RE: Judge's Guild
Re: Judges Guild
Squadron Sizes of the IN
Naval quality in OTU (was Re: Piracy)
Re: Economics of Piracy
Re: Piracy and parting out
Re: Star-Gypsies
TML Subscription problems
re: Inspection: Small Craft vs SDB's
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Re: Piracy
re: Economics of Piracy
Re: Piracy 
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:49:24 +0100
From: "Stuart C. Squibb" <scs@vectis.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Traveller Software Survey for the FAQ

Hi All,

As part of the re-vamp of the TML FAQ I'm planning to add a section on
Traveller software. To aid in this, I'm asking TML members to nominate their
3 most used pieces of Traveller-related software. They can be spreadsheets,
scripts, java, freeware, commercial, shareware, whatever. Please include:

Rank (1-3 1=Best)
Software name
What platform it runs on
What it does
Where you can get it from
Whether its shareware/freeware/commercial

Feel free to nominate your own work :)

Send your nominations to:

mailto:software@vectis.demon.co.uk

NOT to the list.

I'll close nominations in 7 days.

Many thanks,

Stuart.
- ----
Stuart Squibb
Newport, Isle of Wight, England
scs@vectis.demon.co.uk
TML-FAQ: http://www.vectis.demon.co.uk/traveller/faq/tml-faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:21:48 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
>Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
...
>>   I suspect that cheaper work-arounds will be found; the obvious one is
>> using teensy-weensy digital timers to replace the mechanical timer fuzes
>> that were replaced by radar proximity units.
>
>But timers were replaced with proximity *because* timers can't be set
>accurately in advance. To have the timer set properly you have to know
>flight time and what ground level at the target is *very* accurately.

  A digital timer would be a solution; it would be simpler to work with
and much cheaper than earlier mechanical timers. Further, improvements
elsewhere - mostly in mapping, GPS and ease of calculating precise fire
orders (and partly ballistic) - would make accurately allowing for topography
much easier.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:21:57 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Inspection: Small craft vs SDB's (was Re: Piracy)

>Subject: Re: Piracy 
...
>>   All it takes is a cutter doing a boarding (or even a close pass)
>> to serve the traffic control/inspection role - which vessels could
>> be 100-200 times cheaper than a 1000 ton SDB.
>
>Thing is, your average 400 ton pirate boat can toast that 50 ton cutter in a 
>heartbeat.  And if the cutter is the only boat within 6 hrs flight time, the 
>pirates get away.

  Good point - of course if you don't have the money for an SDB to be on
call (evidently your point) then how could you have even inspected the
ship in the first place, as that inspecting ship would not have existed?
OC, the pirate can't _know_ that no SDB is within response range, unless
they have access to vastly superior tech than the IN has?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:30:10 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Sensors and waste heat

>Hm...to be honest, _why_ should ships have black hulls?  There's actually an
>argument for a white (or off-white) hull -- something with a reflected spectrum
>reasonably close to random garbage which might be spotted in a system.  There
>are very few hot objects within your average solar system, while there are
>probably many cool moderately reflective ones.

Pretending-to-be-an-asteroid is an interesting approach to hiding, but my 
feeling is that it generally won't work; 30-m asteroids are rare enough that
it's fairly practical for a ship to scan every one it sees with LIDAR, 
measure its range and velocity (any spaceship that isn't deliberately lurking
will be moving faster than local orbital velocity) and maybe its shape. 
It's more the sort of thing you would try under specialized circumstances...
it works better for defenders than attackers, too, because defenders will 
probably have the whole solar system charted down to 100-m or maybe even 
30-m sized objects. (I thought about adding a rule reducing sensitivity of 
all sensors by -0.5 for the first two days in a new system, to represent the
period during which a ship is learning which blobs are asteroids...) 

I think (though I could be argued out of it) that MilBlack coatings are stil
capable of changing colour, so you could always set your hull coating to
"asteroid red"...although what you probably really want is to have it a
very very very dark red (so that you look (when unresolved) like a *small*
asteroid.)

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:30:39 -0400
From: Daniel Mendyke <Daniel.Mendyke@digital.com>
Subject: RE: Judge's Guild

	> > >I should have said,
	> > >"Anyone know who own's the Judge's Guild copyrights?"
	> > >When businesses fold, someone gets them.

Judge's Guild is actually still in bussiness (sort of).
They haven't released any new product (yet) but they
are stilling selling items from their old line.

http://www.judgesguild.com

Daniel

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:35:49 EDT
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Judges Guild

In a message dated 10/21/98 12:30:38 PM Central Daylight Time,
douglas@teleport.com writes:

<< Which means the WOTC has them now, right? >>

The corollary question is "Does WotC know they have them?"

Marc Miller

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:42:58 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Squadron Sizes of the IN

     Here is my take on the the sizes and makeup of the Imperial Fleet.  I
have used the following sources for this:

1) Supplement 9:  Fighting Ships
2) Adventure 1: The Kinunir
3) Azhanti High Lightning

Non-canonical sources:
1)  The Honor Harrington novels
2)  The Hornblower novels

     The Imperial Navy is formed to protect the sovreignity of Imperial Space.
It consists of  small, very high-tech forces, supplemented by much larger
reserve and colonial forces forward deployed, while the TL15 Navy forces are
held back to react to threats as they develop.

Fighting Ships (Supp 9) gives some specific numbers for types of ships and the
number of ships on deployment:

DD (Midu Agashaam)  Limited Production (deployed in over-size squadrons of 25
for evaluation)
CE (Gazelle)  "Hundreds"
CC (Kinunir) 20 built, deployed either individually or in pairs
CF (Lightning) 133 built
CR (Atlantic) 794

All of these ships seem to be set w/in the Spinward Marches...only in the case
of the CE and the CR are they specifically mentioned as being used Imperial-
wide.

Squadron sizes:
     I reject a lot of the info presented in FSSI...it amazes me that no one
seems to have noticed the glaring errors that puts it right up there w/ most
IG products.  This was probably the worst product GDW put out for any Trav
incarnation.

     There are specific references to the size of a BatRon in Fighting Ships:
Both the Tigress and the Kokirrak-class DN are listed as having a Batron size
of 8 DN's.  So here is what I use IMTU...YMMV:

Squadron (CruRon, BatRon):  8 ships
Squadron (DesRon): 8-16 ships
Division (CruDiv, BatDiv): 2 ships
Division (DesDiv) 4 ships
Detachments (CruDet, BatDet, DesDet) 1-2 vessels

Task Group:  At least one CruDiv, one DesDiv.  More assigned as needed by the
Group.
Task Force:  Usually 2 or more Task Groups, almost always w/ BatRon present.
Auxiliaries attached to Groups or Forces as needed (Tankers, resupply ships,
repair ships, hospital ships [rarely] and Carriers)

During times of peace, BatRons are usually deployed among the sector in
BatDivs at key naval bases (called "stations" for that good old Royal Navy
feel <G>)  Batrons are rarely broken down into detachments, except for
specific missions.  CruRons are routinely broken down into divisions and spend
a fair amount of time on detachments as well ("showing the flag")  DesRons are
used much like CruRons.

     In wartime, the CruRons are usually operated together unless needed for
specific purposes (like commerce raiding) then they operate in divisions,
usually w/ either a Desron or DesDiv in support.  BatRons MAY be committed to
battle in divisions, but only if there is no other choice due to the tactical
or strategic situation.  They will always have at least an attached DesRon,
and usually more than one (If operating as a Task Group).  A CruRon will
generally be present as well.

     I will post some of my TU assumptions on construction of the fleets in a
later post.  Meanwhile, please let me know what you think of the above
ideas/assumptions!  :-)

Thanks, 
DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:55:32 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Naval quality in OTU (was Re: Piracy)

>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
....
>>The reserve fleets will be next to useless for anti piracy as they are
>>manned by reservists and thus spend most of their time in orbit around
>>the high tech, high population worlds in the subsector they are assigned.
>
>This is a totally unwarranted assumption. Nowhere in the rules do I find
>any support for the idea that the colonial fleets and the system defense
>forces are not trained to the same standard as the regular navy. On the
>contrary, the character generation implies (I put it no higher than that,
>the CGR being a tricky thing to draw evidence from) that there is no
>difference at all.

  FWIW, there is a mechanism in FFW relating the difference in degree
of effectiveness between Zho & Impy regular/colonial squadrons, but it
almost certainly refers primarily to TL differences. IAC, the cruise to
the front would likely be 7/24 drills for activated reservists...

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:55:36 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Economics of Piracy

...
>When my toddlers are a little bigger I'll pull out my Mayday game
>and see how much time some different patrol scenarios would give you.

  Doublecheck the time/thrust/hex sizes (ignoring the first turn of each
vector change issue) - IIRC there may be a glitch there.

...
>the incoming patrol vessels will allow. Now the pirate never has to 
>find out about the MCr10 lot of radioactives in your cargo bay.

  Kick it out the hatch before changing course (or an empty :> ).

...
>The lost wages of people murdered in the US every year would pay for
>quite a few more police officers, no?

  The rest of the industrialized world really wonders about that, btw.

...
>akin to leaving life-jacketed people in the water while the Coast
>Guard cutter chases the pirates - the cutter won't do it, not at least
>without sending a boat or helicopter to the rescue.

  The SDB I posted a couple weeks ago _couldn't_ find a use for 16% of
its' hull except cargo, troops, or subsidiary craft. Hopefully the
authorities will have studied operations at Starfleet Academy.

...
>When was the last time a Carribean city was in a situation where it
>would take two weeks or more to call for help?

  Well after the last sacking by buccaneers - there's probably a two
century gap, actually.

        Steven Hudson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:12:55 -0500
From: Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy and parting out

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:
> 
> Douglas Glatz
> 
> >The IMTU code for piracy is pi
> >
> >      pi++    Piracy exists and is rampant.  Anyone may commit piracy.
> >              Ship tracking and ID are uncommon.
> >      pi+     Piracy exists.  Antipiracy is mostly political or economic,
> >              and is inadequate. Transponders may be changed or masked, or
> >              are not widespread or sufficient.
> >      pi      Piracy only exists in the vacuum of government or corporate
> >              morals.
> >      pi-     Piracy is not sustainable.
> >      pi--    Piracy is impossible.
> 
> What's the code for "Piracy is implausible, but it's also a neat plot device,
> so I use it anyway"?

How about pi*, read as "pi splat." ;->

Eris,
  who is *such* a heretic, he doesn't even use IMTU geekcodes. ;->

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:17:29 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Star-Gypsies

     Check out a book called "Citizen of the Galaxy" by Robert Heinlen.  In
this book are the merchant clans, who live on their ships.  Great for ideas
along the direction of your Star Gypsies thoughts.

Leo



Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:50:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: William Prankard <cmdrx@magicnet.net>
Subject: Star-Gypsies

Greetings!

I and a few players had an interesting idea last night.  I do not know if
this had been mentioned on the list before.
We came up with the possibility of "Star Gypsies" in Traveller.

Imagine a constantly roaming people who basically live by jumping system
to system, setting up shop on the mainworld until they work out the debt
they owe the starport, or find whatever materials they need to keep their
ships functioning, or until the locals get tired of them and kick them off
the planet, only to head out to the next system to do the same thing.

Now I understand that starships are expensive business, therefore I am
assuming the star-gypsies will prolly have "Family" ships that are
centuries if not millennia old.  We can say that some of the Star-Gypsies
are actually descendants of merchants who basically continued to ply the
space lanes even after the fall of the RoM (Hmmm... Rule of Man acronyms
to "RoM", interesting <G>)  Star-Gypsy ships must take engineering into
almost religious levels, the ship is their life!  Part of what the gypsies
do is search every square hectare on the planet they happen to be on for
replacement parts to keep the ship running, they should be excellent
scroungers.  While on the world, some families provide entertainment
services.  Travelling gypsy shows are very popular on those worlds which
tolerate them.

But since Star-gypsies have a reputation for "taking anything that is not
nailed down, and taking a crowbar to that which is" Imperial Society
regards them as little more than tramps and thieves.   Therefore a Star
Gypsy will never have higher than average social class and (for GT) social
stigma almost on par with that of psions or cyborgs.  Some worlds regard
them as worse than psions for part of a gypsy show is a "magic" or
"fortune telling" act.  Some psionophobic societies think this really IS
psionics. (Tramps, thieves, and psionic?  KILL THEM!)
The Star-Gypsies will tell you it's all an act, or is it? ;-)

The fact of the matter is that yes, Star-Gypsies do have the knowledge of
psionics, and it is a closely guarded secret.  It has been so even BEFORE
the psionic suppressions.  If you think a Star-Gypsy caravan may be a good
place to look for psi training, think again.  They would quicker trick you
and leave you robbed and naked then tell any of their family secrets to a
"gadje".  Unless....you prove yourself otherwise and join up with them.
;-)


This could provide beucoodles of adventure hooks!

Awaiting comments.






\\  // Commander X
 \\//  CEO X-TEK Industries of Deneb, LIC
T E K  Military & Civilan Starship Contractor
 //\\  High Energy Weapons Research
//  \\ http://www.magicnet.net/~cmdrx/xtek/xtek.htm

- ------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #992
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:33:39 -0400
From: Glenn Myers <glenn.myers@mailhub.ansys.com>
Subject: TML Subscription problems

Hi all,

My TML behavior tends to be as follows, 
(a) Lurk for a few months 
(b) jump in on threads that interest me 
(c) go back to lurking

Recently I tried to jump back in and did not get any response. I have
now resubscribed and this is a test to see if I can post.

When I attempted to post in the past, my messages vanished into the
ether -no bounces or error messages of any kind.

Has anyone else ever experienced this behavior?

Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:34:13 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Inspection: Small Craft vs SDB's

Steven Hudson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
  Good point - of course if you don't have the money for an SDB to be on
call (evidently your point) then how could you have even inspected the
ship in the first place, as that inspecting ship would not have existed?
OC, the pirate can't _know_ that no SDB is within response range, unless
they have access to vastly superior tech than the IN has?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The pirate won't _know_ there isn't an SDB lurking within response
range, but may be willing to _bet_. And the pirate will probably be
able to detect an intercepting SDB before it closes to effective attack
range, giving the pirate a chance to break off and jump.

Cutters would make a nice force multiplier for local forces, though.
One combat-strong ship acting as a base for two to four inspection
cutters, if a cutter gets into trouble the ship intercepts - and the ship
won't be as easily pulled off station by inspections, boardings or
(possibly faked) emergencies.

That pirate trick I mentioned about releasing rescue balls, then
zooming off on a different heading - if the patrol ship had an
associated cutter, the cutter could do the rescue while the ship
continued pursuit.

The standard 400tn Patrol Cruiser carries a Ship's Boat (30 tn, 6G,
pretty good passenger accomodations) - pretty handy to have available
if you are performing commerce patrol.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:55:06 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

At 02:05 PM 10/20/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>>And the US has not built a new carrier in a decade.  They are getting
>ready
>>>to build a new one in the next year or two.  I wonder where the money will
>>>come from.  2 billion dollars for the ship alone.  Makes you wonder.
>>
>>Gotta disagree here...
>>
>>CVN-72 USS Abraham Lincloln, commissioned 11/11/89
>>CVN-73 USS George Washington, commissioned 7/4/92
>>CVN-74 USS John C. Stennis, commissioned 12/9/95
>>CVN-75 USS Harry S. Truman, commissioned 7/25/98
>>
>>and CVN-76 USS Ronald Reagan is currently under construction
>>

Are these Nimiz class?  That was all the Popular Mechanic's artical was on
and I ment 'new' as in new design.

>>And more are on the way.  Authorization was recently granted for the CVX
>>with a combat airwing of about 75 AC.
>>

I think this is the experamental one of platform that the PM artical was on.
It's supose to be something else with new and modern catapults, engines, and
new defesive systems.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:34 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)

At 02:23 AM 10/21/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>>Subject: Economics of Piracy: the Booty (long, request for comments)
>...
>>Even if a pirate has to hunt for an entire year to bag one Fat Trader,
>>he's still making reasonable money. I believe this answers some 
>...
>
>  The variant (if cash flow, etc., permits) is to spend that whole
>year (or however long) in backwaters or outsystems waiting for a
>starship (and getting by on small craft and belters), nailing it
>(which may require a _lot_ of follow-up) and then possibly even
>spending the year or two that Ian mentioned in sneaking it out of
>the state you're in to a market where you can get 25-40% for it
>and simply retire (probably selling your own ship as well).
>
>>There may be more efficient uses for a starship than piracy, but there are
>>people who cannot do legal careers for various reasons and ships they'd
>>not be able to use legally. Combine the two, and you get Corsairs.
>> I believe my analyses show that a pirate can make money, if the setting
>>IYTU allows them to survive and travel.
>
>  Good points and decent analysis, IMHO. Thanks!
>

Probably the best pirate post I have seen yet.  The takeing the ships boat
trick was a real brain storm!

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:44 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

At 06:04 PM 10/20/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>> Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>> >The ort cloud is beyond the orbit of pluto and completely circles our
>> >solar
>> >system.  Can you say too damned big to ever search in a 100 life times?
>
>>Bottom line is that if Bruce says it's bright enough, it likely is
>
>Actually, I don't think I said anything - at least not Ex Cathedra - about
>the Oort Cloud. Looking at the DSR numbers, really big military arrays - the
>kind a pop-10 world will have - can see capital ships in the inner Oort
>cloud (which was sort of deliberate; you want to be able to see the Zho's
>doing ice refuelling out there, otherwise the FFW degenerates to fights only
>at key worlds...). However, a typical backwater sensor array won't be able to
>see a typical pirate in even the Kuiper belt, let alone the inner or outer
>Oort cloud, so pirate bases in the clouds are semi-practical. Hard to catch
>merchants from the Oort cloud, but that's a lesser issue. If microjumps only
>require a small amount of fuel (canon is unclear on this issue) it might help.
>

The ort clould is .5 to 1 LY out from the primary and you expect to see a
ship at that range?  Just how big is that array?  You have to have a curtain
amount of surface area to resolve targets that size at that range.  And how
are you going to pick it out from the million of bodies out there as well as
scan a shell that size with that precission?  And how much does this cost?

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:39 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 12:01 AM 10/21/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>Subject: Re: Piracy
>...
>>They come in oposite the planet, use gravity breaking and catch their prize
>>on the outward leg.  That is why they need a high delta V to start with.
>>They come up behind the target as it is acelerating out.  Best posible time.
>>They are far from the system and close to the jump diameter.  They have to
>>be quick but then they have to anyway.  If the main world has or is a moon
>>so much the better for the pirates.
>
>  They also go right through the primary defense/detection zone, and they
>will be going far too fast for gravity to decelerate them much. I doubt
>that aerobraking will be practical.
>

That's why you run in cold and choose your velocity so that after your
gravity braking you can quickly match velocity with the outgoing trafic.
The merchant is accelerating out, you are moving faster but are behind him.
The velocity formulas for the accel out and decel in are known so not a
problem.  You'll have two limited windows to strike.  One on the way in to
catch a just emerged merchant and one on the way out to catch an outgoing
one.  The first reqires greater breaking but with a slight course change in
nearly any direction will put you out the 100 dia. limit in minutes after
you dock with the target.  A touch of cold gas manuvering and a gravity well
and you can hit any spot on the 100 dia. shell you want on the way out and
you are already moving more than the final velocity of an exiting ship so
that SDB is not going to catch you before it's to late.  Remember 'free
return orbits'?  If your course only needs a small change you don't even
have to get to close to the planet.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:32 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Economics of Piracy

At 12:35 AM 10/21/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
>>Subject: re: Economics of Piracy
>...
>>This is one of the fuzzier assumptions in the list. I'll assume (especially
>>with CT "ice rot" low berth rules) that no one would want to travel
>>low passage more than once, so these people may be bringing 
>>all their money with them to start a new life. That businessman
>>may have an attache case full of multi-MCr bearer bonds. Really
>>rich people would probably ride on a high-jump liner that won't stop
>>in places a pirate could lurk, but there would be exceptions.
>
>  Bearer bonds would be rare due to the potential for various sorts of
>security risks - mostly having nothing to do with piracy. More likely
>would be instruments transferring funds to a specific account or for 
>an individuals use which would be of no use to pirates as such.
>

Except that the funds could be confiscated before the instrament is inacted.
For those travelling years away from home negotiable currence is everything.
A check would take years to clear even a cashers check.  Real value must be
carried or you risk loosing what backs that note.  Even bearer bond and
stock can become worthless in 2 years time if the issueing agency goes toes
up.  There would have to be a discount involve for trader to buy stock in
distant places.  A core stock might be worth 50% in the marches unless is
was for Imperial lines that operated in both.  This could make life very
interesting to a booty oriented pirate or travelling PC.  Maybe a system of
value changes like thoses used in GURPS Cyberworld would be in order with
hard IMP creds being on par and all others fluctuating bases on percived
stability.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:36 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy 

At 02:58 PM 10/20/98 -0400, you wrote:
>> Charles Prevatte writes:
>>  
>> >>How long will the approach take him? Every minute he spends catching one
>> >>victim costs money.
>> >
>> >With a high Delta V and cold gas manuvering thruster it would not be a
>> >problem.
>> 
>> A high Delta V will seriously hamper your ability to slow down once you
>> get near the area where you want to lurk. In space you do not stop just
>> because you stop accelerating. A high Delta V means you spent a long time
>> building up your speed and have to spend a lot of time decellerating.
>> Cold gas maneuvering thrusters? What is the cost, in both money and tonnage
>> of a cold gas thruster system?
>
>Delta-V is the *rate* of change.  A 4G ship has 4 times the Delta-V of a 1G
ship.
>

Not in this context.  It means the difference in relative velocity.
Acceleration is the rate of change of velocity and the the intergal of
velocity while velocity is the direvative of accelration.

Delta has more than one use/meaning just like derivative.

Derivative is a calcus function but it also means derived from or desended
from as in a derivative work.

With jump drives the change 'Delta' of relative velocities between origin
and destination can be very high.  Delta is often use to show that the
velocity in question is highly relative to some perhaps arbitrary object.  A
ship can simultaniously have many different delta Vs, one with the planet,
another with the sun, another this a merchant ship, and another with a SDB,
all constantly changing in different ways.  Each would be expressed as a
velocity relative to one of the above at any given moment in time.  They are
generally denoted with subscipts or bracket titles.

Dv(SDB)=120mps

For example while relative acceleration would be. 

Dv(SDB)=60mps^2  or 60 meter per second accerleration.

That is why falling accel is expressed 32 fps^2.

This is of course only one of several forms of notation.  Use the one you
are most comforable with

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:59 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

At 06:06 PM 10/20/98 PST, you wrote:
>In mail you write:
>
>>>The pirate can't stay in front of the sun's disk for very long if it's
>>>coasting (due to motion of the planet and of sensors orbiting the planet). 
>>>(And even if it is on the disk, a seperate sun-watching telescope will see
>>>it's silouhette.) Near the sun, the glare does indeed make it harder to see
>>>(that's the -0.5 to signature) but not as much as one might think,
>>>since these are space-based sensors and can be optimized for high contrast
>>>and include coronagraphs to block out the sun. Still, the sun case isn't
>>>one I've carefully modelled; perhaps the bonus should be more like -1.
>>>
>>>If the pirate uses its engines to stay close to the sun line-of-sight then 
>>>it will be obvious to other sensor platforms in the system.
>>
>> Cold gas thruster could be used.
>
>Remember that if they give thrust, they *aren't* all that "cold". I've
>flown "cold gas" model rockets. The exhaust is a around 270 K (0 C).
>Which is still rather visible in the IR in open space.
>

Use H2 at 2k and throw 100 kilos out at 100 mps if you think the sesor aray
is that good but it can not be do to quantum limits.  Gasious H2 at near
it's liqification point would be fine.

>And the colder the exhaust, the *less* thrust it'll give. Meaning that

Depends on launch speed to.

>for the same thrust, you are better off using something that produces
>very little exhaust, but has it move *fast*.
>
>Thus for stealth ion thrusters *may* be workable, and mass drivers will
>do quite well. Throw away multi-kilo chunks of scrap iron at a few
>thousand km/sec, and your ship will move a little, while the chunks of
>iron are hard to detect.
>
>I just had this vision of a ship trying to be stealthy and having an
>assistant astrogator standing in an airlock pointing a machinegun at
>the right star and fire off a few rounds.... It *would* move the ship,
>though slowly.
>
>"Charly, that was good. Give me about half as much this time and we'll
>be right on!"
>
>"Ok, last was a 20 round bust, I'll fire 10 this time..."
>

HA!  I like it!  Not practical but ver funny!

Charles L.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #993
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 994



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Warship upkeeps, etc. (was Re: Piracy)
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
4I
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Re: Piracy
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))
re: Sensors and waste heat
Re: The Imperial Fleet

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:55:08 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Warship upkeeps, etc. (was Re: Piracy)

At 02:54 AM 10/21/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Piracy
>...
>>Also the upkeep of 10% per year may be a bit low.  Check the cost of crew
>>for the ASH and the Kenunier in their adventure books.  Neither of these
>/...
>
>  A Kinunir is 80 crew (incl. 35 marines); call it KCr 3.5 each (1 for
>gunners, quite possibly less for pongoes) as an average including pensions
>(which don't apply to those under 20(?) years service, anyway. Bulk it
>up _again_ and it's only MCr 4 per year - less than 4% of the ships TCS
>abstracted upkeep cost. An AHL is 620 (incl. 150 troops), call it maybe
>35 MCr for a 40+ (?) BCr(!) ship with an upkeep also in the billions.
>
>>>By the way, earlier in the Piracy debate, I proposed bits of the Imperial
>>>Intelligence structure arrange for the news that so and so might be able to
>>>be got at, just to see which dogs bark in response.
>>>
>>A sting.  Good idea but that too can work both ways.
>
>  Could you eleborate on that?
>

Sure, drop hints of a tasty cargo and have a Q ship armed to the teeth
'carry' it along the route the 'spies' tell about.

>...
>>>Pirates require at least 3 gees of acceleration. More if they want to play
>>>with competantly-built SDBs. 3 gees of acceleration pushes your power plant
>>>size up, as does the additional weaponary.
>>
>>Or a good head start.  Also what if the pirate used SDBs or equivalent
>>carried by battle transports?
>
>  What's the budget for your "pirate" organization - it's beginning to
>sound a lot more like a Zhodani Colonial force battle-rider squadron.
>Which begs the banker issue...
>

Sorry that wasn't me.  I propesed stealth and spies not muscle.

>...
>>>Atrocity warfare is not a habit of any of the Interstellar states in Known
>>>Space. Except for the K'kree, and during the Second Civil War.
>>
>>That's true but the missles could be duds...
>
>  I recall someone pointing out that these missile would be very hard
>to intercept due to neglible signature (therefore ballistic?) - what
>if the target doesn't detect them?
>
>

Good point.

Send a warning with the basic course.  Then the SDB has to choose.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:57 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

At 05:39 PM 10/20/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>>TL8 Passive-light sensors can be visualized as taking a series of pictures
>>>every ten seconds or so, each picture being about 10 degrees on a side,
>>>with perhaps an 8192x8192 pixel detector with 4 arcsecond pixels.
>
>>At that level you could spot a 100 meter lighted object at (thinking)
>>5156km.  (1 pixel change at that range.)
>
>>Now, what is the light sensativity threshold
>>for one pixel?  How bright would that 100 mete object have to be the effect
>>that pixel from 5156 km out?
>
>The system can detect objects much further than 5156; objects don't need to 
>be resolved (bigger than one pixel) to be detected - you can detect something

I know that but they HAVE to be above the sensor threshold to effect that pixel.

>that's a tiny fraction of a pixel quite easily. (For example, Saturn is about 
>a tenth of a pixel on your eye.) The PEMS described above, with ~2-3m
telescopes,
>can detect a 99% black scout-sized starship at about (if I recall correctly)
>That's a 20-sigma detection - pretty unambiguous. Space is dark. Ships - even
>black ships - are bright.

Please define 20-sigma.  Signal strength deference is not relevent if the
signal is not more than 2x noise level.  It's a quantum physics issue.  If
the viewing angle aproached that of one photon on the surface of the sensor
the obtect is not detectable by any means due to both quantum mechanics and
the uncurtinty principle.

>
>Bruce
>

If the radiant energy from the scout that reaches the sensor drops below the
background noise level it will be undetectable regardless of any other
concurn.  You are egnoring that there are quantum limits on ampification and
discrimination.  With infinite amplification, no noise threshold, and no
quantum energy threshold you are correct.  Signals at 1ev or one photon are
not recoverable.  They carry on inteligable information as they are single
state quantum units.  The noise level is much higher than that.

Space is not at 0k.  I think that if I recall properly it is in the single
digits (2k maybe) but it varies some from place to place.  Not my field but
I do remember hearing it quoted in the past somewhere.  99.9 black at 300k
is 3k effective and that 300k can be reduced by technological means I've
discuss in other posts to much less than 300k.  How do you think thermos
bottles work?

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:48:56 -0400
From: Greg Smith <gsmith@helot.arl.mil>
Subject: 4I

Hi Keven and Jim.  You wrote:

>> 7)  The 4I uses high tech, TL 17, but tries to limit subject worlds >> to no more than TL 12 or so.

>I can see the 4I keeping tech down to about TL11 for civilians and >outlawing higher tech in non-military hands.  This would include >starships as well as weapons & computers.  But if the 4I is against >high automation, then TL17 becomes difficult at best.  And would they >recover enough in the 850 years since the Virus to achieve TL17?  >Assuming their archives survived to allow them relatively quick >rebuilding to TL12 or TL14, there's still the needed scientific >advancements to get to TL16 & beyond.  My take, given that most >surviving planets would devolve to TL6 or less, is that 850 years is >*WAY* too short to get to TL17, especially given that high automation >is probably outlawed, and that the necessary expertise is restricted >due to the TL cap on member worlds.  I could see the 4I as having TL14 >under these conditions; after all, they're just reinventing what >they've lost over the years.  TL15 is feasible too, even when you >discount the infusion of Hiver technol!
!
ogy.  The main point is, unless >they import tech from the Hivers, they'd be hurting for tech.


I disagree with you if we are talking about having archives available. 
If you remove the "way we've always done things" and let some archives
survive, then there could be new ways of doing things....the oddball
experiment that works out and moves things in a radically different
direction.  That's how I'd play it anyway...  Some areas of higher tech,
some lagging.  But 850 years is a long time.  Yeah there'd be some fear
of tech, but the Solomani would forget quicker than the Vilani I think.

>And what of the Regency?  You *know* they'd go up against the 4I the >instant they run into them.  And after 850 years with a TL15 start, >they'd prolly be at least TL18 *or better*.  And keep in mind that >eventually the Regency would expand through Corridor into the old 3I >space due to population problems.
 
I disagree here too.  The Regency still has all the trappings and
baggage of the 3I, ie, slow tech advances, culture that moves slowly,
and they would still have the way things were always done....  They
wouldn't advance far in 850 years...  They would have the high tech, but
also the fear of the virus and all that went with that.  I'd put my
money on Solomani expansion.

I do think that they would become the 4th Imperium though....and then,
after they started through the Corrider, they'd run into the "other" 4th
Imperium coming the other way.... Just about as advanced as they were in
some areas, more advanced in others.  Think of all the industrial
espionage, spying and combat encounters you could roleplay...

Now there are some possibilities!

Greg

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:46 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

At 06:11 PM 10/20/98 -0600, you wrote:
> 
>> Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>> >The ort cloud is beyond the orbit of pluto and completely circles our
>> >solar
>> >system.  Can you say too damned big to ever search in a 100 life times?
>
>Ships in traveller are *bright*. In terms of _detection_ (very

Where is the canon for this?  What is the energy source that make them
bright?  What is thier energyu density and how do you know that it is above
the treshold of detectability at 1 LY?  The ship would have to be blazingly
bright in the light part of the spectrum.

Where is the canon that says that you cam pick out a scout in the ort cloud
that you did not know was there?

>different from resolving a target) it doesn't really matter how far
>away it is if it is bright enough*. You are scanning the whole sky
>regardless of target distance. True you might simply see a single
>bright pixel, hell the target might take a day to move out of that
>one pixel, but the pixel will still be brighter than background. The

If it is above the threshold of detection.  Numbers please?

>only way it takes more time to scan is if you decide to integrate
>longer to see fainter sources. I could be wrong, but I'd likely scan
>at the integration time needed for 100D defense, and add the frames
>together to look for indications of fainter sources out in the void.

a ship scan for 100 dia could not resolve a ship at .5 light years.

>If I saw something in an added frame set that wasn't in the normal
>scan, I'd know it was fainter. I could then dedicate a tighter scan
>at higher resolution and longer integration time on that specific
>area to get more data.
>

This might apply at 100 dias.

>(* big caveat, it needs to be fairly bright--distance obviosly comes
>into play in terms of square-law reductions, and masking a drive is
>far easier when the sensor array subtends a very small angle)
>

I could not include the zeros after the decimal to express the veiwing angle
of a 100 meter ship at 1 ly in this post.  All the computer in the world
could not hold the data if one binary bit represented every 100 square
meters of surface area in a 1 LY shell.

>The bigger problem is simply that the light will take so long to get
>to your sensor that the data will be very old.
>

.5 to 1 year!  You'd never find a moving ship.  You saw were it was a year ago!

>Bottom line is that if Bruce says it's bright enough, it likely is
>:-)

and exactly how bright is that, in lummins please?  I'd love to run the
energy densities at the reciever on this.  I dought you could detect a 1 meg
atomic blast at 1 light year in the light spectrum!

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:41 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy

At 01:10 AM 10/21/98 -0700, you wrote:
>...
>>>With a high Delta V and cold gas manuvering thruster it would not be a
>>>problem.  As for matching velocities, you can finish that after you
>disable him.
>...
>>One ton at most, 0 power, dirt cheep.  It's compress gas.  You could use
>>your life suport reserves.
>
>  I suspect that this will fall far short of the needed performance envelope.
>Let's assume that the target has been running at 1-G for an hour or so (d=
>65kkm, v= 36 kps). A souped-up Far Trader may have a similar vector, having
>taken off intending to intercept, and could follow until it's far enough away
>to feel safe from intervention* or drops off the indigs lousy sensors.
>
> *under CT (B:2) this is likely past the planetary 100-d limit.
>
>  OTOH, a 800-ton purpose-built SOTA corsair is _extremely_ unlikely to have
>anything like a similar vector (and if it can come in from the other side of
>the planet - _through_ its' core COACC zone - then the pirate leader may as
>well thumb through "Space Viking" and decide to land instead); so it follows
>just how much "cold" gas is required to significantly alter the course of a
>vessel travelling at tens or hundreds of kps in aid of intercepting another
>starship doing a similar speed, keeping in mind that the first ship likely
>masses 10-20 metric tonnes per displacement ton, and that the ISP of your 
>specified thrust agent sucks beyond all rational* belief?
>
> *in a thruster universe, which admittedly ain't all that rational :>
>

The cold gas thruster need only impart a tiny vecter that will build up a
angle of attack change over 3 ls distance of 1000s of Kms.  Note that all of
the manuvering on the Apolos were cold gas.  The mains were only for
generating the inial velocity.  Steering was cold gas thrusters and they
used a free return orbit insertion just incase they had a problem.  Apolo 13
did and it got them home.  They used the main LIM engine to get home faster
because they were running out of everything.

As for landing, you'd have to dump your delta v and then you'd be toast!
Speed is life when dealing with 6g intersepters.  You need a high delta V so
that your lower acceleration will still get you out the 100 dia limit before
they get into range.  Figure the vector math for the pirates approach, the
merchants accel. out and the SDBs persuit from orbit and you'll see what I
am saying is correct.  The SDB and Merchant both have to build up speed
while the pirate already has speed equal to or slightly greater than the
merchant will have at the 100 dia. shell.  If the pirate is a 6Ger he can
quickly match up on the out bound leg from 75 dias or better out and still
have enough V to coast out while looting his prize before the SDB gets to him.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:54 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

At 01:31 AM 10/21/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
>>Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
>...
>>>>The sensor ship could not maintain constant readiness.  It would have to out
>>>>mass the pirate 10 to one or more to stand a chance.
>>>/...
>>>
>>>  What's the basis for that 10:1 assertion?
>>>
>>Guesstamate.  The ships would take at least one broadside as the weapons
>>were unmaned and probably a second before the crew made it to stations and
>>got up to snuff.  How many ship could fight effectively after receiving a
>>broadside from an equal weight ship with max weaponry?  I'd target the
>>weapons and drives on the first pass if I were that pirate.
>
>  You'll forgive me for pointing out that this is hardly an authoritative
>citation?
>

Not at all.  Combat is a highly fluid enviroment.  I was giving a good
margin for error.  Over designing as it were.

>  So, at maximum sensor range (IIRC?) a single "broadside" will inflict
>damage equal to the survival capacity of a ship 2-4 times its' size? I

Or cripling damage.  The second shot finises the job.

>shall not bother to address the concept of a sweep conducted with all
>weapons crews off-duty.
>

Maned full time all the time?  A sensor ship that spends months listening
with gunnery crews on full alert would be driven insane be bordom.

>  If I've been paying attention properly pirates IYTU tend to be large
>(400-1000 tons) high-performance (high-G, high end electronics, mil-spec
>weapons, Mil-Black hulls).
>
>  At what range do you need to be to reliably disable the drives and weapons
>of an armoured target? 
>

...one fifty misile launch...

>  Just for fun, where do they build them, and who paid for them?
>

Pirate base, standard shipyard, foriegn states.  They are not pirate until
the do their first ilegal act now are they.  After that Law 0 areas.

>...
>>>  Little traffic except the occasional patrol by SDB's practicing warfighting
>>>routines for their Oort cloud withdrawals.
>>
>>The ort cloud is beyond the orbit of pluto and completely circles our solar
>>system.  Can you say too damned big to ever search in a 100 life times?
>>Care to guess how long it would take the SDBs to get there on manuver drives?
>
>  I know perfectly well where the Oort Cloud is in our system. I never
>implied that such a search would be meaningful, or even intentional -
>although _eventually_ sensor readings will propagate to remotes left 
>there by local SDB elements (or sub-sector/sector forces) simply to
>keep an eye on their own refuelling fallbacks (although the distances
>will prevent detection of casual use - a base elsewhere would be best).
>

In a year or so IF your sensor can pick up the flare at 1 ly.  That is an
assumption I am not willing to make.

>  In CT maneuver drives didn't have cutoffs, and given many months of
>fuel it is in practical range for many SDB's; Jump vessels could be
>used otherwise.
>

Yes, but would the ships systems last 2 years+ without spares?

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:50 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

At 07:36 PM 10/20/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>>The ort cloud is beyond the orbit of pluto and completely circles our
>>solar
>>system.  Can you say too damned big to ever search in a 100 life times?
>
>Bruce is an astrophysicist - he's talking about his specialty here.  Ships
>will have to accelerate continually to get to the Oort base, or jump
>there, and jump 'flare' is already part of Traveller canon.  Assuming
>dedicated orbital sensor stations, it wouldn't be that long before the
>visiting ships were detected.  We can detect planets around neighbouring
>stars, after all, and Traveller starships (all Traveller tech, actually)
>produce lots of waste heat.  
>>

The flare is a signal with a finite strength.  After propagating through a
sphere .5 lys across the signal strength will be in the mud unless the flare
is lethal at 1000 miles or more.  The signal will also take 6 months to
reach the reciever.

>>Care to guess how long it would take the SDBs to get there on manuver
>>drives?
>
>Assuming continuous acceleration? Care to do the calculation? 
>
>Yes, I can do it myself, and no, I'm not going to do it for you. I'm
>getting a little tired of hearing guesses and assertions when a few
>minutes thought or a bit of research would produce a different answer. 
>This is a back-of-the-envelope calculation, strictly high school physics,
>no calculus involved, clearly not a problem for an engineer.  
>

The ort cloud is .5 to 1 lY out from the primary.  The above was sarcasm.
It would take years and your sensor reading when you first recieved them
would be 6 months out of date.  The entire IN could not search the volume of
the ort cloud for a single ship in 1M years.  It's that big.

>You say you are an engineer: then start doing your part by contributing
>some thought and knowledge, and using that expensive training. You say you
>are extremely busy: then post more reasoned messages less often. 
>

Sorry I keep forgeting that sarcasm does not work in email.  As for the
astrophysics, I have no problem with defering to Bruce in matters of
astrophysics but this is sensor tech and data aquisition and processing.  MY
baliwick.  In theory you could design a device that could hear a wispered
conversion taking place in Japan while being in New York.  I can tell you
with curtainty that it will never be built do to the practical problems
inherent in APPLIED science.  There are limits placed by the real world on
science like the noise threshold.  Once a signal drops below that level it
is unrecoverable.

Spotting a planet in another solar system is relatively easy.  We know
within a very limited area (much less that a single second of arc) of the
sky were that planet will be if it is there and can train high power low
viewing angle telescopes on that area.  We watch that area long enough we
see it.  Easy, but the ort clould covers our sky.  It's the needle in the
haystack problem.

Bruce, what is the smallest object in the rings of saturn that can be seen
well enough to identify with the whole sky scaner you talk about?  Exactly
how many of those size objects are there?  How long would it be before a new
one was detected?  What is the name of this device and where on the web can
I view the data on it?  How does it see a signal that has an amplitude less
than the universe's noise temperture?  

I would truely like to know.  I know of no techology in existance or
proposed in theory that can simultainious see both a spherical panarama and
resolve all objects present with a viewing angle of 10^-30 seconds, a
temperture of 200k, only emitting IR, and is a half light year away.

If this is a theoretical device, as I believe it has to be, how does it get
past the limits of quantum mechanics that set a finite limits of minimal
energy level that can the detected and the universe's noise level that is
orders of magnutude higher?

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:29 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was: Piracy))

At 05:25 PM 10/20/98 PST, you wrote:
>In mail you write:
>
>>>> to design a non radiator ship powered be batteries to fool the sensors if
>>>> they can 'see' your heat radiator.  The best solution is a directed
>>>> (columated) radiator as discribed in the novel "Sun Diver".  The ship was
>>>> cooled by dumping it's heat into a laser.  That laser could then be 
>> directed
>>>> into deep space and thus undetectable disposal of the heat if this tech.
>>>> exist in the TU.
>>>
>>>It can't exist anywhere. Laser light is *low* (almost *zero*) entropy.
>>>Heat is very high entropy. Thus you *cannot* convert heat to laser
>>>light without creating far more heat than you send away. The trick in
>>>Sundiver isn't allowed by the laws of thermodynamics.
>>
>> UH...heat IS light.  Inferred light.  That is want heat is.  And there are
>> IR lasers avalable today.  The problem is convertion.  A chemical catalist
>> laser could in theory convert waste heat to collumated IR.
>First thing. The difference between "heat" and an IR laser beam is that
>heat is spread over a *wide* frequency range and the radiation is *not*
>coherent. An IR laser has *one* wavelength, and the radiation is
>coherent. 
>
>That makes a *big* difference. An IR laser beam, just like any other
>laser beam, is *low* entropy. Heat is *high* entropy. Thus, as I said,
>you *can't* convert raw heat into *any* kind of laser beam. Not without
>creating even *more* heat than you started with.
>
>Not even "in theory" can a laser convert heat to IR.
>

There are solid state devices the conver heat to electricity without
themselves generating more heat than they use.  Thay is one way to do it.
There are more.  All you need to do is put the heat to work and that work
will use up the heat. 

>> Also there is
>> the other question as to how much waste heat a TL12 Fusion reacter has.  If
>> it's low and the insulation facter is high then there would be no need to
>> vent heat at all.  The color temperture difference between the hull an space
>> could be less than 1 degree.
>
>It's not a matter of waste heat from the *reactor*. It's that all power
>generated on the ship *will* wind up as waste heat sooner or later. If
>you have a 100 MW power plant, and it is generating the full 100 MW
>then your ship *will* be radiating 100MW of energy, mostly as heat. 
>
>The heat is what the power winds up as *after* being used.
>

Not always.  If you use it to debond H2 from O you get very little heat
compared to power input.  The energy is store in the chemical bonds.

When you charge a capaciter you heat loss is near zero regardless of charge.
Bateries product a moderate amount of heat in a slow charge.

Electricity can be use to due work other that producing heat at good
efficencies.  Heat is not the only 'high entropy' energy and not all energy
ends up as heat.

>>>In fact, you have the problem that your *effective* radiator area is
>>>equal to the area of the cone of radiation at the closest point to the
>>>ship. So the narower the emission cone, the smaller the area, and thgus
>>>the higher the radiator temp. 
>>>
>>>Thus there are some rather tight limits on how stealthy you can get.
>>>
>>
>> Again it depends on the amount of waste heat.  You need some to warm the
>> crew spaces to begin with.  If the waste heat is not greater than that there
>> is no waste heat.
>
>Wrong. That means that the crew spaces will be radiating heat at 300 K.
>But the problem is that the crew *themselves* plus minimal amounts
>of equipment generate *more* heat than is required to keep the ship at
>a livable temp. Thus the need to *cool* the ship by using large
>radiators.
>

Tell that to Appolo 13.  They nearly froze to death!  Their water supply
froze.  Explain that!  The reason was they were running with there power
shut down.  The same as the pirate would do.  Add an inner hull (thermal
shielding) seperarted from the outer with vaccume.  Minimal power useage
(lights, life support, and passive sensor).  You'll have to use some power
to heat the enter area to comfortable levels.  Waste heat will not be
enough.  A layer of that solid state thermal converter on the outside of the
enter hull to convert some of the radiate leakage back into electricty to
save power and cut emissions.  The outer hul temp will be very low.  That's
what you pay for with the thermal shielding option.

>Just consider the Space Shuttle. It doesn't have large power generation
>capacity while in orbit. Yet it *has* to open the cargo bay doors to
>expose the radiators that *cover* the inner surface, or else it will
>*rapidly* become too hot to live in!
>

Only when heat gain from the sun is high.  They spend a lot of time with
those doors closed as well.

>Remember, the *only* way energy can leave a spaceship is via radiation.
>Which means that *cooling* the ship is a major consideration.
>

Who said it needs to leave?  See above.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:55:02 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Sensors and waste heat

At 05:55 PM 10/20/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>>>A lasers beam spreads over great distances.  I typical comercial 1 watt unit
>>>>today would cast a circle about 1.5 feet in diameter on the moon.
>>>
>>>God knows where you got this number from; to make a 1.5' circle on the
>>>moon you'd need a diffraction-limited 800-meter telescope to launch the
laser.
>>>Perhaps 1.5 miles is closer to the mark? 
>>>
>>I'm aware of the arc angle.  Are you aware of the angle of deffusion
>>available on lasers?  More than .001 second is a reject for good comercial
>>positioning use today much less high percission stuff.  We are talking
>>lasers (mono polar light) not telescopes.  They work very differently.  And
>>you do not need a telescope to launch the laser.  Course target it yes, fire
>>it know.  NASA uses a 2 foot relecter on the moon for laser distace
>>mesurements.  It was put up there by one of the apolo missions.  I do not
>>recall which one.
>
>
>I'm not sure where you're 0.001 second (presumably you mean arcseconds?)
>number comes from. It might be the mean positioning accuracy or stability of
>the beam - though that sounds somewhat too good and I'd like a citation. 

Neither, it's the angle of defusion in the spec.

>That's *not* the amount the beam spreads out by. Spreading of any beam is
>fundamentally limited by the diffraction limit of its launch aperture, with
>the spread angle given by wavelength / diameter of the launch aperture.
>That's why you need a telescope-like device to launch a beam and expect it 
>to stay reasonably collimated; if you launch the beam from the 1-mm output
>of a typical commercial laser, the beam will be spreading at about 10^-3
>radians or a twentieth of a degree. By the time it reaches the moon it would
>be 250 miles across. NASA's lunar rangefinding experiments are launched
>from the earth through 0.5 - 3 m telescopes; by the time the beam reaches
>the moon it is a few miles across. (Only the portion of the beam that hits
>the 2 foot reflector is returned to the earth, of course, which might be what
>is confusing you.) 
>

No that was my point.  Effective energy at the reciever = (transmited
power/surface area of the wave front) x area of reciever.  That is also why
I dought that a space ship is all that easy to pick up at a distance.
Signal strength is low, surface area is that of a sphere of that radi, and
the reciever array surface area is small.  Recieved power is small and if it
is small enough it is below the noise and quantum thresholds.  None of this
counts in the absorbion of heat by space matter.  Planetary space is dirty.
This provide both a higher local space temperture and a higher noise figure.

>Trust me. I do this for a living. (Almost literally; one of the experiments
>I'm involved in is projecting a laser (attached to the Lick 3-m telescope) 
>to make a star-like spot on the mesospheric sodium layer 100km up.)
>

Are you doing tropospheric scatter research?  If so I'd love to discuss it
with you.  I have some questions about this process as it aplies to
communication systems.  Do the best bounce frequences remain fairly constant
or doe the drift?  Is it a predictable drift?

>>>The trick to getting such accuracies is not to track the whole turret to
>>>those precisions but to move the turret for coarse aiming and do fine aiming
>>>with a smaller precision steering mirror in your laser.
>
>>Quite true IF a multikilowatt xray laser weapon could and would be so
>>equipted on a reguler basis.  I dought it.  Drives the cost way up and would
>>not be needed for it's primary purpose.
>It's certainly how real laser weapons will be designed - cf AvWeek articles
>on the YAL-1. A precision steering mirror and closed-loop tracking system 
>is only $50 - $100 K. (Again, I do this for a living - I'm involved with
>the group building the AO system for the Lick and Keck telescopes - so I know
>this for a fact.) 
>
>>What would you use for mirrors and lenses
>>for a Xray laser anyway?  Magnetic fields might work for lenses but what
>>could you make a 100% mirror for xrays out of?
>Magnetic fields don't bend light.
>
>The question of mirrors for x-rays is more interesting; presumably the
>fact that x-ray lasers don't come into use until TL-13 allows a certain 
>amount of time to solve the problem.
>
>>The lag time would also throw a nasty PID loop constant into your control
>Details of the control loop can be left unspecified. The adaptive controllers
>we use for tip/tilt correct out to 100 Hz and respond rapidly to changing
>atmospheric turbulence; I doubt any maneuvers a spacecraft could make would
>be a problem for them, since spacecraft typically vary their course somewhat
>slower than that.
>

True, again it comes down to scale.  A small move for the laser = a long
distance at the target.

>>If you assume a high efficency insulation
>>and mininal power, just enough for life support and passive sensors your
>>outside temp would be only a few degrees warmer than space.  Apollo could
>>maintain life support, manuver, sensors, and comunications on 40 watts of
>>power with body heat alone heat keeping the cabin at arround 20 degrees.
>
>This is more a problem with Traveller overall, in that life support takes
>really ludicrous amounts of power (megawatts) in most Traveller incarnations.
>Still, even if life support is free, a pirate-quality passive sensor array
>will take tens of kilowatts or more, the crew will generate a few kilowatts,
>ten kilowatts leaking through a thousand square meters of hull still warms
>it up to a moderately-detectable 100K. Much more problematical is the fact
>that your pirate has to have a black hull (so as not to be seen in reflected
>sunlight), which means it's absorbing a kilowatt per square meter of
>solar heat - you'll need to actively refrigerate the hull and dump that heat
>out somewhere, which requires more power - a nasty cycle.
>

The pirate uses a double hull with a hard vacume between and solid state
thermal electric converters on the inner hull to convert the waste heat back
to electrical power and a 100% refecter shield one inch above that.  All
tech available today.  As for the pasive sensors a few watts would be more
than enough to pick up those oh so nice transponder signals that tasty
freighter is sending out or the ground control chatter to that other
freighter breaking orbit on such in such a course.  They make it so easy.
Taffic control is alway in the clear to warn others of their flight path.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:54:23 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

At 11:50 PM 10/20/98 EDT, you wrote:
>> >>_Rebellion_ p. 27 states that each sector of the Imperium theoretically
>has
>> >>a group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships. This number includes combat
>> >>vessels such as cruisers, carriers, battleships, and _some_ escorts
>> >>(emphasis mine). It does not include auxiliaries, support ships, and
>scouts.
>> >
>> >Now this is posible.  A 1000 ship sector Navy INCLUDING escorts is
>> >reasonable. What I said was 1000 capital ships alone was not reasonable.
>
>It should be noted that the colonial forces are taken out of that theoretical
>1000 ships...  "Reserve fleets are technically considered part of the forces
>of a named fleet, but are rarely moved out of their original subsector." -
>Rebellion pg 27.  This drops your average 62.5-combatant fleet by half.   
>

Did not know this.  I think I may have fould the answer to the discrepincies
in Fighting ships.  It apear the a great many ships are 'second line',
'reserves', 'auxilleries', and 'ordinatary' (moth balls).  The spinward
marches ordinary is located in corrador.

>They're also in Battle Rider. : )  CT (Fighting Ships) makes no reference to
>these larger escorts, defining escorts as "small ships of up to 5,000 tons"
>meant to be support craft for larger ships, primarily cruisers.  You're the CT
>guy, ain't you, Hans? ; )
>

My quess basses on fighting ships is that there are as many battle riders
carriers as the are battle ships (about 40).  There is one batron of
Tigeress and 4 Kokirrak.  The Tigeress is a full 8 ship force but the
Kokirraks may be under stenth.  The Plankwells are in ordinary.  The battle
riders were relagated to 'force multipliers' due to their weekness of
loosing their carrier and being wiped out.

Bases on FS ant the AHL books I would ssay there are 10-20 crurons (some of
them light) of 'heavy' crusers and some carriers 5-10 crurons worth. 

40 battle ships
40 battle carriers
80-160 crusier
20-80 carriers

120-320 capital ships.  Add escorts and auxilleries ect and you have your
1000 ships.  Some of the FSs material hints the SM maybe a bit under
garrisoned and that they are mostly older ships.

Piracy notes:  2 Frontier configuration AHLs are in the the marches as
planetary defense units.  These units retained their weaponry.  Carried
small craft and missle load out are not discussed.  5 more of these are fuel
carriers and 2 are private cargo hauled.  These are striped of most of their
weapons.  One planetiod moniter is also pressent.  The IN move it with one
of their battle rider carrier when it was sold for one planet to another.
The marches is heaver with piracy than some other secters.

Only two cruron are regularly devided up for anti piracy patrol.  That 16
patrols at most.  The Batron and cruron are stationed at curtain strategic
bases and apparently rarely move.  A single tigress does a show the flag
trip every so often though.  This would explain some things and make sence.
While at a known base these ships can easily be contacted and dispatched to
trouble spots.  If they regularly patrol then getting intel to them would be
a problem if their courses were at all event driven.  The IN would have to
send out fleet couriers to wait where they hoped they jump to.  Have the
ships in base 90% of the time make them FASTER to respond to trouble as they
do not have to be hunted down.  It woulds also explain how pirates could
operate.  They stay away from navy bases any the navy only uses a fraction
of it's abilities in anti piracty patrols unles a pirate base is dicovered.

The navy has an armed jump 6 messenger ship, the fleet courier, to pass the
word if there is trouble.

FS says there are arround 1000 scout couriers in the marches that could be
reactivate to duty in case of war.

FS also says that main line naval bases are massive construtions.

With the above information I would say the IN spending is mush greater that
we have postulated in ships, bases, and operations.  The fleet courier
operations are probably maintained for intel gathering and C^3I.  Bases are
more common and more extensive.  Ships remain mostly at the bases.  This
would save money in upkeep and allow the crew some form of life.  There is a
massive mothball fleet in the Corrador subsector (100+ crusiers and 80+
battle ships.)  More than likely a large persentage of the naval ships that
are not at bases are on interdiction duty or in rotation for interdiction
duty.  Thiese ship would have much higher maintainence cost.

There are perhaps 50 system that will never be bothered by pirates due to
local fleets and naval bases but that still leave 350 posible targets.

From all this I would say the the IN is bases more on a 'real cost' model of
naval operations than the simplified system used for player chacaters.  More
like T4 pocket impires and less like TCS.  TCS is a simplified tactical game
after all.  No one really expects it the closely mirror what would be
reality.  To make it more real would to overly complicate the game.  A ships
that remains occupied but in port cost less to maintain than one the is on
constant patrol but the current rule say they cost the same.  A mothballed
ships costs a fraction of the cost of a docked ship to maintain but you have
demothballing cost and time if you want to use it.  With the mothbal fleet
in Corrador the IN is in a good position to bring these ship online to
counter any aggression in the Marches but saves money.  The mothballed ships
are older ships retired from service but one that could still be usefull in
case of war.  When they are no longer viable they are sold as surplus
recouping some of the investment in them.  A very sound fiscal policy.

Piracy is posible under this pattern IF the pirate stays in the more back
water systems or on the trade routes between main systems.  There lives are
not easy and booty is far from sure but it is posible to exist.  The navy is
the sleeping giant.  Pirates are very happy about wars too.  They give up
piracy and start picking over the battle fields.  A pirate in a war zone had
better keep a very low profile.  One blast form a type T spinal mount and no
more pirate.  The nave on a war footing will not be very understanding about
ships that are not what they seem to be.  Better have your transponder on
people or at least be ready to turn them on when you enter a control zone.
Even the navy will under stand why you want to keep a low profile in you
free trader when enemy cruron may be arround especially if you are carring
their fresh food to the base.


>> >Then the number of ships is out of line with CT history.  Look at the
>> >production nubers for the two cruisers that have their own books.
>> 
>> The KINUNIR is not a real cruiser. The AZHANTI had a "print run" of, what,
>> 120? (My books are at home). Perhaps it was an atypical number. One example
>> just proves that it is within the parameters but it dosen't say where.
>
>The production order of Azhanti's was 100.  92 were built. There is one more
>example I know of...  Fighting Ships says there were 794 Atlantic class CRs
>built of which ~500 remained in service c1100.   People think Azhanti names
>were convoluted... like to see someone name 794 ships. ; )
>

It's a second line ship and probably in the crurons in the Marches but FS
does not say for sure.

>>>If the 1000 ships are for a sector with a full sixteen sub-sectors, then the
>>>average fleet has 1000/16 = 62.5 ships. Since there are 320 regular fleets
>in
>>>the Imperium, the total of combat ships for the Imperium would be around
>>>20,000.
>
>You'd have to cut that to 31.25 (combatant) ships due to a fuller and in-
>context reading of Rebellion.  Note that the Midu's are described in Fighting
>Ships as being in limited production.  Their purpose is to be an escort that
>supplements fleet defenses w/ anti-fighter and anti-small craft ship.  They
>were committed "to operations only with the Navy's major battle fleets."
>
>> >Where is 'fleet' defines as the ships of one sector?  I have not seen this.
>> 
>> _Rebellion_ explains that the Imperium operates with two kinds of fleets.
>> Numbered fleets are (roughly) one regular and one subsector fleet to a
>> subsector (with a few extra for special cases; the Imperium have about 300
>> subsectors and 320 regular fleets). The other kind is the named fleet. A
>> named fleet is either a command structure for all the numbered fleets in
>> a sector of a separate force. The evidence is conflicting, but I have
>> chosen the first interpretation. In any case, there is a named fleet for
>> each sector and provision for creating special named fleets for special
>> occasions.
>
>The Named Fleets are umbrella organizations.  One Named Fleet for each sector.
>All regular and colonial fleets are member of the named sector fleet.  Fleets
>can be pulled from their Named Fleet and assigned to named 'Special Fleets'
>ala the "Vengeance Fleet", "the Loyal Fleet", etc etc. but there aren't
>additional (numbered) fleets created for just that purpose.  The Special
>Fleets forces are pulled from Named Fleets.  The only exception is Capital,
>which keeps 4 numbered fleets as a reaction force or something like that.  The
>Big Stick of the Emperor, maybe? (along w/ a couple regiments of the Imperial
>Guard).
>
>> >2 battle ships and 6 escorts or 1 battle ship 2 cruisers and 5 escorts.
>> >Sounds very reasonable.  If you mean 8 battle ships in one formation this
>> >is not reasonable.
>> 
>> That's what the examples imply. 8 battle ships.
>
>The "Typical" BatRon from FSotSI has 4 BBs, 3 scouts, 1 tanker, 2 transports
>and 2 auxilliaries (auxilliaries being noncombatant resupply/fuel ships in
>FSotSI).  The Rider BatRon has 4 BRs.  The Typical CruRon has 5 cruisers.  In
>fact, all the typical Imperial squadrons have about 4-5 core ships w/ a larger
>number of scouts, escorts, and/or auxiliaries.
>

I'm afraid that FS state the tigress was deployed in the Marches as one 8
ships batron.  It does say in AHL that such formation are often devided in
war time to provide core ships for squadrons.

>It seems your 'examples' are atypical and on the high end of the scale.
>
>> >This is not a good squadron to use as it is a battle rider squad.  In CT
>> >battle ridder are uncommon compared to jump warships.  For a jump capable
>> >group to carry equaul firepower it would raise the cost quite a bit.
>> 
>> That was my point.
>
>Mmm....it's mentioned in several places that the Imperium had gone over
>heavily to Battle Riders...  Fighting Ships and Battle Rider both say that
>Battle Riders dominated the Imperial Fleet.  

at the start of the fourth war.  They took high losses during the opening
battles.  The enemy targeted the carrier and then cleaned up the riders once
they could not escape.  Battle riders were then relagated to the reserves as
force multipliers.  Basicly assualt ships.

Fighting Ships says that due to a
>shifting to the Reserve Strategy and precisely because Battle Riders cannot
>flee when things go bad, that Battle Riders were concentrated in the
>"strategic reserve."  Jump capable ships were used in the "frontier areas."
>
>> >>The other possibility is that a large number of ships are laid up in
>> >>ordinary. That would require that part of the annual budget was used to
>> >
>> >The USA has more ship in mothballs than operating including several
>carriers
>> >and battle ships.
>> 
>> Unfortunately a huge reserve fleet gives other problems for the background.
>> Right, Gary?
>
>Nope.  : )   Possibly, if based on your (uncanonical) assumptions. According
>to canon?  No. 
>

According to cannon of FS and AHL there must be a huge mothball fleet in
Corrador.  See above for some numbers.

Charles L.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #994
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 995



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Current Tech: Shortstop 
Re: Sensors and waste heat
re: Star Gypsies
Re: Inspection: Small craft vs SDB's (was Re: Piracy) 
Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was:  Piracy))
Physreps
RE: Star Gypsies
Re: various piracy bits 
Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others
CodeRe IMTU
Jump Durations
Re Piracy
mass-based jump limits
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges (long and tedious)
Re: mass-based jump limits
Re: Squadron Sizes of the IN

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:18:40 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop 

> Kevin R. Pittsinger wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > ObTrav:  You may be able to do this with nuclear dampers, depending on
> > how they work IYTU.  Just turn the knob up to "11"...
> 
> I was under the impression that the ECM program for starship computers was supposed to do that very function.  I'm refering to the LBB 2, of course...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> I'll bet the CT ECM program only works to blow up missiles that are
> already armed - and the missile won't arm until it gets to safe distance.

One would assume they'd arm not only on safe distance, but on safe 
trajectories too.  Wouldn't do to take out your buddy who's 10 degrees off the 
bad guy.  And this would keep them from blowing up in the tubes.

Keven



tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:26:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Sensors and waste heat

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:
> Pretending-to-be-an-asteroid is an interesting approach to hiding, but my 
> feeling is that it generally won't work; 30-m asteroids are rare enough
> that it's fairly practical for a ship to scan every one it sees with
> LIDAR,  measure its range and velocity (any spaceship that isn't
> deliberately lurking will be moving faster than local orbital velocity) and
> maybe its shape.
Well, if it has a reasonably high angular velocity (more than something like 10
milliradians/day) it probably looks exceptional, yes.  Sort of depends on what
size of area you're talking about hiding _in_, there's quite a lot of 30 meter
rocks in your average solar system, and their orbits are probably chaotic
enough that keeping track of them really isn't practical.  My point was mainly
that given a choice between emitting a certain amount of heat as IR, and the
same amount of heat as reflected visual, the reflected visual might actually be
less 'interesting' to a sensor looking for you.

Btw, I think that shape resolution is almost a non-issue -- if we try resolving
things in 5,000A visual light with a 10-meter diffraction-limited telescope you
still only get .05 microradians, which will allow recognizing a 30 meter ship
as something other than a point of light at about a light-second.  Using IR
your resolution is a lot worse.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:24:10 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Star Gypsies

A big factor affecting the possibility of these "Star Gypsies" existing
is how YTU handles aging starships. Is the annual maintenance
cost higher for a 40 year old Free Trader than it is for one 39 years
younger?

Some of the discussions on how a pirate supports himself are
relevant here as well. Can someone scrounge or improvise
cheap replacements for life support materials and maintenance
requirements?

A Free Trader can easily hold three pairs of adults and a couple
kids for each pair. If it has no bank payment any more, the price
of running this ship for a year would be about Cr520000 for
life support, plus the cost of the annual maintenance, plus
any berthing fees at starports, plus any damage or unexpected
equipment failures - that annual maintenance on your jump drive
has never been described in canon as including a warranty.

86 tons of cargo can support these expenses with a pretty dependable
level of success, but I'm getting more of a "Merchant Clan" feeling from 
this than "Star Gypsies" - even with the minimum Free Trader example,
this group has more capital wealth and more cash flow than
many small corporations.

Not that this is a bad thing. Puts me in mind of the family merchant
ships from Cherryh's work like _Merchanter's Luck_.

Anyone want to try raising your kids on a Free Trader? 

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:32:47 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Inspection: Small craft vs SDB's (was Re: Piracy) 

> >Subject: Re: Piracy 
> ...
> >>   All it takes is a cutter doing a boarding (or even a close pass)
> >> to serve the traffic control/inspection role - which vessels could
> >> be 100-200 times cheaper than a 1000 ton SDB.
> >
> >Thing is, your average 400 ton pirate boat can toast that 50 ton cutter in a 
> >heartbeat.  And if the cutter is the only boat within 6 hrs flight time, the 
> >pirates get away.
> 
>   Good point - of course if you don't have the money for an SDB to be on
> call (evidently your point) then how could you have even inspected the
> ship in the first place, as that inspecting ship would not have existed?
> OC, the pirate can't _know_ that no SDB is within response range, unless
> they have access to vastly superior tech than the IN has?

My take on the SDB's being used as revenue cutters would be, yeah, they'd use 
them, if for no other reason than to break the monotony of a long patrol.  
IMTU, they'd send them out for like 6 months at a time, just like we do nuke 
subs.  Only a percentage of them would be doing customs inspections, say, 
maybe 25% of them at any one time.  The other reason to use them would be for 
training purposes.  Action of any kind keeps your swabbies sharp.  If they're 
on constant 6 month patrols, there'd be an awful lot of 'The Bug', and morale 
will be in the toilet.  It's easier to keep troops in line if you give them 
something *real* to do.

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was:  Piracy))

Charles Prevatte writes:
> 
> There are solid state devices the conver heat to electricity without
> themselves generating more heat than they use.  Thay is one way to do it.
> There are more.  All you need to do is put the heat to work and that work
> will use up the heat. 

Well, thermodynamics specifies that the maximum amount of work (non-entropic
energy) you can get out of a heat differential is (amount of heat
transferred)*(1-(absolute temperature of destination)/(absolute temperature of
source)) -- the remaining energy is transferred as heat into the destination. 
This also applies to refrigeration, which is what a laser 'heat pump' really
is.  As a laser has a fairly high effective temperature, it requires you to
pump energy into the laser if you want to transfer heat out with the laser.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:25:14 -0400
From: ringrose@ascent.com
Subject: Physreps

  Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:36:53 -0400
  From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>

  Thomas Vickers wrote:
    The D&D campaign I have been playing in for about 10 years, one of our

Reminds me of something I did in my previous D&D game, which I ran for
about 6 years until I finally painted myself into a corner where my
choices were a. be cheesy or b. allow the game to conclude.  (It's
concluded, in with a satisfactory save-the-plane and
eliminate-much-of-the-enemy-god's-streangth end, and only a few loose
plot threads)

Basically, anything "important" in the game has a physrep - physical
representation.  It might be smaller (a sword-shaped letter opener,
rather than a magical bastard sword, for example), but it's unique
enough to remind people of what it represents.

I found that with physreps there were three nice effects.

1: there wasn't argument over "I thought you had the frob!" 'I thought
_you_ had the frob!' `What do you mean, Greg has the frob?!` Whoever
has the physical object, their character has the item it represents.
Pass it around as necessary.

2: if a physrep's effect, or the activation of the physrep's effect,
isn't obvious, the GM can look around for who has the object and act
appropriately.

3: how many stories have you read where the protagonist "happened" to
pick up an item which "happened" to be just what he needed later?
Many.  How many stories where they left the really powerful, necessary
item, behind?  Fewer.  If something has a physrep, it is likely to be
important for the story.  Not guaranteed either way, so don't count on
it, but likely.

I was also considering using pente stones or M&Ms to keep track of
ammo.


Anybody else do this kind of thing?  Suggestions, comments?

	- Robert Ringrose
	  ringrose@ascent.com


  Walt Smith

  "If these are his (the GM's) idea of flunkies, I'd hate to see what his
  supervillains look like."

PC: "I'll see if I can get it's attention." [appropriate action]
GM: "Its head slowly turns your way and stares meanacingly."
PC: [backing away] "Uh....  I think I got its attention, guys, now
what?"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:39:35 -0700
From: "Brian Mays" <bmays@genscope.com>
Subject: RE: Star Gypsies

>Anyone want to try raising your kids on a Free Trader? 
>
>Walt Smith


3 days into J-Space:

"DAD!  Are we there yet?"

"No."

"DAD!  Are we there yet?"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:43:39 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: various piracy bits 

> >Subject: re: various piracy bits
> ...
> >>  They use SDB's for revenue cutters?
> >
> >Why not? They've got the G's to intercept traffic easily (so the traffic
> >can stay on a good course, rather than having to vector to meet them),
> >they can stay on station a long time, and they have to be out there
> >anyway. Not all of the SDB's will be used for this - most are probably
> >lying doggo somewhere - but it's good for your well-patrolled system
> >to _look_ well patrolled, it keeps the riff-raff out.
> 
>   I have to comment that this only makes sense if the system has _lots_ of
> SDB's - rational economy would likely have diversified ships for this.

I dunno.  Seems to me a SDB makes a fairly decent multimission boat if you 
design it right.

> >There will be many situations where a single free trader can make
> >ten times (or hundreds of times) more profit at a particular port
> >simply by getting there first. The next trader will still find goods, but
> >the one cargo bay full of an incredible, once-in-a-lifetime deal will
> >be gone.
> 
>   How do they know which is which without (near-) instantaneous
> interstellar commo? Luck and good planning will have their place,
> but even rumour should still be STL unless ship-borne.

Experience and *luck*.  Keeping your eyes open and your ears to the grapevine, you can learn a *LOT*, especially when you put the pieces together with everything *else* you know.  This is what makes the difference between a subbie merchant just barely making the fuel payments and a Free Trader crew making the beginnings of a sector wide trading house.

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:50:06 -0400
From: Glenn Myers <glenn.myers@mailhub.ansys.com>
Subject: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others

Hi all,

Last Friday I went to my local used bookstore hoping to complete my
Honor Harrington Series. You see, I had heard about HR on the TML and
when I saw a complete set in near mint condition I immediately bought
the first 4. I also picked up a couple of Weber's other works.

They were gone...  Gasp...  sputter... I'll have to pay FULL PRICE!

But, In Enemy Hands was there, again in mint condition. Apparently I
have an anal-retentive high-volume Weber reader in the vicinity. Lucky
me!

Getting to the point now, I also saw some other titles I recognized from
the TML. Anyone care to recommend or warn me about these?

L. Neil Smith
  Nagasaki Vector
  Henry Martyn (Space piracy, Oh No!)
  Tom Paine Maru (More space pirates!)

The Midshipman's Hope series by Author Fein-something. Looks to be 4 or
5 mint volumes from the same Weber reader.

I have generally had good fortune following the advice of this list.
Exception - Ian Banks' Culture series shipped from England did not quite
meet expectations.  

I was rather disappointed in the other Weber Books I bought. "Crusade"
and "In Death Ground" are more like traveller technology (more
conventional drives -none of the wedges from HR). But I found them much
less interesting partly due to the unending carnage. In Death Ground is
about 600 pages of endless battle fleets being turned into plasma. At
the end, you've only read the first installment. I felt "Part 1" should
have been on the outside cover. I will not be buying the conclusion.

Bye All,

Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:00:21 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: CodeRe IMTU

>>Douglas Glatz
>>
>>>The IMTU code for piracy is pi
>>>
>>>         pi++    Piracy exists and is rampant.  Anyone may commit piracy.
>>>                 Ship tracking and ID are uncommon.
>>>         pi+     Piracy exists.  Antipiracy is mostly political or
>economic,
>>>   and is inadequate. Transponders may be changed or masked, or
>>>   are not widespread or sufficient.
>>>         pi      Piracy only exists in the vacuum of government or
>corporate
>>>                 morals.
>>>         pi-     Piracy is not sustainable.
>>>         pi--    Piracy is impossible.
>>
>>What's the code for "Piracy is implausible, but it's also a neat plot
>device,
>>so I use it anyway"?
>>
>
>
>Hans, if it will get it into your IMTU, I'll heartily support changing the
>pi code to read:
>"Piracy only exists in the the vacuum of government/corporate morals, or as
>a plot device for the GM"
>

How about instead simply adding some other symbol to the list (like the #
sign),  which says
	pi# 	Piracy is primarily a plot device. (this code may be combined
 		with other pi Codes)

So hans could use pi-# and I could use pi+#.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:47:15 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Jump Durations

>This is the last time I'm going to mention the variation in jump time. You
>can maintain a scedule for outbound ships at the expense of losing about a
>day per jump (which comes to several jumps per year, which is why I don't
>think it would be used), but there's no way you can time an arrival closer
>than plus/minus a day or so.

Under MT, based upon one of the issues of MTJ, you can reduce the
variability by nearly half by taking a significantly longer (and harder)
navigational task.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:44:26 -0800
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: Re Piracy

Hans Writes:
>>...so that's reducing hostility chances to 33/36 of 1/36 or less (11/432)
>>chance of a viable pirate encounter, before applying the commonsense
>>approach of making a reaction roll!
>
>Why is it common sense to make a reaction roll to see if a pirate is in the
>mood to attack you today?

The basic reaction procedure will fill in the void (since other rules are
lacking) to account for such factors as how full are his holds, how tired
his crew, how he percieves you threat wise (For Ex, are you bigger, are you
known for "Muggerhunting", are you known for crack gunners, are you known
for being undercrewed). A positive reaction (Friendly) indicates you just
don't fit his target profile, or he's being watched, etc, while a negative
(hostile) reaction indicates he's ready and rarin' to go at you. It covers
the intangibles that aren't covered by the starship encounter tables (which
only tell you hull type, mission (which may include piracy), and basic
heading (Inbound, outbound, loitering, jumping). Creative and consciencious
use of metasystems (like encounters and reactions) are prerequisites (IMHO)
for good GMing.

>How many insignificant encounters you have in between dosen't alter the fact
>that you appear to have about 2.5% chance per jump to run into a pirate. That
>works out at 47% risk per year for a free trader (OK, it will be less than
>that since even free traders visit Class A and B starports once in a while).

Two things:
1) the number of insignificant encounters DOES affect both how many targets
there would be, as well as just how low the actual percentages of private
craft are piratical.

2) Under MT (which is the source I keep close at hand), there is no
reduction in pirate chance for starport type. Only for what type of hulls.

Jason Writes:
>Anti-pirate techniques - How about a weapon( missile? ) emplacement
>behind the airlock that will bypass the outer hull when the pirates
>board?
>
>This has been suggested by 1 of my players and I can't think of any
>problems with it.  The airlock will be a 90 deg for normal access.  With
>the thinner inner walls, most of the interior will be demolished and the
>explosion will break the connection between the 2 ships before it kills
>the firer.
>
>So, for a trashed airlock, you get a dead pirate.  Has anybody heard of
>this before and can anybody think of any down sides/problems?

yes: safety and health inspections. Risks of a loaded missile system aimed
at a section of reinforced hull.

{now responding to no one in particular)

One other thought about piracy and the 3i: One bit I have noticed is that
Hans and Ian both seem to think of the Imperial Government as some form of
federal government, which includes internal policing as part of it's
duties. I don't; instead I see the 3I as more of a confederation, with only
verly limited policing powers for "internal matters", basically limiting
imperial crimes to those which directly threaten the stability of the
imperium or it's nobility or officials, plus murder and deprivation of
basic sophont rights (which IMTU, specifically does NOT include the right
to property). IMTU, the imperium may take any actions deemed needed to
prevent external threats, and violations of the articles of membership, and
acts of the Emperor, but piracy (IMTU) is considered a local enforcement
matter, just like assault, theft, etc. IMOJ can extradite you, if the
request is in the system, when you get caught elsewhere, but they won't be
actively hunting you unless you (a) murdered* someone, (b) kidknapped
someone and then left the local jurisdiction, (c) committed tax fraud, (d)
attempted to overthrow legitimate IMPERIAL authority, (e) used unlawful
weapons vis a vis nukes chem or bio, or (f) violated imperial property,
including data, officials, agents, or symbols.

* murder, as I've seen it defined for Traveller, is "The unreasonable and
unjustified taking of a sophont's life". I use the and as a logical and,
thus it is only murder if it is BOTH unjustified AND unreasonable. Thus,
killing crewmen while attempting to commit piracy via use of force
ship-to-ship isn't, IMTU, murder, but if the pirate slits the throats of
the crewmen after he's captured them, he becomes an imperial target for
murder. Likewise aslan duels and vargr infighting are both reasonable
(culturally), and thus not imperial crimes if death occurs, but may still
be local crimes. Ship owners know that by fighting back at a pirate, they
are running a reasonable risk of having crewmen die or be gravely injured,
or even lost to space, and, IMTU, that to avoid "Imperial ENtanglements"
most pirates IMTU will NOT go on wanton killing sprees, nor take vacc suits
or rescue balls, nor shoot up a surrender, nor space crews on a capture,
and more than likely, if you don't shoot up the pirate, he'll take you
cargo and cash, and disable your PP for long enough to get away. If you
cooperate, he may even leave you some, so you're not totally crushed.

Because IMTU the imperium not only doesn't care, but really doesn't have
the de jure authority to prevent piracy (altho it does have de facto), it
only hits rings and ones who don't at least attempt to look like they have
some legitamacy. IMTU, there is this little thing called the pirate's code,
and in Gurps terms, it's a 10 point code of honor: Never kill surrenderers,
never take a prize unless you have a letter of marque, never leave the
survivors in such a straight so as to undully risk their lives, Don't open
fire until they refuse to surrender, never waste your crew's lives on
ulikely sources of income, don't violate the rules of warfare. Pirates IMTU
who follow this tend to get ingored BY POLICY as being a nuisance, not a
threat, and often are subject to wartime activation just like mercs, and
are liscenced in just the same way. Violators tend to become targets of
meson fire from factor J mounts. (A J mount's burst radius will, if fully
bracketed, engulf a 400td corsair, and by striker, this means totally
vaporize it).

Also, while I runt (basically) MT, I use the VEHICULAR COMBAT rules, not
the space combat rules (which are the same as HG for combat resolution...
Ick!). This means ranges tend to be fairly close for space combat, and
ability to hit is determined by TL. I use the folowing task for starhip
fire:

To hit with a direct fire weapon in space combat (varies, by Fire control
tables), Gunnery and Computer Model, target's defmod, combat task.
Referee:
	if taget has made a successful sand roll vs firing ship, and
weapons fired are lasers, increase difficulty by one (to represent the
ablative effects of the sand).
	If computer assistance is not available, use Int, and increase
difficulty by 1 level.
	If target has been pinpointed reduce difficulty by one level.
	If target has not maneuvered since last turn in which it was hit,
reduce difficulty by 1 level. This never applies for shots fired the same
turn.
	If firing ship has no active sensors, increase difficulty by 1 level.

William F. Hostman
<Mailto:Aramis@asylumbbs.com><Mailto:aramis@gci.net>
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn t4- tt+ to- ?tg ru+ ge 3i+ jt-() au+ st+ ls ls- kk+
as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+
ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:02:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: mass-based jump limits

Any opinion on making the jump limit based on object mass, rather than
diameter?  If you base it on, say, the local tidal strength (rate of change of
gravitational force) it remains a fixed multiple of radius for objects of
constant density, and allows resolving questions about jumping near a comet or
other large gas cloud.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:20:43 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges (long and tedious)

This whole discussion must be becoming extraordinarily tedious to most
of the TML. It's possible that by this point everyone else is bored and I 
should be giving Charles his tutorial in basic imaging theory in private 
email; if anyone feels that way, please send me a note.



>>The system can detect objects much further than 5156; objects don't need to 
>>be resolved (bigger than one pixel) to be detected - you can detect something

>I know that but they HAVE to be above the sensor threshold to effect that pixel.
I don't know what "sensor threshold" means in this context. It's certainly
possible to detect an object that is much dimmer per square arcsecond than
the background - infrared telescopes do it all the time; the IR sky is about
1x10^-15 watts/m2 micron in brightness at 2 microns wavelength, for example,
and the the dimmest objects currently detected by the Keck telescope are 
about 1x10^-19 watts/m2 micron. As long as the background is stable, sources
much fainter than the sky can be detected relative to it. The main reason that
the sky isn't stable is quantum mechanical - poisson noise in the number of 
photons arriving in a given unit time - and that can be reduced relative to
the signal by collecting more photons, since the poisson noise goes up as only
the square root of the number of photons involved, and hence goes up as the
square root of the time or collecting area, while the real signal goes up 
linearly with time or collecting area.


>>detect objects
>>that's a tiny fraction of a pixel quite easily. (For example, Saturn is about 
>>a tenth of a pixel on your eye.) The PEMS described above, with ~2-3m
telescopes,
>>can detect a 99% black scout-sized starship at about (if I recall correctly)
>>That's a 20-sigma detection - pretty unambiguous. Space is dark. Ships - even
>>black ships - are bright.
>>Please define 20-sigma.  Signal strength deference is not relevent if the
>>signal is not more than 2x noise level.
"Twenty sigma" means "twenty times the noise level", in some particular 
integration time with the given collecting area. Signal-to-noise isn't just
the ratio of the brightness of target to brightness of background but is in
fact a function of collecting area, efficiencies, and time spent integrating.

>It's a quantum physics issue.  If
>the viewing angle aproached that of one photon on the surface of the sensor
>the obtect is not detectable by any means
I have no idea what "viewing angle approached that of one photon" means.
In any case, the signal levels are well above single-photons (trust me, I 
did real calculations with real numbers to justify these sensor models.)
The main noise source is (as previously indicated) poisson noise in the
background. (Internal electronic noise is effectively negligible for 
modern imaging sensors.) 

>If the radiant energy from the scout that reaches the sensor drops below the
>background noise level it will be undetectable regardless of any other
>concurn.  You are egnoring that there are quantum limits on ampification and
>discrimination.  With infinite amplification, no noise threshold, and no
>quantum energy threshold you are correct.  Signals at 1ev or one photon are
>not recoverable.  They carry on inteligable information as they are single
>state quantum units.  The noise level is much higher than that.
Astronomers routinely observe objects where they are collecting only a 
photon per second (even in a ten meter telescope). You just have to collect
long enough for those photons to add up to a real signal. Granted, a single
photon isn't a real detection - but 400 photons is, and it's just a matter
of waiting long enough or having enough collecing area. Amplification 
doesn't enter into it.

>Space is not at 0k.  I think that if I recall properly it is in the single
>digits (2k maybe) but it varies some from place to place.  Not my field but
>I do remember hearing it quoted in the past somewhere.  99.9 black at 300k
>is 3k effective 
Something emitting 0.1% as much energy as a 300 K object is emitting as much
energy as a 53 K object, since power radiated goes as temperature to the fourth
power, but that's a minor point. Emitted power goes *up* with the blackness
of an object (emissivity = 1 - reflectivity); that's why they're called
blackbodies. A 99.999999% *white* 300K object would emit only as much power
as a 3K blackbody. It's also radiating all that power at very
different wavelengths than a colder blackbody and would still be easily
detectable.  Most of the power in the 3K blackbody comes out at milimetre 
wavelengths, most of the (small) amount of power in the 300K object comes out
in the mid-infrared. Easy to tell apart.

In reality, the main background signal isn't actually the 3K cosmic background
anyway, but scattered sunlight and thermal emission from zodiacal dust. That
does look like a 300 K blackbody, but with a distinctive spectral bump that 
is hard to hide against...and it's optically thin, so it's dimmer per unit
area than a solid object like a spacecraft.

>and that 300k can be reduced by technological means I've
>discuss in other posts to much less than 300k.  How do you think thermos
>bottles work?
I certainly don't think that thermos bottles make things become colder than
they originally were, or that if I put a heat-generating object in a thermos
bottle - or a vacuum - or wrapped it with insulation - that it would become
cold. Refrigerators make things cold; they also have to put the heat somewhere.

>[cold-gas thrusters]
>Use H2 at 2k and throw 100 kilos out at 100 mps
This will accelerate a one-thousand-tonne pirate ship by about a centimeter
per second, which seems somewhat inadequate.

>>And the colder the exhaust, the *less* thrust it'll give
>Depends on launch speed to.
This depends on how you launch it. When people who actually know what they're
talking about refer to a "cold gas thruster" they mean something that basically
opens a valve in a bottle of compressed gas to let it expand into vacuum
and provide thrust. The velocity of the gas comes from its internal kinetic
energy, which is proportional to its temperatuer. 
I know of no good way to accelerate a gas
without heating it in the process - if you're going to use non-thermal
ways to accelerate something you're better off flinging away a solid rather
than a gas. 


Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:21:47 -0500
From: Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: mass-based jump limits

Anthony Jackson wrote:
 
> Any opinion on making the jump limit based on object mass, rather than
> diameter?  If you base it on, say, the local tidal strength (rate of change of
> gravitational force) it remains a fixed multiple of radius for objects of
> constant density, and allows resolving questions about jumping near a comet or
> other large gas cloud.

It's been suggested before..I think Shadow is a big proponent of using
the tidal strength. The main reason I haven't done anything with it
is...inertia, my own in this case. ;->  

Eris

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:23:46 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Squadron Sizes of the IN

At 14:42 21/10/98 EDT, DustyLV769@aol.com wrote:


>Squadron sizes:
>     I reject a lot of the info presented in FSSI...it amazes me that no one
>seems to have noticed the glaring errors that puts it right up there w/ most
>IG products.  This was probably the worst product GDW put out for any Trav
>incarnation.

I agree with you, but IFAIK the errors are all in the ships themselves, not
in the accompanying text or the essays about the Imperial Fleets. I'm sure
that the diagrams of squadron size are schematic, not literal, as the TL14
Tender carries 3 BRs and the TL15 Tender carries 6, so rather than the 4
BRs the diagram shows a more likely size IMO, would be 6 BRs and
accompanying Tenders.

>     There are specific references to the size of a BatRon in Fighting Ships:
>Both the Tigress and the Kokirrak-class DN are listed as having a Batron size
>of 8 DN's.  So here is what I use IMTU...YMMV:
>
>Squadron (CruRon, BatRon):  8 ships
>Squadron (DesRon): 8-16 ships
>Division (CruDiv, BatDiv): 2 ships
>Division (DesDiv) 4 ships
>Detachments (CruDet, BatDet, DesDet) 1-2 vessels
>
>Task Group:  At least one CruDiv, one DesDiv.  More assigned as needed by the
>Group.
>Task Force:  Usually 2 or more Task Groups, almost always w/ BatRon present.
>Auxiliaries attached to Groups or Forces as needed (Tankers, resupply ships,
>repair ships, hospital ships [rarely] and Carriers)
>
>During times of peace, BatRons are usually deployed among the sector in
>BatDivs at key naval bases (called "stations" for that good old Royal Navy
>feel <G>)  Batrons are rarely broken down into detachments, except for
>specific missions.  CruRons are routinely broken down into divisions and
spend
>a fair amount of time on detachments as well ("showing the flag")  DesRons
are
>used much like CruRons.
>
>     In wartime, the CruRons are usually operated together unless needed for
>specific purposes (like commerce raiding) then they operate in divisions,
>usually w/ either a Desron or DesDiv in support.  BatRons MAY be committed to
>battle in divisions, but only if there is no other choice due to the tactical
>or strategic situation.  They will always have at least an attached DesRon,
>and usually more than one (If operating as a Task Group).  A CruRon will
>generally be present as well.

These seem consistent with what I understand canon to be. I've always felt
that trying to understand the IN's deployments and Trav's ships in WWII
terms is a mistake, and that the age of sail gives a much better base
model. Hoever for ship classes and relative tonnages the Washington Treaty
ships of the 20's and 30's seem to be useful.


- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #995
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 996



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Economics of Piracy
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was:Piracy))
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions
Re: UWP Cultural Extension
Finding ships in the Oort Cloud (not quite as long or tedious.)
Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others
4IWG Signup
Re: mass-based jump limits
Re: Sensors and waste heat
Re: CodeRe IMTU
Re: Capital ships
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others
Re: Piracy and parting out
Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges
Re: Question regarding Ley Sector
Re: Finding ships in the Oort Cloud (not quite as long or tedious.)
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:27:00 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Economics of Piracy

At 11:55 21/10/98 -0700, Steven Hudson wrote:

>>The lost wages of people murdered in the US every year would pay for
>>quite a few more police officers, no?
>
>  The rest of the industrialized world really wonders about that, btw.

My friends and I have often speculated as to how it is that the US has so
many cops per capita and still has such a high crime rate (especially
murder) compared to other places. Note this is not an attempt to start a
gun debate (so there).

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:29:05 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

At 02:15 21/10/98 PST, Leonard Erickson wrote:
>In mail you write:

>>   I suspect that cheaper work-arounds will be found; the obvious one is
>> using teensy-weensy digital timers to replace the mechanical timer fuzes
>> that were replaced by radar proximity units.
>
>But timers were replaced with proximity *because* timers can't be set
>accurately in advance. To have the timer set properly you have to know
>flight time and what ground level at the target is *very* accurately. 

Modern artillery relies on knowing these things anyway. A battery of guns
can achieve amazing accuracy these days if they have had the time to do a
proper survey of their positions and have good maps, and if you want good
fire support this is essential. They also go to a lot of trouble to make
sure their weather readings are accurate and keep very careful records of
barrel wear, etc to ensure accuracy.

>The way to get proximity fuzes that *aren't* susceptible to "Shortstop"
>would be to use radar units that are multifrequency and that use
>"random" pulses. That way you *can't* jam them. But it'd take a while
>to get these more advanced units to be cheap.

IIRC you can make proximity fuses that use a capacitance sensor to tell
when they are at the right distance from the ground. These should be immune
to just about anything.

>>>it comes from out of nowhere to kill you, the way you can't do anything
>>>but hunker down and hope they run out of ammo. I'm imagining these
>>>grunts, if Shortstop works, fighting for the priviledge of wearing it
>>>(and thus being in the middle of the protection zone).
>>
>>   Nah, the guy beside you, in case of snipers...
>
>The heck with snipers! A few HARM rounds mixed in with the proximity
>ones will make wearing that pack *very* unpopular!

Hell yes!

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:33:22 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

 
> >Ships in traveller are *bright*. In terms of _detection_ (very
> 
> Where is the canon for this?  What is the energy source that make them
> bright?  What is thier energyu density and how do you know that it is above
> the treshold of detectability at 1 LY?  The ship would have to be blazingly
> bright in the light part of the spectrum.
 
MT and on a Scout-like ship rejects more than 100MW of power.

> Where is the canon that says that you cam pick out a scout in the ort cloud
> that you did not know was there?
 
150MW is a bright source.

> If it is above the threshold of detection.  Numbers please?
 
Intergrate long enough. Bruce's sensor numbers (signatures in this
case) simply apply magnitudes to hulls radiating--I beleive the
baseline was 1 100dton sphere, but I could be wrong.

> >only way it takes more time to scan is if you decide to integrate
> >longer to see fainter sources. I could be wrong, but I'd likely scan
> >at the integration time needed for 100D defense, and add the frames
> >together to look for indications of fainter sources out in the void.
> 
> a ship scan for 100 dia could not resolve a ship at .5 light years.
 
Huh? A ship scan that does the whole sky one or two times in a half
an hour, that can _just_ detect a 100dton ship obviously won't
detect the same ship in the same amount of time at 0.5ly. If the
same sensor integrates for longer periods of time (or adds scanns
together over time, same thing) it can see fainter objects at the
same distance, or the same object farther away.

> >If I saw something in an added frame set that wasn't in the normal
> >scan, I'd know it was fainter. I could then dedicate a tighter scan
> >at higher resolution and longer integration time on that specific
> >area to get more data.
> 
> This might apply at 100 dias.
 
HUh? it always applys. Intergrate long, see fainter. Period.

> I could not include the zeros after the decimal to express the veiwing angle
> of a 100 meter ship at 1 ly in this post.  All the computer in the world
> could not hold the data if one binary bit represented every 100 square
> meters of surface area in a 1 LY shell.
 
IT DOESN"T NEED TO. Stars are typically point sources (distant ones,
certainly). You don't need to resolve a target to detect it. The
sensor operator would simply see a bright point, and have a rough
idea of where it is (somewhere within the arc reprented by the
pixel). He would also have spectroscopic data, and after a while, it
might even move on the sky.

>.5 to 1 year!  You'd never find a moving ship.  You saw were it was a year ago!
 
That doesn't mean you don't know that it _was_ there. A fusion
rocket ship breaking into the system at 1ly would be visible now I'd
wager.

> and exactly how bright is that, in lummins please?  I'd love to run the
> energy densities at the reciever on this.  I dought you could detect a 1 meg
> atomic blast at 1 light year in the light spectrum!

I'll work it out when I'm back at home. 150MW isotropically radiated.
That's 1.34E-25 w/m^2 at 1ly or so.

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:34:23 +1300
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

At 11:24 20/10/98 -0700, Steven Hudso wrote:

>  Now, can they make them detonate in the launch tubes? :>

Sorry, but no. A shell doesn't arm itself until it's a good way out of the
barrel, and modern fuses are just about impossible to set off early.
However a good close explosion can set off the shell itself - this is how
ammo dumps go up if they are pooorly laid out.

- -- 
IMTU tc+ tn++ t4- tt+ tg- ru+ ge+ 3i+@ jt+@ au- st- ls- hi+ va+ so+ sy--

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
 
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@clear.net.nz>
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Web Page: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/rboleyn/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:37:47 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was:Piracy))

Charles Prevatte wrote:
 
> There are solid state devices the conver heat to electricity without
> themselves generating more heat than they use.  Thay is one way to do it.
> There are more.  All you need to do is put the heat to work and that work
> will use up the heat.

Not unless they repealed the laws of thermodynamics while my back was
turned. 


- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:36:29 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk> wrote:


>..or just a case of taking your work to lunch. It is, after all, what
>the AWE crowd are payed for.

Fair point.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:12:05 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Re UWP Cultural Extensions

"David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net> wrote:

>	I hate to reopen the gripefest about DGP products, but what about the
>World Builders' Handbook? If I recall the way somebody explained it once,
>while DGP owned the copyright to the actual *text*, the ideas and concepts
>were created under license, and hence the license holder (then GDW, now
>FFE) had free right to reuse those ideas and concepts. Sure, the text would
>have to be rewritten or paraphrased, but the various profiles were
>invaluable as a guideline and creativity jogger ...

When I edited  _101 Religions_ most of them came with the URP from WBH. To
avoid complications we grouped all the religions by 1 of the codes and then
converted the number into a textual description. Tedious, but not too
difficult. The only problem I could see is avoiding the same words that DGP
used. We took the decision to avoid the problem entirely, which was a shame
as one of the TML Peters (Peter B IIRC) had expanded the URP quite
usefully.

I agree the codes are a great creativity jogger - in much the same way that
a UWP is. It makes you think to justify the stats, which makes for an
interesting universe.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:46:33 +0100
From: Mark Watson <markw@antares.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: UWP Cultural Extension

"Volker A. Greimann" wrote:

>
> DGP´s World Builders Handbook had three different stats:
> Progressiveness, Aggressiveness and Extensiveness. These were subdived into:
>
> P: Radical, Progressive, Conservative, Reactionary
> A: Expansionistic, Competitive, Unagressive, Passive
> E: Monilithic, Harmonious, Discordant, Fragmented
>

I liked the DGP stuff (but then I liked everything they did). Nancy Parker also
did a pretty good article called "Aspects of Culture" in Digest 16, with a few
more tables. I seem to remember there was also something in Space Gamer, but
maybe I'm wrong.

One thing not covered by any of these: I'd like to see something about status of
the arts, architecture, etc. Is there an emphasis on beauty or on functionality,
is life ordered or chaotic. To a certain extent these could be inferred from
other cultural ratings, I guess, but whatever ratings emerged should be able to
act as the DNA for the "flavour" of a system's society.

M

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:47:11 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Finding ships in the Oort Cloud (not quite as long or tedious.)

Charles writes
>The ort clould is .5 to 1 LY out from the primary and you expect to see a
>ship at that range?  Just how big is that array?  You have to have a curtain
>amount of surface area to resolve targets that size at that range.  And how
>are you going to pick it out from the million of bodies out there as well as
>scan a shell that size with that precission?  And how much does this cost?

This particular claim got a little out of hand - no-one - not me or Merrick
or Steve or anyone - was claiming that you could easily see lurking pirates
in the outer part of the oort cloud. I did make the claim that a really 
big military array could see targets in the *inner* Oort cloud - the
Oort cloud really starts at about a thousand AU out (depending on who you
talk to, of course; it's not like there's a big sign in space saying

- ------------------------------------------------------------
|  <=== OORT CLOUD NEXT 100,000 ASTRONOMICAL UNITS         |
|       KUIPER BELT AND ALL SOLAR SYSTEM DESTINATIONS ==>  |
|                                                          |
|       Please do not throw garbage or missiles from       |
|       your ship - help keep our solar system clean!      |
- ------------------------------------------------------------

A major population-10 world might have a PEMS-15.5 sensor - MCr 250,000
(about as much as a battleship), 50,000 m2 of collecting area. A battleship
might have a million megawatts of power (and most likely no IR masking,
since battleships tend to run out of surface area), for an IR signature of
1.5. The sensor array has an Impossible task to detect a target out to 
a range of (15.5+1.5=17), or about 3000 AU. It's true that there are a lot of
bodies out there - but few that are radiating at the 2000 K temperatures of
a fully-powered battleship's radiators; the battleship would stand out.
(Not easily, but MCr 250,000 buys a lot of computer power to keep track of
which source is which; "millions of bodies" will be recorded in its database.)
If the battleship was mostly powered-down, or using various baffling tricks,
(if it knows where the sensor array is), then it would be more able to hide.
There are tricks the sensor operator can use to balance things out partially.

A dinky little pirate, on the other hand, can hide pretty effectively in the
oort cloud at full power or no - my main contention is that it can't hide from
a big (high-pop world) sensor array at one light-second.

>Bruce, what is the smallest object in the rings of saturn that can be seen
>well enough to identify with the whole sky scaner you talk about?  Exactly
>how many of those size objects are there?  How long would it be before a new
>one was detected?  What is the name of this device and where on the web can
>I view the data on it?  How does it see a signal that has an amplitude less
>than the universe's noise temperture?  

Note that seeing signals less than the temperature of the background is 
easy if you just integrate long enough or have enough collecting area.

>I would truely like to know.  I know of no techology in existance or
>proposed in theory that can simultainious see both a spherical panarama and
>resolve all objects present with a viewing angle of 10^-30 seconds, a
>temperture of 200k, only emitting IR, and is a half light year away.

The half a light year thing I don't feel obliged to defend, since I never
made that claim. Nor did I claim that you look at the whole spherical
panorama simultaneously (one scans a piece at a time). Nor that we can do
all of this at current tech levels (though the extrapolations are pretty 
smooth in FFS2; the main assumption is that high-TL sensors can be built much
bigger than modern telescopes.)

At the ranges that I was talking about, like one light-second, these 
detections are much easier. A
typical scoutship is about 15th magnitude in reflected visible sunlight at
one lightsecond. (I have to double check whether that's for a black hull or
a grey hull.) There are telescope systems even now that can scan the whole
sky down to 15th magnitude every night (a piece at a time) and relatively
complete catalogs of the whole sky down to this level; making a system that
matched all detections with these catalogs is within the realm of modern
technology and moderate cost (less than a million dollars including the
telescope.) High TLs and more money will make things much more sensitive.

(By the way, if anyone cares, the closest you can see this scout with your
naked eye is about 6000 km (as a 6th magnitude star.))

The waste heat is where the scoutship's real problem comes from, of course.
A T4/TNE scout with a 100 MW power plant, generating 10 MW of waste heat
(generous assumptions) is ~7-8th magnitude in the near-IR (2-5 microns); it
stands out pretty sharply. IR sensors are going to get even better faster 
at high TLs (through things like cooling the telescope optics); the 
hypothetical scout is easy to see. A pirate running its power plant at any
level will be similarly easy to see. Running on batteries, with its hull 
cooled down, and almost no life support, it becomes more possible to hide.
I have previously said that its' on the margin; a pirate running very cold
can probably hide from a low-TL or low-pop world's sensors at the 100 diameter
limit - barely, as long as the world has no forward-deployed sensors or SDBs.
(I suppose I need a DSR rule for "extreme shutdown" - when all the power plant
is shut down, minimum life support (from suits), refrigerated hull, etc.; 
might be worth another -0.5 or so.) 

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:48:23 -0700
From: "Douglas Glatz" <douglas@teleport.COM>
Subject: Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others

>The Midshipman's Hope series by Author Fein-something. Looks to be 4 or
>5 mint volumes from the same Weber reader.


David Feintuch.  The Midshipman series is well written, and I devoured each
one.  It is also an extremely depressing series - the protagonist is
literally tortured by his experiences and David Feintuch is a good enough
author to transmit that to the reader.  By the end of Fisherman's Hope, we
have seen Nicholas Seafort succeed at every task put in front of him, but at
a tremendous personal cost.

I recommend the series, but with reservations.

E-Mail: douglas@teleport.com
http://www.teleport.com/~douglas/traveller
IMTU tc+ t4+ tg- ru(+) ge(+) 3I+@ pi+ jt au- st ls
The early bird gets the worm, BUT
   the second mouse gets the cheese!

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:56:16 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: 4IWG Signup

We're having minor technical difficulties with signups to the 4th Imperium 
Working Group.  Please use the subscription box at:

http://www.glasscity.net/users/jamstar/traveller/4i/index.html

The one on Jim's page needs tweaking a bit to work right.  Dammifiknow how the 
error slipped in, but it's signing everybody to lurk in my PBEM.  <sigh>

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:02:51 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: mass-based jump limits

Anthony Jackson wrote:
> 
> Any opinion on making the jump limit based on object mass, rather than
> diameter?  If you base it on, say, the local tidal strength (rate of change of
> gravitational force) it remains a fixed multiple of radius for objects of
> constant density, and allows resolving questions about jumping near a comet or
> other large gas cloud.

I suspect that this is exactly what does occur, since it is canon that
large masses precipitate ships out of jump space, and the 100 dia. limit
is simply a convenient rule of thumb, so I'd favor this.

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:04:43 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Sensors and waste heat

>>[telling ships from asteroids]
>Btw, I think that shape resolution is almost a non-issue 
I was thinking more of using a LIDAR - probably running in the UV - to light
the target up and get a shape from imaging and time resolution, but it's pretty
marginal for a small sensor at 1 AU, I admit. 

>there's quite a lot of 30 meter
>rocks in your average solar system
True, but a planetary station only needs to keep track of the ones
within the a few lightseconds of the mainworld - each time a new one comes
comes into that sphere it studies it intently with LIDAR, high-res imaging,
spectroscopy, etc for a couple of hours, then adds it to its database of 
targets currently close enough to be confusing...

Jumping into another system, on the other hand, telling asteroids from
defenders is much more painful.

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:03:15 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: CodeRe IMTU

Where can I find out about IMTU codes?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:01:59 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Capital ships

At 05:53 PM 10/21/98 +0100, Matt Clonfero wrote:
>pbroeder@wave.co.nz wrote:
>
>>The "Wet Navy" rules from Challenge say that a navy at TL15 will mostly
>>consist of meson gun armed submarines
>
>He he he. This takes `we hide with pride' to a whole new level. To
>invade a world with deep meson sites is bad enough; to invade one where
>they move around...

Remember that those deep meson sites need targeting data, and those pretty
much have to be on or near the surface.  I think a heavily-stealthed
submarine devoted to sensor work would be useful for a TL15 wet navy.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:19:23 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com wrote:

>but why not both on the same ship?  seems pretty silly to me.  it is not
>like they are controled by the same gunner....

You can have both on a ship under HG. You just can't have any secondary
batteries of the same type as the spinal mount.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:16:23 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

Re the Kinuir....

>It is classed a cruiser,  perhaps a light cruiser.

Post High Guard, all the references to the Kinuir class ships called them
as 'Colonial Cruisers', not 'Battle Cruisers'.

They're just an overblown gunboat, and not even optimised under HG. They're
good for showing the flag and scaring pirates with the PA barbettes. The
Sydkai (?) was a much better ship... (MTJ) but that's a different story.

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com--------
"Even in the most depressing dystopia, there's still the notion
that the future is something we build. It doesn't just happen.
You can't predict the future, but you caninvent it. Build it." -
'Fallen Angels' Niven/Pournelle/Flynn ---All Rob Prior's
MacOS software @ http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com/ 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:36:11 -0500
From: Eris reddoch <eris@gulf.net>
Subject: Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others

Glenn Myers wrote:

> Last Friday I went to my local used bookstore hoping to complete my
> Honor Harrington Series. You see, I had heard about HR on the TML and
> when I saw a complete set in near mint condition I immediately bought
> the first 4. I also picked up a couple of Weber's other works.

> They were gone...  Gasp...  sputter... I'll have to pay FULL PRICE!

Gasp! The Horror!!! ;->

Buy "On Ballik Station" and enjoy it. It's the first book and the one
you should start with. Then recheck your used bookstore..maybe some HH
books will be back in stock.

> But, In Enemy Hands was there, again in mint condition. Apparently I
> have an anal-retentive high-volume Weber reader in the vicinity. Lucky
> me!

Hey, I'm not selling my copies anytime soon. ;->

> Getting to the point now, I also saw some other titles I recognized from
> the TML. Anyone care to recommend or warn me about these?

> The Midshipman's Hope series by Author Fein-something. Looks to be 4 or
> 5 mint volumes from the same Weber reader.

I read the first one and liked it well enough...although the hero was
sort of introspective for my tastes. Sooner or later, I intend the
read the others.
 
> I was rather disappointed in the other Weber Books I bought. "Crusade"
> and "In Death Ground" are more like traveller technology (more
> conventional drives -none of the wedges from HR). But I found them much
> less interesting partly due to the unending carnage. In Death Ground is
> about 600 pages of endless battle fleets being turned into plasma. At
> the end, you've only read the first installment. I felt "Part 1" should
> have been on the outside cover. I will not be buying the conclusion.

Well, in most of the HH books there is at least one space combat scene
and one or two personal combat scenes. Less combat oriented than David
Drake's books or the Sten series, though.  I have to admit to liking
the Sten books, space opera and all. ;->

Eris

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:07:59 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Piracy and parting out

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:
> 
> Douglas Glatz
> 
> >The IMTU code for piracy is pi
> >
> >         pi++    Piracy exists and is rampant.  Anyone may commit piracy.
> >                 Ship tracking and ID are uncommon.
> >         pi+     Piracy exists.  Antipiracy is mostly political or economic,
> >                 and is inadequate. Transponders may be changed or masked, or
> >                 are not widespread or sufficient.
> >         pi      Piracy only exists in the vacuum of government or corporate
> >                 morals.
> >         pi-     Piracy is not sustainable.
> >         pi--    Piracy is impossible.
> 
> What's the code for "Piracy is implausible, but it's also a neat plot device,
> so I use it anyway"?
> 
Based on other "geek codes" I've seen, that would probably be "pi!"

>       Hans Rancke
> University of Copenhagen
>      rancke@diku.dk
> ------------
>         "This gives a possible range of 56 to 178 starships
>          total  in the three Terran starport facilities,  a
>          believable quantity for such a star system."
> 
>         "We have a maximum of 178 ships in port, and (as it
>          is a busy star system)  we will say that there are
>          70 docking berths at the Phoenix facility."
> 
>                         ---Journal of the Traveller's
>                            Aid Society # 22

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:10:00 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Piracy and Sensor Ranges

BTW, the sun would be around 10^-9 W/m^2 at 10ly--sun-like stars are
visible much farther than this, and so the power/area would drop as
a square law.

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 23:13:20 +0100
From: Mark Watson <markw@antares.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Question regarding Ley Sector

Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:

> I'm currently reworking the Luriani in light of Jeff's revised data for the Fornast
> Sector which ment that I have moved the Luriani to the Ley Sector (which
> actually makes them more interesting IMHO). My question is does anyone
> know when the Imperium moved into the Ley Sector? I know that Fornast was
> brought in by around 120. But did Artemesus immediately move on to Ley or
> did he turn his attentions elsewhere?

"A Concise History of the Imperium" in Digest 18 doesn't specifically mention when Ley
was incorporated, but does mention that Depot/Ley was attacked by a long range raid by
the Julian Protectorate in 185.

This essay seems to form the basis of the essay on the pacification campaigns in the
Milieu 0 campaign - the raid on Ley is mentioned there on p.121

My guess is that it was taken during the earlier part of the Julian Wars.

M

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:16:10 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Finding ships in the Oort Cloud (not quite as long or tedious.)

I'd like to say I'm sorry if I'm the one who got things out of
hand--it wasn't my intention. That's what I get for deciding I have
time to read the list again in the middle of a thread :-)

I became interested in the question of whether or not it would even
be possible to detect a small ship in some part of the oort cloud.
Not as a routine detection task (that fits within a turn sequence,
limiting integration time a lot), but rather in the broad sense. A
fixed in-system sensor, building up data over time. CouHaow far out
could they detect, say, a scout ship adding up their routine scans
over time (how many intergration periods to increase the sensitivity
by 0.5, 1.0, and so forth--and what is the maximum for this).

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:12:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

SD Mooney writes:
> Aerron_Winsor@insurquote-ias.com wrote:
> 
> >but why not both on the same ship?  seems pretty silly to me.  it is not
> >like they are controled by the same gunner....
> 
> You can have both on a ship under HG. You just can't have any secondary
> batteries of the same type as the spinal mount.

Nah, HG just doesn't let you have two weapon systems of the same type with
different attack ratings.  Messes up the USP.  Of course, as GT doesn't _use_ a
USP, this isn't a problem....

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #996
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 997



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others
Re: TML Subscription problems
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Re: GT transponders
Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others 
Re: Mutiny
Re: Ship swallowing pirates
Re: The Imperial Navy
Re: The imperial Fleet

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:20:44 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others

>Anyone care to recommend or warn me about these?
>L. Neil Smith
>  Nagasaki Vector
>  Henry Martyn (Space piracy, Oh No!)
>  Tom Paine Maru (More space pirates!)

Very politically-driven Libertarian fiction. Not to my taste. "Henry Martyn" 
is an extreme example of the lets-put-gunpowder-technology-in-space 
approach...

>The Midshipman's Hope series by Author Fein-something.

One thing you could consider, after reading the Forester-influenced 
Weber and Feintuch, is skipping straight to the source and reading C.S.
Forester's "Horatio Hornblower" novels, and (even better) Patrick O'Brian's
wonderful Aubrey/Maturin novels (staring with "Master and Commander".) 
There are many (myself among them) who tend to give Traveller space combat a 
Napoleonic feel...and these give a wonderful feel for the era. Forester is a
much better writer than Weber. (And O'Brian is so much better than any of them
that they don't deserve to be mentioned in the same paragraph, but he's not
to everyone's taste.)

(Nostalgia for Napoleonic naval warfare may sound odd from someone who's 
also currently debating interferometric sensor ranges and infrared background
radiation...but in some ways, long Traveller sensor ranges are more
Napoleonic than Harpoon-like; Napoleonic ships could see each other at much
greater ranges than their weapons could reach too, as opposed to modern
missile-armed ships. Where Traveller differs from the Napoleonic model is more
that the relevant regions of engagement/operation (the 100-diameter limit) 
are very small compared to the weapons and maneuver ranges of the ships 
involved. It's as if Napoleonic ships could Jump from one side of the atlantic
to the other after six hours sail away from port.) 

Bruce Macintosh
(Currently re-reading "The Surgeon's Mate", by O'Brian, as part of my
fourth re-reading of the entire 18-volume series in preparation for the 
release of the 19th book.)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 23:16:45 +0200
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <greimann@geocities.com>
Subject: Re: TML Subscription problems

>My TML behavior tends to be as follows, 
>
>Recently I tried to jump back in and did not get any response. I have
>now resubscribed and this is a test to see if I can post.

>Has anyone else ever experienced this behavior?
Same with me:
After some lurking, i tried to post, but didn´t see my msgs on the list 
anymore. I tried resubscribing, too and it seems to have worked, at least
my last post got through! Strange, though!
Volker
- ---
Volker A. Greimann, greimann@geocities.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:17:30 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

At 03:54 PM 10/21/98 +0200, you wrote:
>>I guess we have come to the point where we have to agree to disagree... I
>>don't think that expecting miracles out of advanced technology is a
>>'handwave'.
>>
>>There were many earlier this century that thought that the sound barrier
>>was a law of nature, that the turbulence of transonic speeds would only
>>increase, and that supersonic flight was therefore impossible.  We learned
>>otherwise.
>
>What then DO you consider a handwave? Traveller is (the only besides
>T2300?) SF RPG that tries to be hard SF ie the physics has to be explained,
>either with real world physics or invented physics but at least some
>physics that more or less has to be described and then we live with the
>consequences. (like those darn near-c rocks, ooops ;-)

ALL science fiction, because human beings are fallible, eventually will
create some kind of contradiction.   Reactionless thrusters that produce
more thrust than a laser of the equivalent power are violations of the laws
of thermodynamics... you can build perpetual-motion machines with them.  We
went over this on the Trinity list a while back.

In science fiction, you eventually will get some consequences you don't
like.  At that point you can either ignore them, change your assumptions,
or live with the consequences.  Changing the assumptions is only a
short-term solution because the new ones will eventually produce more
consequences you don't like.

I don't consider anything a 'handwave'.  You make a universe that is as
internally consistent as you can stand it to be.

>About your example about soundspeed I'm afraid you're a bit wrong there.
>According to aerodynamics theory at the time it would require infinite
>energy to cross the soundbarrier which was a bit perplexing to the
>engineers as they KNEW that bullets, grenades and later even V2 rockets etc
>were able to break the speed of sound. They knew their theory was wrong
>just as our scientists KNOW that something is fishy with quantum mechanics
>and/or general relativity as the two theories are incompatible.

And when we finally DO reconcile the two theories, things will be possible
that we never thought were.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:12:24 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: GT transponders

At 07:52 AM 10/21/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:30:42 -0400
>From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
>Subject: Re: Ship swallowing pirates
>>The transponders in GT also seem easily forgable....just record someone
>>else's and broadcast it back.
>That depends on whether there's some kind of time-dependent encryption on
>them.
>************
>doesn't seem to be...just a wideband radio message...

If it's just a wideband radio message, then yes, you can be anyone you want
to be, at least on your transponder.

If that's true, then why have a transponder at all?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:29:05 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others 

> Getting to the point now, I also saw some other titles I recognized from
> the TML. Anyone care to recommend or warn me about these?
> 
> L. Neil Smith
>   Nagasaki Vector
>   Henry Martyn (Space piracy, Oh No!)
>   Tom Paine Maru (More space pirates!)

Neil Smith's stuff is ok.  I wouldn't put it on a 'gotta have' list, but it 
*would* be on my 'grab it if it shows up someplace'.

What's on my 'gotta have' list is just about everything by H. Beam Piper:

      Little Fuzzy
      4-Day Planet
      Uller Uprising
      Space Viking

There's a couple others, too, but I can't remember them off the top of my head.

If I was into doing a real high tech game, I'd get some *selected* Jack L. 
Chalker:

      Dancers In the Afterglow
      The 'Lords of the Diamond' series
      The 'Flux and Anchor' Series

And of course, just about anything by Niven & Pournelle, particularly their 
Known Space stuff.

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:36:26 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Mutiny

>Then there is the question: you've offed the Captain and a senior
>officer or two, as well as any loyal crew. Where do you get
>replacements? I don't see too many crew mutinying as a unit - 
>unless we're talking Vargr of course.

There have to be safe havens somewhere or there won't be pirates.  If the
mutineers want to 'go pirate', chances are one of the crew has some
underground contacts...

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:45:37 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Ship swallowing pirates

At 03:46 PM 10/21/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Those must be REALLY big pirates...
>
>

"Fee fi foe fum!  I smell the blood of a fat trader!" (Grin)

Yep, they would have to be BIG!

OR...

How about an armed version of the Jump ship from FS.  A 1000 ton ship for a
loss of a jump one.

"Ooppss there goes another rubber tree far trader" (Grin again)

This hole line reminds me of "You only live twice"

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:45:40 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Navy

At 04:37 PM 10/21/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Charles Prevatte writes:
>>I never said the escort HAD to be small. I said I had a problem with a 5000
>>ships sector navy.  Your quote about does NOT say that it ONLY included
>>HEAVY escort.
>
>No, but it does say _some_ escorts, indicating that not all escorts are
>included and it also says that it does not include auxiliaries, support
>ships, and scouts. The most reasonable interpretation of this seems to
>me to be that small ecsorts are considered auxiliaries and only big escorts
>are considered combat vessels.
>
>>Just as that 1% could be all navy ships including auxilleries.
>>IT does not say and we do not know for sure.
>
>Charles, the next time you write something that indicates that you haven't
>read, or at least not thought about, the thread your are "contributing to",
>I'm going to ignore you. I DID INCLUDE THE AUXILIARY VESSELS IN MY ANALYSIS!
>

OK, I missed that or forgot it.  I'm human.  Are you?  If so show a little
tolerence for human error.

>>Some of the TNS articels included the names of the ships and their classes
>>that were in those fleets.  Also some mention total ship losses as well.
>>The production information for the Marches in in the AHL and Kinuneer books
>>as well as some more combat history. 
>
>How about a few quotes and an in-depth analysis of them? So far you haven't
>exactly contributed much to the discussion except questions, unsubstantiated
>guesses and "feelings".
>

Working on it.  Some from AHL and FS are in another post.

>>From those I'd say that 1000 ships including escorts sounds about right.
>
>From the level of support you provide for your arguments I'm not inclined
>to take your say-so for it.
>

The canon is contradictory in place or leaves out some specifics.  I am have
problems reconsiling them.  I'm working on it.

>>>>I think they would have to be.  More than likely the 'missing ship' are
>>>>auxilleries and 'coast guard' ships belonging to well to do planets.
>>>
>>>Those count against a different budget.
>>
>>Is there canon saying aux. ships are in a different budget. I'll give you
>> the 'coast gaurds' are.  There is canon to support that. lots of canon.
>
>Sorry. I meant the 'coast guards', not the auxiliaries.
>

Ok.  We have a consences then.
 
>>>The KINUNIR is not a real cruiser. The AZHANTI had a "print run" of, what,
>>>120? (My books are at home). Perhaps it was an atypical number. One example
>>>just proves that it is within the parameters but it dosen't say where.
>> 
>>It is classed a cruiser,  perhaps a light cruiser.
>
>No, it is _called_ a "Frontier Cruiser". A real cruiser has a spinal mount
>(Quick, somebody, I'm sure I've seen that definition somewhere, but I can't
>recall the reference. Am I wrong here?).
>

You are right.  It looks more like a special forces transport ship than any
thing else.  I would not put it in line of battle as a light escort.  It's
junk!  Looked it up last night.  Yuck!  Good adventure seed though.

>>As for the AHL I am at work but that number sounds right. If memory is
>>accuarate they were built over a long time period and all of then were
>>not in sevice at on time. There may be some extrapolatable data of ship
>>down time in there some were. I'll try to check tonight.
>
>As Traveller Gary wrote, the Atlantic Class cruiser ran to around 800.
>

AHL had a run of 92.  The Atlantic is being put into second line in the FS
book.  Not enough Gs to cut it.

>>>>Those numbers and their service dates does not make sense for a 1000 capital
>>>>ship navy per sector but does make sense for a 250-300 crusier heavy capitol
>>>>ship navy.
>>>
>>>Would you explain your reasoning here, please?
>> 
>>The AHLs production run and lossed if memory serves would have kept a
>>minimum of 30 on line at any one time.  (I've got to reread it.  I got it
>>out for this reason)  AHL was being replace while in production with heavier
>>ships with less jump capacity.  It's long legs made it a bit of an ugly
>>duckling so its' numbers could be scued.  The Kenineer could be one of the
>>special escorts you mentioned through now that I think it through.  It has
>>some ver interesting features.
>
>In other words, you just feel that they don't make sense, but you can't
>explain your reasoning?
>

Sometimes it takes time for an idea to jell.  There is something hinky with
CTs spinward marched ship numbers but I have not nailed it down yet.  There
is not enough data for a fully reasoned responce yet.  There may never be.
Look at FS.  Do those number and break down look right to you?  There are
holes in the ship classes and sizes.  That has me curious.
 
>>>ambiguous. It could be the regular fleet stationed in a subsector, but
>>>it is more likely to be the local fleet (also known as the reserve fleet,
>>>but that can be confused with the ships laid up in ordinary (if any).
>>>I prefer 'regular' and 'colonial' fleet. That is unambiguous.
>>
>>Who pays the bills for these?  Locals of IN?
>
>As a matter of policy I don't answer questions that has already been answered
>three or more times in the previous two week period. The management couldn't
>care less about the inconvenience this may cause any posters too lazy to read
>for themselves.
>

I take it your memory is perfect then?  Lighten up.

>>I never seen a TNS artical dealing with this size formation and Fighting
>>Ships production lists does not support it.  There are only a few names on
>>the list.  Not enough to cover a sector much less the Empire with these
>>groups.  What am I missing here?
>
>That the Imperium is a big place and can easily build more ship types than
>can be fitted into one little black book.
>

True, but the ratios of ships sizes do not look right.  Were are the medium
and heave escorts?
 
>>>If you want to suggest some numbers and sizes for auxiliaries, then you
>>>are more than welcome.
>> 
>>There is not nearly enough canonical data to try.
>
>Cop-out. There may not be enough to prove anything (though the information
>various kind people have provided from FSSI will give me some happy hours
>trying. Thanks, friends), but that shouldn't keep you from coming up with
>something that you think is reasonable. You certainly have firm enough
>opinions about what _isn't_ reasonable. Why don't you put a few hours work
>where your mouth is. I'm tired of getting nothing but vague "feelings" for
>arguments.
>

Check my post regarding FS.  I have not seen any hard data from you that
prove your 'feelings' either.  Canon says 1000 ships but not what ships or
in what condition of readiness, or lots of other details like ratios of
capital of escorts ect.  With so little hard data a 'feel' for the strength
of the navy and it's character is all I get.

Besides I'm not trying to fill the gaps I'm looking for canon.  I could come
up with a Order of battle and fill in the missing ships if I choose to.  It
is not that hard.  Write up a few heavy escorts and parsel them out and
you're pretty close when combine with the data in FS.  It's the missing
classes and the ship balence that disturb me.

>>The above is based of my knowledge of WW2.
>
>Try basing it on your knowledge of the Traveller ship-building and combat
>rules. That'd be a lot more germane.
> 
>>>The equipment AND the personnel to service a ship will cost roughly what it
>>>costs to maintain 25 ships of that size. Which is what the 0.1% maintenance
>>>fee goes to.
>> 
>>Not posible.
>
>It is not possible that this would not be the case. If it cost more to
>service a ship, annual maintenance would cost more.
>

The heavy equipment in the shipyard is a one time expense. Upkeep on that
will be minimal like your 1% maintainence but that was my point a 1% pay out
on the support structure would be reasonable and the support structure in
the Marches is extensive.

>>The size of the dock alone would be half again as big as the biggest ship
>>it could hold. 
>
>What dock? These are space ships, not surface ships. They don't need a dock
>to support them while they have the barnacles scraped off.
>

They do need work structures for the workers use.  The dock would look like
a large tunnel of girders for the heavy material transporters to work on.
10 tons may be 0 weight but a slow moving great mass is tough for an
unanchored man ti stop in free fall.  It would be much more efficient than
working in bare open space.  There would also be work craft and stocks of
materials stored.

>>Plus all the equipment and spare parts.  It does not make sense.
>
>But it makes sense to you that a shipyard would charge less than their own
>costs to perform an overhaul?
>

I never said that.  There is more to maintanence that just the overhaul.
Remember the increasing cost of maintainence with age thread.  There has to
be parts or systems that must be replaced.

>>Also the naval base is equivalent to a type A star port in canon.
>
>Not any canon I can recall.
>

Then how does it handle and repair a Tigeress?

>>Look at the cost in T4 to build a class A! It take 20 years of planetary
>>level income!
>
>Did you ever stop to consider that maybe it's the T4 figures that are off?
>

So not all canon is canon?  Ok, which is canon and we will limit this
discussion to that.
 
>>>Unfortunately a huge reserve fleet gives other problems for the background.
>>>Right, Gary?
>>
>>Can you explain?  I missed this discussion.
>
>A lot of it was conducted by e-mail. Basically I believe that if the Domain
>of Deneb have a huge number of ships laid up in ordinary, then Norris will
>get enough reinforcements to secure the borders against the Zhodani (who are
>not activating their reserves) in time to kick the Vargr and the Aslans out
>of the Domain far faster than canon says he did. Gary disagrees with me on a
>number of counts. IIRC 1) The reserves aren't that big. 2) They can't be
>activated that fast. 3) They will all be needed at the Zhodani border,
>because the possibility that the Zhos may invade is much more serious than
>the killing, robbing, enslavement, and land-grabbing that the Vargr and the
>Aslans are actually performing at the same time. 4) The Aslans can provide
>enough strength to outfight anything Norris can afford to send against them.
>Am I forgetting anything or misrepresenting you in any way, Gary?
>

FS says that the ordinary (mothball fleet) in the the Corrador subsecter.
Just from the AHL and Plackwell ships there are a lot of tons of capital
ships there.

>>Or just send me a copy of the last bruehaha about it.
>
>I don't keep much in the way of back files. If one of us is going to use his
>time digging it out of the archives, I guess it will have to be you.
>

I do not have the archives.  I've only been on the list 3 weeks.
  
>>>>Where are these numbers coming from?  I have not seen them and would love to
>>>>have this resource to analize.
>>>
>>>_Striker_. See above.
>> 
>>I saw a second edition striker in my local hobie shop.  Is this the one you
>>have?  I missed the first release years ago.
>
>No, I'm referring to the original version. The TNE version didn't have the
>economic information. 
>
>

Ok, I'll keep looking for the real thing.  Thanks.

Charles L.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:45:44 +0000
From: Charles Prevatte <prevattec@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: The imperial Fleet

At 05:18 PM 10/21/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Aerron Winsor
>>Unfortunately a huge reserve fleet gives other problems for the background.
>>Right, Gary?
>>*******************
>>wasn't there some refernce to ships still being pulled out of mothballs
>>*years* into major interstellar wars?   sounds like huge reserve fleets to
>>me.
>
>And to me. I used that to argue that this was indeed the case. I thought that
>Gary disagreed with me, but he has just stated that he has no problem with
>huge reserve fleets. I wonder what all the arguing was about, then...
>
>Keven R. Pittsinger writes:
>
>>Delta-V is the *rate* of change.  A 4G ship has 4 times the Delta-V of a 1G
>>ship.
>
>Thanks for the correction. I hope the argument was intelligble despite the
>error.
> 

Please see my other post.  Delta V can and does also refer to relative
velocity depending on notational style.  It is also call Vr(reference
point).  It depends on notation style.

velocity = delta v of 100 mps(SDB)

acceleration = delta v of 20mps^2(SDB)


>Charles Prevatte also writes:
>>Subject: Re: Piracy
>> 
>>>Cold gas maneuvering thrusters? What is the cost, in both money and tonnage
>>>of a cold gas thruster system?
>> 
>>One ton at most, 0 power, dirt cheep.  It's compressed gas.  You could use
>>your life suport reserves.
>
>The thing is, Charles, that the merchant will be carrying two or three snub
>pistols and they will of course make it impossible for the pirates to board
>him, since he can shoot them to pieces while they approach.
>

I do not understand this comment.  A small change in vertor at a great
distance with a high relative velocity can make a great deal of difference
in the final arrival point.  The point of cold gas is to avoid detection by
running cold.  If the target can see you use your 6Gs

>>>>As for matching velocities, you can finish that after you disable him.
>>>
>>>You miss my point. Matching velocities will take time and all the while
>>>the merchant is bulleting towards safety and one or more patrol vessels
>>>are speeding towards you. Also you are getting deeper and deeper into a
>>>gravity well. Once you do chase down the merchant and plunder him, you
>>>will have to make an 'outside 10-diameter' jump.
>> 
>>I get it very well but as you say later, give them some credit for brains.
>>They come in oposite the planet, use gravity breaking and catch their prize
>>on the outward leg.
>
>Brains?!? ROTFL!
>
>"Captain, we're are being chased by a bogey."
>"All hands! Prepare for premature jump!"
>

A stealth aproach with a ram coating.  If they are using search radar launch
HARMs cold with a delay.  Big surprise when they arrive long before you
enter there sensor range.

By the way what is ROTFL?

>>That is why they need a high delta V to start with. They come up behind the
>>target as it is accelerating out. Best posible time.
>
>Would you care to explain how they managed to time their approach to
>coincide with the victim leaving? And you still haven't told me how long
>they spend on the approach.
>

Cold gas manuver and the planets gavity well for breaking and slingshoting
just like the apolo missions.  Time would be about equal to the time it
takes to boost out from the planet to 100 dia.  You have more inial speed
but you do not accelerate.  This lets to match speeds with either a freshly
arrived ship or one on the way out.  You'll have to hard dock to the inbound
ship to change it's vecter back out system.  The outbound ship you just
coast along with.

>>>Landing point? Surely the actual landing spot on the planet would not mean
>>>more than a few minutes' difference in arrival time. Especially since the
>>>ship will arrive with a plus or minus of up to a day.
>> 
>>Depends on planetary day lenght and relative entry point.
>
>I don't understand your reasoning at all. My interplanetary navigation skills
>are weak, but I believe that getting from any spot on the 100 diameter limit
>to any spot on the planet will take almost the same time. Can anyone who
>actually know anything about this help us out?
>

If the planet rotation time is greater than your transit time and the planet
is large it could add some orbit time it you are landing on the planet.  It
could make an hour or two at most diference.  Not much I'll admit.  A good
pilot could cut this to as little as minutes with the proper aproach once
the communications officer finds out where you are suppose to land.  If is
an X port though you could be in orbit a while looking for a spot but that
would be a rare occurence.

>>>>IF the pirate knew these thanks to spies or surveilance he could be johnie
>>>>on the spot.
>>>
>>>Since this is determined when the astrogator makes his astrogation plot, the
>>>pirate would have no way of getting advanced notice of it. Try to allow the
>>>victims a few brain cells to knock together, Charles.
>> 
>>Plotted courses, as in the traveller adventure.  Remember the ship was 'due
>>in'.
>
>This is the last time I'm going to mention the variation in jump time. You
>can maintain a scedule for outbound ships at the expense of losing about a
>day per jump (which comes to several jumps per year, which is why I don't
>think it would be used), but there's no way you can time an arrival closer
>than plus/minus a day or so.
>

Wait a minute here.  A planet moves a long distance in a day.  Almost
100dias for earth.  A similar planet with a shorter year would be imposible
to hit with that kind of time slop facter with and regularity.

Jump time = 168 hours +- 10%

Canon says the jump is 'straght line travel' that can not intersect the 100
dia limit of any object over 1 mile.

Problem people.  What if the planet you want to go to is on the oposite side
on it's sun from you when you want to jump?  Do you wait half of that
planet's year?

I think we just found our nitch for the pirates.  Planetary rotation
relative to each other will make it necessary to stand out 100 steller
diameters to reach some worlds during curtain windows.  Travel times and
entry points will vary greatly with relative position of the primary worlds.

Anybody see a hole in this?  I know the the Milky way is a disk and that
most systems are in the plane of the disk so the behind the star or the
planet to fast to hit accuartely should exist from some points to others.

>>>First of all, the 1000 ships per sector is for the regular fleet only. It
>>>dosen't include subsector fleets (which recieves the same amount of funds
>>>as the regular fleet, though they spend them differently) and it dosen't
>>>include planetary navies. Most especially it does not not include
>>>auxiliaries. Yet most auxiliaries would be quite capable of giving a
>>>pirate a hard time.
>> 
>>Last time I looked the subsector fleet were just accounting units and part
>>od the IN.
>
>You actually looked? Well, last time _I_ looked (In _Striker_) the colonial
>fleets recieved half the Imperial military budget.
>

I don't think that the colonial and subsecter fleets are the same thing.
The subsecter fleets are the parts of the sector fleet assigned to a
particular subsecter.  I think the colonial fleets are a entirely different
set of ships.  This could be a matter of semantics though.  I think we are
both saying the same thing.  That there is the IN and a local forces both
present in the Marches Secter.

We could be tangle up in the word here.

>>>No I don't. I have accounted for planetary armies, because I have assigned
>>>70% of the canonical 3% to planetary forces (No, I tell a small lie: I have
>> 
>>but does canon say thats the break down?
>
>Yes.
>

In something other than Striker?  I think our problem may be the the
economic system in striker maybe oversimplified to speed play.  I don't have
striker but I am looking for it so I can say for sure.  I'm just fishing for
an answer.
 
>>>>These are all assumtions not canon.
>>>
>>>Most of it is canon.
>> 
>>Sorry I have not seen that.  What book is it in and I look it up?  If you
>>are right then we can drop this line of reasoning.
>
>I'm sorry, that information has been posted too often during the last 14 days.
>The Bandwidth Police will get me if I answer it again.
>

I'm looking for a sourse other than striker to conferm the numbers.
 
>>>>The only canon we have is cross version. Is there enough canon in any one
>>>>version of the TU to figure the budget for that version?
>>>
>>>Yes. CT. Though I don't quite agree with your point, which seems to be that
>>>the four Traveller versions constitute four distinct canons. My approach is
>>>to accept anything official as canon provided it 1) makes sense and 2) does
>>>not contradict any other canon. 
>> 
>> What is true in CT is not always true TNE.  You have to watch for the
>> changes.  The transponders are a good example.
>
>"My approach is to accept anything official as canon provided it 1) makes
>sense and 2) does not contradict any other canon. 
>

Reasonable.

>>>You're referring to PE, aren't you? I must confess that I simply hhaven't
>>>had the energy to try to integrate PE economics with earlier versions. 
>> 
>>It's pretty good but it will play hell with your economic of the military.
>>Spend to much and you get a recession.  Oh, and all military spending come
>>out of the same pot not just the navy.
>
>OTOH, I did read it. IIRC it gives military budgets far higher than 3%.
>

True, but there are other trade offs for the extra credits. I have not had a
group to test the system in play yet, so I don't know for sure how it will
play or it I'll be able to use it as an economic background system in my TU.
 
>>>>Maybe they are spending the money in 'infrastructure'.
>>>
>>>They are. Annual maintenance is 0.1% of ship's cost (1% of annual budget).
>>>Salaries run to about 0.25% (2.5% of annual budget). 2.5% goes to building
>>>replacements (that's an assumption on my part based on a 40 year life
>>>cyclus for the ships. Since there is canonical evidence of ships lasting
>>>for over a century that may be quite a bit too high). I presume the remaining
>>>71.5% of the budget goes to "infrastructure".
>> 
>>Maintainence would go up with ship and base age.
>
>The highest mountain in Scotland is Ben Nevis.
>

I do not understand this comment.
 
>>Then how much time do the crew get for leave?  Two weeks a year?  Talk about
>>moral problems.
>
>Me, I'd talk about morale problems instead. There are ways to deal with those
>pronlems. Blue and Gold crews, perhaps? Anyway, if you want to postulate that
>it takes several ships to keep one ship permanently on station, I'm
>perfectly agreeable.
>

I'm not so sure at this assumtion now.  FS seems to say the most of the
Battle ships stay near there bases most of the time.  If that were true and
true for other classes of military ships then leave would not be much of a
problem and pirates would have room to work.  It would also cut down of IN
overhead.  A parked ship cost less to run than a active one.
 
>>Also those ships can't do jack while IN jump. Have to figure that as part of
>>the down time.
>
>For those ships that are stationed away from their base, yes indeed.
>

Good point.  Could be that is one reason for them staying put in strategic
places.
 
>>>I hope there is, but there don't _have_ to be. Sometimes a background just
>>>contains a contradiction. I have canonical statements that the _Maghiz_
>>>took place in -927, -925, AND -924. There is no simple answer to explain
>>>that. Two of them are just plain wrong. But go ahead. I wish you luck.
>> 
>>Also a good point but I'll keep hoping for a solution.  Maybe Marc will
>>'speak from on high' and give us the word on this and the transponders and
>>the sensors and ....
>
>Marc certainly has the authority to decide once and for all when the _Maghiz_
>really took place. I'd prefer if he decided on -924 (my favorite), but I'd
>accept any of the three. But if he were to tell me that it took place on all
>three dates, I wouldn't accept it, even from him.
>

Good for you!  A logical ruling from on high with some minimal editing of
canon to straighten it out would help.
 
>>>That was addressed last time around (or was it the round before that?). 
>>>Annual maintenance takes two weeks, not four. And most systems have a
>>>Class A or B starport on a high-population world within one or two jumps.
>> 
>>Would the navy let civilians do the maintainence on a Battle ship
>
>Propably yes, if they have the proper security clearances, but who says that
>civilians are involved at all?
>

Good point.  They could secure they part of the port they needed but this
would only be true if there was a naval base with the star port.  I'm sure
that military ships would need a thing or two not in civilian stocks.

Charles L.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #997
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 998



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others 
Re: Finding ships in the Oort Cloud (not quite as long or tedious.)
Re: Travellerish Fiction - Webber
Re: Economics of piracy
Re: Re Piracy
Re: The Imperial Fleet
Re: The Imperial Navy
Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others
Re: Sensors and waste heat
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others
Re: Finding ships in the Oort Cloud (not quite as long or tedious.)
Re: Traveller Software Survey for the FAQ
Re: Squadron Sizes of the IN
Re: Economics of piracy
Re: mass-based jump limits
Re: CodeRe IMTU
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Sensors and waste heat
Re: Re Piracy
Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was:Piracy))
Re: Mutiny
Re: Star Gypsies
New Deck plans

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:42:20 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@glasscity.net>
Subject: Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others 

> Well, in most of the HH books there is at least one space combat scene
> and one or two personal combat scenes. Less combat oriented than David
> Drake's books or the Sten series, though.  I have to admit to liking
> the Sten books, space opera and all. ;->

The 'Sten' series was great, except where it started turning weird toward the 
end when the new Emperor started flipping out.

Keven

tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:47:11 -0700
From: bmac@astro.ucla.edu (Bruce Alan Macintosh)
Subject: Re: Finding ships in the Oort Cloud (not quite as long or tedious.)

>I became interested in the question of whether or not it would even
>be possible to detect a small ship in some part of the oort cloud.

Increasing sensitivity by 0.5 takes about a day worth of scanning and is probably
the limit for a target that can accelerate. You can also use single-arc
scanning to get a +0.5, and put your sensor out in the outer part of the
solar system to get it away from zodiacal dust (although then you need 
two sensors...) All of this gives a big top-of-the-line military array 
about a 17.5 sensitivity. That lets it see the prototypical scout target
(signature 0) out to a range of 17.5, or 10,000 AU (well into the Oort cloud). 
That's taking two weeks to scan the whole sky (twelve arcs at one day per 
arc roughly), and an Impossible task for each detection (maybe a 10% chance of
success for a really good operator), so it would probably take a month or 
two to really find the scout, at a cost of MCr 500,000 for the system.
If the scout was well-masked and running at low power, you could only see it 
out to 100 AU or so. (Add a difficulty level for "surprise" and the 
detection range comes in by a factor of 3...)

Bruce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:48:27 -0700
From: "Leo Hale" <lhale@panlabs.com>
Subject: Re: Travellerish Fiction - Webber

     Glenn, you might try another series of Webbers' called the Armageddon
Inheritance.  Great story telling.  Some very cool alternate answers to
some of the big questions regarding human civilisation.

Leo



- ------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:50:06 -0400
From: Glenn Myers <glenn.myers@mailhub.ansys.com>
Subject: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others

Hi all,

Last Friday I went to my local used bookstore hoping to complete my
Honor Harrington Series. You see, I had heard about HR on the TML and
when I saw a complete set in near mint condition I immediately bought
the first 4. I also picked up a couple of Weber's other works.

They were gone...  Gasp...  sputter... I'll have to pay FULL PRICE!

But, In Enemy Hands was there, again in mint condition. Apparently I
have an anal-retentive high-volume Weber reader in the vicinity. Lucky
me!

Getting to the point now, I also saw some other titles I recognized from
the TML. Anyone care to recommend or warn me about these?

L. Neil Smith
  Nagasaki Vector
  Henry Martyn (Space piracy, Oh No!)
  Tom Paine Maru (More space pirates!)

The Midshipman's Hope series by Author Fein-something. Looks to be 4 or
5 mint volumes from the same Weber reader.

I have generally had good fortune following the advice of this list.
Exception - Ian Banks' Culture series shipped from England did not quite
meet expectations.

I was rather disappointed in the other Weber Books I bought. "Crusade"
and "In Death Ground" are more like traveller technology (more
conventional drives -none of the wedges from HR). But I found them much
less interesting partly due to the unending carnage. In Death Ground is
about 600 pages of endless battle fleets being turned into plasma. At
the end, you've only read the first installment. I felt "Part 1" should
have been on the outside cover. I will not be buying the conclusion.

Bye All,

Glenn

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:02:00 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Economics of piracy

Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> wrote

> >Figure as an estimated average, Cr25000 per 100tns of ship. Note that 
> >my only real source for this is the Cr100,000 the _March Harrier_ had 
> >on hand at the start of _The Traveller Adventure_, it may be much higher.

> FYI the type A2 far trader _Empress Nicholle_ from TWILIGHT'S PEAK had
> Cr40,000 when the adventure started.

While the information from the adventures may be the only canonical data
we have I would be somewhat leary of considering either the March
Harrier or the Empress Nicholle as typical.  After all if both ships
were not having financial problems would they really have gotten
involved in the adventures they did....

The needs of the adventures required that the players be relatively
poor.  In the case of the Empress Nicole from Twilights Peak the poverty
of the ship was empthasized by their need for Cr 3,500,000,000 to repair
their jump drives.  I note also that none of pregenerated charecters
for  either adventure posessed any levels of skill in either Broker or
Trader, and this may explain why the ships were relatively short of
funds.

[Adventure 3 Twilights Peak was published in 1980 before Broker & Trader
skills were introduced in 1981's Special Supplement 1 Merchant Prince,
which appeared in JTAS #12 but the Traveller Adventure  was published in
1983 & could have used the Breoker & Trader skills if desired.  It is
possible that these skills were deliberately left off the pregenerated
charecters so that making money would actually be a challenge & not a
statistical likelyhood.]

When you look at the ammount you can make in speculative trade in either
ship if you have a Broker 2 (or better) aboard you may have a better
idea of what is typical.  Speculative trade (using the canonical trade
system) can produce incomes of several _thousand_ percent per year (in a
jump 2 or better ship so you have more choice of which planet to sell
on) if done correctly.  This suggests that even if starting cash is only
a few thousand credits it will quickly become much more.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:08:32 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: Re Piracy

>{now responding to no one in particular)
>
>One other thought about piracy and the 3i: One bit I have noticed is that
>Hans and Ian both seem to think of the Imperial Government as some form of
>federal government, which includes internal policing as part of it's
>duties. I don't; ...

[major snip]

Hmm, and here I was thinking that the discussion was over the plausibilty
of career piracy in the "official" Traveller 3rd Imperium. :-)

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:08:29 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: The Imperial Fleet

>>>Who pays the bills for these?  Locals of IN?
>>
>>the Imperium pays for the regular and reserve (colonial) fleets. system
>>squadrons are payed for by the locals.
>
>_FSSI_ impplies in one place the Colonial Squadrons are payed for by the
>Imperium, and just based at worlds that can support them, and in another
>place says that worlds that can afford tham can raise jump squadrons that
>then count as part of the subsector's Colonial Fleet.


I took the reference of local systems "raising" colonial squadrons to mean
that the local world was buying obsolecent ships from the Imperial Navy. It
mentions somewhere in there that the world just needs the resources to
support the ships, not actually build them.

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:08:31 -0500
From: yikes@evansville.net (Joseph R. Dietrich)
Subject: Re: The Imperial Navy

>>It seems your 'examples' are atypical and on the high end of the scale.
>
>Could be. But to stick to my abovementioned principle, I'd prefer an
>explanation that validated both sets of information. Maybe the typical
>BatRon for the Rebellion era is just smaller than the typical BatRon from
>the previous era, the one that _Fighting Ships_ detail? 4 BBs, you say? That
>could be an 8 BB squadron that had been split in two or reduced by combat
>losses. What is the in-game date of _FSSI_? Long enough into the Rebellion
>for combat losses to have affected the composition of the typical squadron?


From the way it is written, the fleet diagrams in FSSI are of the
pre-Rebellion navy. The text describes the organization of the 3I Imperial
navy then goes on to describe the effects the Rebellion has had on the
organization.

BTW, several blocks of text and a couple of diagrams in FSSI are simply
reprints of material that appeared in the _Rebellion Sourcebook_, so you
may not be missing as much as you think, Hans.

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:23:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brannon Boren <brannonb@animal.blarg.net>
Subject: Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others

> Buy "On Ballik Station" and enjoy it. It's the first book and the one
> you should start with. Then recheck your used bookstore..maybe some HH
> books will be back in stock.

I just finished "On Bassilisk Station" (on the TML's advice) -- I am
defintely able to see why Traveller fans would like it. I'm tempted to
adopt Weber's universe lock-stock-and-barrel!

Has anyone done a write-up for such a campaign, or a good synopsis of all
the governments/powers in the HH universe?

Ben

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:24:48 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

johannes wrote:

> Did you ever wonder what someone would think who was monitoring this list
> and had no idea what Traveller or RPGs were?  And suppose Nuclear Dampers
> (for example) really DID exist, but as a deep dark secret weapon?  We'd
> probably have our own desk at the NSA by now!

Who says we Don't?

- --
Ave et vale.
Evyn,
Warleader of the Clan MacDude
Solus Stellamilitia Ludus, 1998 Œ

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:27:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others

Brannon Boren writes:
 
> I just finished "On Bassilisk Station" (on the TML's advice) -- I am
> defintely able to see why Traveller fans would like it. I'm tempted to
> adopt Weber's universe lock-stock-and-barrel!
> 
> Has anyone done a write-up for such a campaign, or a good synopsis of all
> the governments/powers in the HH universe?

Some of weber's later books are fairly verbose about the universe (sort of big
appendices).  Of course, his tech doesn't make much sense, and he's fond of
inventing 'new technology of the week' in books, so don't expect too much
consistency.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:58:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Sensors and waste heat

Bruce Alan Macintosh writes:
> I was thinking more of using a LIDAR - probably running in the UV - to
> light the target up and get a shape from imaging and time resolution, but
> it's pretty marginal for a small sensor at 1 AU, I admit. 

Heh.  There's a feature of disguising yourself as an asteroid I hadn't
considered, nor would most pirates, though I'm sure a good tech would -- real
asteroids tend to spin.  Code your military black hull to gradually vary its
brightness, or possibly to shift a bright spot around the hull ;)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:15:48 -0500
From: eldwyn@juno.com
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

On Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:13:03 EDT Sethkimmel@aol.com writes:
>In a message dated 10/19/98 11:00:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU writes:
>
><< My brother at Fort Bragg tells me of a piece of gear the US Army is
> doing some test deployments of now, it's called Shortstop.
> 
>No offense, but I wish this stuff woundn't be posted on line. Why let 
>the bad
>guys know what we're working on....
>
As a duly appointed representative of Bad Guys Who Love Traveller
(BGWLT), I promise not to disclose any secrets unveiled on the TML, as
long as the disclosed secrets are declared as Top Secret or better....

MarioC
eldwyn@juno.com

- --Imagine Whirled Peas...

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:23:18 -0700
From: Sanders <timmon@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: Travellerish Fiction - Weber and others

At 04:27 PM 10/21/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Brannon Boren writes:
> 
>> I just finished "On Bassilisk Station" (on the TML's advice) -- I am
>> defintely able to see why Traveller fans would like it. I'm tempted to
>> adopt Weber's universe lock-stock-and-barrel!
>> 
>> Has anyone done a write-up for such a campaign, or a good synopsis of all
>> the governments/powers in the HH universe?
>
>Some of weber's later books are fairly verbose about the universe (sort of
big
>appendices).  Of course, his tech doesn't make much sense, and he's fond of
>inventing 'new technology of the week' in books, so don't expect too much
>consistency.

One of the fan-pages on the web has massive 'library' type data for Honor's
universe - I don't recall the http for the specific site, but the area on
the pages themselves were called the "Honorpedia" (or something quite
similar). 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:25:27 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Finding ships in the Oort Cloud (not quite as long or tedious.)

Bruce's calculations on the month required to find a scout in the
oort cloud snipped...


Cool. The problem is time frame. It means that a fleet that jumps in
will likely come and go (and have arrived to attack :-) in about
half the typical detection time.

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:36:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roberto Camino <swordworlder@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller Software Survey for the FAQ

Rank 1
Traveller Character Generator 1.4
Win32
Generates many different races and professions
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/8037/util.html (select from
a list of items)
freeware


_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:35:25 +0100
From: "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Squadron Sizes of the IN

Following Dusty's posting I thought  I  post  my  own  take.  For
sources I use primarily the  "Fifth Frontier War"  boardgame  and
the Batron description in the  "Spinward Marches Campaign".  This
defines the Imperial assets available for the war (only a portion
of the total Imperial assets):



Analysing the counters (assuming I  haven't  lost  any  over  the
years) ...

Batrons
    Number: 32 of 11 different types
    Defense Factors: 147 (average 4.6 per squadron)

Crurons
    Number: 26 of 7 different types
    Defense Factors: 163 (average 6.3 per squadron)

Assaultrons
    Number: 8 of all same type
    Defense Factors: 48 (average 6 per squadron)

Tankrons
    Number: 2 of all same type
    Defense Factors: 8 (average 4 per squadron)

Scoutrons
    Number: 8 of 4 different types
    Defense Factors: 38 (average 4.8 per squadron)

Colonial Batrons
    Number: 10 of 4 different types
    Defense Factors: 67 (average 6.7 per squadron)

Colonial Crurons
    Number: 19 of 9 different types
    Defense Factors: 107 (average 5.6 per squadron)

Colonial Assaultrons
    Number: 1
    Defense Factors: 4 (average 4 per squadron)



From this I make one deduction - that the Imperial fleet is  very
un-homogeneous (in contradiction to FSSI), and one  assumption  -
that there is one capital  class  ship  per  defense  factor.  In
other words there are (within the Spinward Marches at that  time)
eleven different classes of Imperial battleship/battlerider (plus
another four classes used by  the  Imperium's  colonial  forces).
There are also seven different classes of Imperial cruiser  (plus
another nine classes used by the Imperium's colonial forces).  It
would seem that the smaller the ship the more standardised it  is
likely to be (for Imperial forces), but colonial forces use  more
Crurons.

Additionally, there are no  destroyer  squadrons.  So  they  (and
other escort vessels) are subsumed into the squadron types listed
above.  Thus each defense factor represents a capital class  ship
and its escort wing.  (Of course, a destroyer squadron  could  be
labeled a "Scoutron", which would explain what a Scoutron capital
class ship is.)  In a Battlerider squadron  each  battlerider  is
counted but the battletender is only  counted  if  it  is  combat
capable (most are not, but the Lurenti class for example is).

In war time the activities of a number of Batrons and Crurons are
coordinated by a Fleet Admiral, and  as  such  are  considered  a
Fleet.  Assaultrons  and  Tankrons  may  be  added  depending  on
mission profile.  So called Scoutrons are  primarily  for  inter-
fleet use.  (For  example,  IMTU  the  Imperial  214th  Fleet  at
Glisten is composed of 2  Batrons,  3  Crurons,  and  a  Colonial
Cruron.)

In peace time Battleship squadrons are broken up into  individual
Dreadnaughts plus support ships and escorts (like a  current  day
US carrier group) and are deployed to  potential  trouble  spots.
Battlerider squadrons tend to  stay  in  Depots  or  are  out  on
training missions.  Cruiser squadrons are broken up into pairs of
Cruisers plus  support  ships  and  escorts  ...  called  CruDivs
(Cruiser Division), that patrol  Imperial  space.  Scoutrons  are
disolved and deployed  as  individual  vessels.  Assaultrons  and
Tankrons stay  in  Depots  and  at  strategic  points  throughout
Imperial space.

The  capital  class  ships  in  Imperial  regular  squadrons  are
primarily  TL15,  with  some  TL14  ships  awaiting   retirement.
(Retirement means either mothballing or transfer to the  colonial
forces.)  The capital class ships in Imperial colonial  squadrons
are either transfered ex-regular ships or localy  produced  ships
at inferior TL (13 or 14).

To summarise:  The Imperial Navy term "squadron"  (when  used  as
Batron, Cruron, etc) does not just mean  a  number  of  identical
ships, it refers to a mini fleet.  During the  5FW  the  Imperium
Navy had 404  regular  capital  class  ships  plus  178  colonial
capital class ships in the theater of operations  (plus  all  the
lesser ships).  582 capital class ships would be  almost  60%  of
the quoted 1000 ships ... a far higher percentage  than  I  would
have expected.  IMTU the total size of the Imperial fleet is  not
really relevant (just the size in theater) but I would  place  it
between 2000 and 3000.



Regards PLST
"Rome wasn't burned in a day"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:53:26 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Economics of piracy

	I have a question that I have not yet seen addressed here...there are all
kinds of posts being made talking about how much pirates could possibly make,
and at least as many saying that they can't make that kind of money.

	Just what kind of time frame are we using to make those claims?  Sure, if you
want to show a profit in a month or so, piracy is not the way to do it.
Perhaps even over a year, you won't show any.  But couldn't these types of
things be a long-term investment for a really commited
individual/organization?

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:52:08 +0100
From: "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: mass-based jump limits

Anthony Jackson wrote:
> Any opinion on making the jump limit based on object mass, rather
> than diameter?

Been there, done that.  :-) I proposed just this idea  last  week
under  the  heading  "Jumpimg from zero planetary diameters".  If
you missed it check out

http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/trisen/personal/traveller/jump.html

But be warned, stars have big jump boundaries and this may  alter
your Traveller campaign.



Regards PLST
"Rome wasn't burned in a day"

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:54:28 +0100
From: "Peter L.S. Trevor" <ptrevor.trisen@zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: CodeRe IMTU

Fred and Evelyn Wolke wrote:
> Where can I find out about IMTU codes?


http://www.metronet.com/~washi/Tas/Lists/IMTU.html



Regards PLST
"Rome wasn't burned in a day"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:45:09 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

In mail you write:

> At 11:24 20/10/98 -0700, Steven Hudso wrote:
>
>>  Now, can they make them detonate in the launch tubes? :>
>
> Sorry, but no. A shell doesn't arm itself until it's a good way out of the
> barrel, and modern fuses are just about impossible to set off early.
> However a good close explosion can set off the shell itself - this is how
> ammo dumps go up if they are pooorly laid out.

My *evil* mind just came up with a lovely "technobabble" weapon.  It
fires a beam tuned to the molecular resonant frequency of the explosive
used in enemy shells. 

Which means that for much less power than a typical laser/maser
requires, you'd have something that'd set off unshielded explosives. 

Of course, the casings of most shells ought to be enough shielding. But
what happens when you take off the end cap to fuze the shell? <eg>

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:54:13 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Sensors and waste heat

In mail you write:

>> What would you use for mirrors and lenses for a Xray laser anyway?
>> Magnetic fields might work for lenses but what could you make a 100%
>> mirror for xrays out of?

>> Magnetic fields don't bend light.

I've gotten conflicting answers regarding this. I've heard that
*strong* magnetic fields will bend light that is polarized in the right
direction. 

> The question of mirrors for x-rays is more interesting; presumably the
> fact that x-ray lasers don't come into use until TL-13 allows a certain 
> amount of time to solve the problem.

We have x-ray mirrors *now*. The trick is that they only work at
shallow angles of incidence. At those angles the layers of atoms in the
mirrors are effectively solid, even at x-ray wavelengths.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:10:43 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Re Piracy

In a message dated 10/21/98 14:08:30 PM Pacific Daylight Time, aramis@gci.net
writes:

<< Also, while I runt (basically) MT, I use the VEHICULAR COMBAT rules, not
 the space combat rules (which are the same as HG for combat resolution...
 Ick!). This means ranges tend to be fairly close for space combat, and
 ability to hit is determined by TL. I use the folowing task for starhip
 fire:
  >>

Now just how do you apply damage...esp. for Spinal weapons/nuclear weapons?
And what effect do screens have?  I would really like to know...

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:15:06 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: detecting starships (was re: mperial economics (Was:Piracy))

In a message dated 10/21/98 14:46:30 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu writes:

<< Charles Prevatte wrote:
  
 > There are solid state devices the conver heat to electricity without
 > themselves generating more heat than they use.  Thay is one way to do it.
 > There are more.  All you need to do is put the heat to work and that work
 > will use up the heat.
  >>

I am sorry...I have held my tongue as long as I can.  I have to wonder:  Do I
live on the same world as you do???  This is clearly, patently, blatently in
error.

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:23:53 EDT
From: DustyLV769@aol.com
Subject: Re: Mutiny

In a message dated 10/21/98 15:48:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
thewolkes@earthlink.net writes:

<< >Then there is the question: you've offed the Captain and a senior
 >officer or two, as well as any loyal crew. Where do you get
 >replacements? I don't see too many crew mutinying as a unit - 
 >unless we're talking Vargr of course.
  >>

Has anyone read the F.M Busby series Star Rebel?  I believe there are 2 Bran
Tregare novels, 3 Rissa Kerguelin books and one w/ both (Alien Debt).  This
series postulates a tyrannical corporation on Earth who holds the monopoly on
interstellar (STL in this universe, but making use of the time-dialation
effects).  The corporation uses these ships to maintain contact w/ there
colonies, and many ships have mutinied against the company (crew members,
usually the 1st Officer and others, replacing the captains)  

Granted this is hardly Traveller, but the idea could work very well under
certain circumstances w/in a Trav campaign.

DustyLV769@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:42:09 -0400
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Star Gypsies

>Anyone want to try raising your kids on a Free Trader? 

Been there, done that, lost the sleep :-)

Don't try this if your GM has small children unless you (a) have a lot of
patience or (b) are willing to help with the babysitting and diaper
changing.  

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:28:57 -0400
From: "Michael D. Peters" <Letterworks@citnet.com>
Subject: New Deck plans

THe PDF file for the Twain Class 200 sdt Free Trader has been added to the
Jump Point web page. That makes two PDF files, both Free Traders. Take a
look and grab the file(s) and let me know what you think.

Jump Point can be found at http://users.citnet.com/letterworks

Mike Peters, Letterworks@CITnet.com
"For my part, I travel not to go anywhere, but to go. I travel for travel's
sake. The great affair is to move."
Robert Louis Stevenson

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #998
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, October 21 1998     Volume 1998 : Number 999



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

re: Finding Ships in the Oort Cloud
Meson Subs (was re: Capitol Ships)
Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)
Re: Judge's Guild Products
Re: Judge's Guild Products
Re: Judges Guild
Re: Sensors and waste heat
arty
Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*
Deck plans
Re: CodeRe IMTU
Re: Judges Guild
Re: Judge's Guild Products
Re: Meson Subs (was re: Capitol Ships)
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Striker
Re: TML Subscription problems
Re: Current Tech: Shortstop
Re: Star Gypsies
Re: Piracy
Re: The Imperial Navy
Re: Star-Gypsies (long)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:42:15 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Finding Ships in the Oort Cloud

Bruce Allan MacIntosh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

(By the way, if anyone cares, the closest you can see this scout with your
naked eye is about 6000 km (as a 6th magnitude star.))


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Um, actually, this to me was the single most useful bit from the whole
sensors debate. <G>

Thanks Bruce!

Walt

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:46:09 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: Meson Subs (was re: Capitol Ships)

Fred and Evelyn Wolke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>He he he. This takes `we hide with pride' to a whole new level. To
>invade a world with deep meson sites is bad enough; to invade one where
>they move around...

Remember that those deep meson sites need targeting data, and those pretty
much have to be on or near the surface.  I think a heavily-stealthed
submarine devoted to sensor work would be useful for a TL15 wet navy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm thinking of lots of cheapie sensor bouys. They could even be towed
by the sub itself, on a kilometer long cable with fiberoptics. Or just
use meson communicators to feed targetting data to the sub, if
you have commo tech to handle that.

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:08:39 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: sensors (was the interminable piracy debate; pretty long)

In mail you write:

>>> Cold gas thruster could be used.
>>
>>Remember that if they give thrust, they *aren't* all that "cold". I've
>>flown "cold gas" model rockets. The exhaust is a around 270 K (0 C).
>>Which is still rather visible in the IR in open space.
>
> Use H2 at 2k and throw 100 kilos out at 100 mps if you think the sesor aray
> is that good but it can not be do to quantum limits.  Gasious H2 at near
> it's liqification point would be fine.

H2 freezes at *20* K. And you are missing the primary point. With a gas
thruster, the exhaust velocity is determined by the
temperature/pressure of the gas. To get hydrogen to exit a thruster at
100 m/s, it's going to have to be *very* warm. I don't have the
formulas handy, but I'm willing to bet that it'd be *above* 200k.
Likely above 300 K.

>>And the colder the exhaust, the *less* thrust it'll give. Meaning that
>
> Depends on launch speed to.

No. The exhaust velocity depends *entirely* on the nozzle design and
the temp/pressure upstream of the nozzle.

To put it a different way....

For an *ideal* nozzle the exhaust velocity is equal to the average
velocity of the molecules in the exhaust. That is determined by the
temp in the reaction (or expansion for a cold gas rocket) chamber. 
For a cold gas rocket, you have the pressure in the chamber determined
*solely* by the temperature of the liquid/gas.

So for a given temp of input gas (or liquid) the exhaust velocity is
*fixed*. 

You could try pressurizing the feed to the expansion chamber, or
heating it, but either way, the higher exhaust velocity means that the
exhaust will be *hotter*. And thus more visible.

>>I just had this vision of a ship trying to be stealthy and having an
>>assistant astrogator standing in an airlock pointing a machinegun at
>>the right star and fire off a few rounds.... It *would* move the ship,
>>though slowly.
>>
>>"Charly, that was good. Give me about half as much this time and we'll
>>be right on!"
>>
>>"Ok, last was a 20 round bust, I'll fire 10 this time..."
>>
>
> HA!  I like it!  Not practical but ver funny!

Actually, it *is* practical for smaller craft. For larger craft, you
use more ammon or heavier weapons.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:27:01 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Judge's Guild Products

In mail you write:

>> So the *best* case has the Judges Guild stuff still being copyrighted
>> until (1975+75 = 2050). 
>> 
>> And even if the company that had the copyright went out of business
>> *someone* "inherited" the copyright as part of the company's assetts. 
>> 
>> So there's no point in hoping that copyright has expired on *anything*
>> that was published for RPGs. You'll have to get permission.
>
> Or else we hold our breath til 2065 or so.  <grin>

Longer if the *author* kept the copyright...

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:27:46 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Judge's Guild Products

In mail you write:

> I should have said,
> "Anyone know who own's the Judge's Guild copyrights?"
> When businesses fold, someone gets them.

Last I heard, one of the "partners" had the rights. And a big dispute
with the IRS that keeps him from selling anything.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:35:10 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Judges Guild

In mail you write:

> The City-State of the Invinicble Overlord went to Mayfair Games and then
> from there to TSR. I think Mayfair bought all the Judges Guild copyrights.
> TSR then sued and settled with Mayfair and all the judges guild AD&D
> copyrights went to TSR.

On what *possible* grounds could TSR have sued? 
 
- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:00:21 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Sensors and waste heat

In mail you write:

> The pirate uses a double hull with a hard vacume between and solid state
> thermal electric converters on the inner hull to convert the waste heat back
> to electrical power and a 100% refecter shield one inch above that.  All
> tech available today.

Sorry, but thermoelectric converters convert heat *differences* into
power. That is, you have a heat source and a heat *sink*. And *by
definition* "waste heat" is heat at the temperature of your *sink*.

The 3K background is the *eventual* sink. But as far as the *ship* is
concerned, the "sink" is the temperature of the radiating surfaces on
the hull. 

And you have to realize that temperature is *directly* related to
"watts radiated per square meter". The higher the W/m^2 the higher the
temp. 

Your thermoelectric converters would merely act as extra insulation,
which, by *slowing* the rate at which heat moves from inside the ship
to the outside *raises* the internal temperature. This is an
unavoidable consequence of the laws of thermodynamics.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:16:32 -0700
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: arty

>>  Now, can they make them detonate in the launch tubes? :>
>
>Sorry, but no. A shell doesn't arm itself until it's a good way out of the
>barrel, and modern fuses are just about impossible to set off early.
>However a good close explosion can set off the shell itself - this is how
>ammo dumps go up if they are pooorly laid out.

  Well, infantry can always dream, can't they?

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:06:43 +0800
From: Colin Hutchinson <chutchin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: GURPS: Traveller *Nuclear Missiles*

>
>I guess we have come to the point where we have to agree to disagree... I
>don't think that expecting miracles out of advanced technology is a
>'handwave'.
>
Expecting 'miracles', as the adage goes...'The impossible we do as a matter
of course, miracles take a little longer'!

I certainly think that such is a 'possibility', but without some
expalnation about how this becomes 'probable', I think it remains a matter
of (quite justified) game mechanics.   Thanks for your comments

Colin

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:03:21 -0500
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
Subject: Deck plans

I have a question for the Traveller people.

Is 1 ton of displacement equal to 14 cubic meters?

If so, I am trying to match the 400t System Defense boat and Jump Shuttle
match these figures.  From what I can work out from the deckplans, the 200
ton jump shuttle measures out to 6498 cubic meters give or take a few.

If I use the 14 cubic meters rule, this works out to about 464 tons instead
of 200?

Am I off here?

Someone help
tv

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:19:29 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: CodeRe IMTU

At 01:54 AM 10/22/98 +0100, you wrote:
>Fred and Evelyn Wolke wrote:
>> Where can I find out about IMTU codes?
>
>
>http://www.metronet.com/~washi/Tas/Lists/IMTU.html
>
>
>
>Regards PLST
>"Rome wasn't burned in a day"

*****

thewolkes@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~thewolkes

*****

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:19:58 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Judges Guild

Leonard Erickson wrote:
> 
> In mail you write:
> 
> > The City-State of the Invinicble Overlord went to Mayfair Games and then
> > from there to TSR. I think Mayfair bought all the Judges Guild copyrights.
> > TSR then sued and settled with Mayfair and all the judges guild AD&D
> > copyrights went to TSR.
> 
> On what *possible* grounds could TSR have sued?
> 
Because they were TSR, the same company that tried to trademark the term
"Nazi", because it was used in their "Indiana Jones" RPG.  After all,
TSR stands for They Sue Regularly.  ;-)

> --
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:15:56 -0500
From: "Thomas Vickers" <redroach@sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: Judge's Guild Products

Government just extended copyrights to 95 years, Disney was going to loose
Micky in 2003, and they threw a fit. Read that this weekend.

TV
- -----Original Message-----
From: Leonard Erickson <shadow@krypton.rain.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Date: Wednesday, October 21, 1998 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: Judge's Guild Products


>In mail you write:
>
>>> So the *best* case has the Judges Guild stuff still being copyrighted
>>> until (1975+75 = 2050).
>>>
>>> And even if the company that had the copyright went out of business
>>> *someone* "inherited" the copyright as part of the company's assetts.
>>>
>>> So there's no point in hoping that copyright has expired on *anything*
>>> that was published for RPGs. You'll have to get permission.
>>
>> Or else we hold our breath til 2065 or so.  <grin>
>
>Longer if the *author* kept the copyright...
>
>--
>Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
> shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
>leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:29:24 -0400
From: Fred and Evelyn Wolke <thewolkes@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Meson Subs (was re: Capitol Ships)

At 09:46 PM 10/21/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Fred and Evelyn Wolke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>He he he. This takes `we hide with pride' to a whole new level. To
>>invade a world with deep meson sites is bad enough; to invade one where
>>they move around...
>
>Remember that those deep meson sites need targeting data, and those pretty
>much have to be on or near the surface.  I think a heavily-stealthed
>submarine devoted to sensor work would be useful for a TL15 wet navy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>I'm thinking of lots of cheapie sensor bouys. They could even be towed
>by the sub itself, on a kilometer long cable with fiberoptics. Or just
>use meson communicators to feed targetting data to the sub, if
>you have commo tech to handle that.

That could work, too... or perhaps a combination.  I wouldn't like to tow a
bouy, it could give away my position, depending.
I could see taking out surface sensors as an important mission for Imperial
Marines.
*****

thewolkes@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~thewolkes

*****

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:54:18 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

Walter Smith wrote:
> 
> Tommy Grav wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >Did you ever wonder what someone would think who was monitoring this list
> >and had no idea what Traveller or RPGs were?  And suppose Nuclear Dampers
> >(for example) really DID exist, but as a deep dark secret weapon?  We'd
> >probably have our own desk at the NSA by now!
> 
> The TML-files, huuuummmmmm......
> 
> Didn't someone make some NPC based on Mulder and Scully
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
> IIRC, the FBI has investigated players of T$R's Top Secret game -
> someone overheard the players discussing an op and called the feds.
> 
> Walt Smith

Not to mention SJG's run-in with the Secret Service over their
GURPS:Cyberpunk setting....


Oooops.  I just mentioned it.  Forget I posted anything.  Fnord.
- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:57:06 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Striker

In a message dated 10/20/98 9:26:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
CardSharks@aol.com writes:

<< There are also two printings of CT Striker, with some revision between the
two
 (these are both L:BBs).
 
 Marc Miller >>

Dear Mr. Miller:

Do you happen to know the differences? I have the 1981 copyright, with the
1/25/82 errata sheet. Is this 1st or 2nd printing?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:03:28 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: TML Subscription problems

Glenn Myers wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> My TML behavior tends to be as follows,
> (a) Lurk for a few months
> (b) jump in on threads that interest me
> (c) go back to lurking
> 
> Recently I tried to jump back in and did not get any response. I have
> now resubscribed and this is a test to see if I can post.
> 
> When I attempted to post in the past, my messages vanished into the
> ether -no bounces or error messages of any kind.
> 
> Has anyone else ever experienced this behavior?
> 
> Glenn

I did, when I first subscribed, because I was using a spam-foiling
corrupted e-mail address (which, BTW, indirectly set off a minor
flame-war ~blush~ ).

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:06:12 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Current Tech: Shortstop

Date sent:      	Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:54:18 -0500
From:           	Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>

>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
>> IIRC, the FBI has investigated players of T$R's Top Secret game -
>> someone overheard the players discussing an op and called the feds.

>Not to mention SJG's run-in with the Secret Service over their
>GURPS:Cyberpunk setting....

A PBM diplomacy game got a _lot_ of attention when one player sent a 
postcard with "attack on Liverpool agreed" to another, mind you it was at the 
height of the IRA bombings on the mainland.

Obtrav: how closely does the Imperium scan the X-mail?

Andrew etc.
  a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz
  http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/index.htm
IMTU Code
  tc tm- tn-- t4+ ?tg- @ru @ge !@3i -jt+ au- st+ ls- pi-
  kk+ hi- as va+ dr++ so++ zh+ vi-- da ?si lu++ su+ ge

*****************************************************************
Names Explained 7: KARL
More Teutonic than the English Charles, Karls can often be found
advising US Presidents on the underutilisation of nuclear weapons
*****************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:11:27 -0500
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
Subject: Re: Star Gypsies

Brian Mays wrote:
> 
> >Anyone want to try raising your kids on a Free Trader?
> >
> >Walt Smith
> 
> 3 days into J-Space:
> 
> "DAD!  Are we there yet?"
> 
> "No."
> 
> "DAD!  Are we there yet?"

Which was the _real_ driving force behind the invention of low
berths....

- -- 
- ------
|    |  Reply to wombat_at_premier_dot_net
|JOLT|
|COLA|  Visit my Web site at:
|    |
- ------  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776/

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:27:04 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Piracy

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:

>>The reserve fleets will be next to useless for anti piracy as they are

>>manned by reservists and thus spend most of their time in orbit around

>>the high tech, high population worlds in the subsector they are
assigned.
>
>This is a totally unwarranted assumption. Nowhere in the rules do I
find
>any support for the idea that the colonial fleets and the system
defense
>forces are not trained to the same standard as the regular navy. On the

>contrary, the character generation implies (I put it no higher than
that,
>the CGR being a tricky thing to draw evidence from) that there is no
>difference at all.

FSotSI pg 6
"The primary activity a reserve fleet undertakes is training."
"Colonial squadrons are equipped with obsolescent (but still servicable,
rather than obsolete) ships and with personnel with somewhat less
training and experiance."
RS pg 27
"Reserve fleets are equipped with obsolescent - but still useful -
starships which have been retired from front-line Imperial service; they
are staffed by personnel serving in the Reserves (technically in the
service of the Imperium, but without the status of strict Imperial Navy
duty)."

I believe this implies that reserve and colonial units are not as well
equipped or trained as Regular fleets.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:27:18 -0500
From: Charles R Hensley <z3crh@TTACS.TTU.EDU>
Subject: Re: The Imperial Navy

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:

>>>>>_Rebellion_ p. 27 states that each sector of the Imperium
theoretically
>>>>>has a group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships.
>>
>>It should be noted that the colonial forces are taken out of that
theoretical
>>1000 ships...  "Reserve fleets are technically considered part of the
forces
>>of a named fleet, but are rarely moved out of their original
subsector." -
>>Rebellion pg 27.  This drops your average 62.5-combatant fleet by
half.
>
>That would be one possible interpretation if it wasn't for the fact
that
>_Rebellion_ also says that fleets range from 50 to 200 ships. With a
lower
>bound of 50 ships it is kinda difficult to get an average of 31.25...

the 50-200 ship numbers do not specify if this is combatant only or
non-combatants and combatants.  I would say this is both combatants and
non-combatants, thus the average 31.25 combatants per fleet would be a
good number.

>>The "Typical" BatRon from FSotSI has 4 BBs, 3 scouts, 1 tanker, 2
transports
>>and 2 auxilliaries (auxilliaries being noncombatant resupply/fuel
ships in
>>FSotSI).  The Rider BatRon has 4 BRs.  The Typical CruRon has 5
cruisers.  In
>>fact, all the typical Imperial squadrons have about 4-5 core ships w/
a
>larger
>>number of scouts, escorts, and/or auxiliaries.
>
>>It seems your 'examples' are atypical and on the high end of the
scale.
>
>Could be. But to stick to my abovementioned principle, I'd prefer an
>explanation that validated both sets of information. Maybe the typical
>BatRon for the Rebellion era is just smaller than the typical BatRon
from
>the previous era, the one that _Fighting Ships_ detail? 4 BBs, you say?
That
>could be an 8 BB squadron that had been split in two or reduced by
combat
>losses. What is the in-game date of _FSSI_? Long enough into the
Rebellion
>for combat losses to have affected the composition of the typical
squadron?

the larger numbers for ships in a squadron could be a hypathecical
maximum, i.e. that is what the Navy wants these squadrons to be equiped
to but the lower numbers are what is actually bought and payed for.  Or
a second posibility is that the CT era fleets also had escort and
destroyer squadrons and a reorganization eliminated these squadrons
(divided up and placed in the units they were to escort)

>>>Unfortunately a huge reserve fleet gives other problems for the
background.
>>>Right, Gary?
>>
>>Nope.  : )   Possibly, if based on your (uncanonical) assumptions.
According
>>to canon?  No.
>
>Really? And here I thought that we had had a long discussion where you
>argued that the Imperial peacetime navy wouldn't have a huge reserve,
>because a huge reserve would provide Norris with scores of extra fleets

>once they became reactivated. Was I mistaken? You actually believe that

>the Imperial Navy propably have huge numbers of ships laid up and that
>that is the reason the peacetime navy is so comparatively small?

The navy has huge reserves at the depots, but Norris did not have access
to a depot.  also the Corridor depot has been depleted in the many
frontier wars.

Charles

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:48:19 -0600
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com>
Subject: Re: Star-Gypsies (long)

>
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:50:09 -0400 (EDT)
>From: William Prankard <cmdrx@magicnet.net>
>Subject: Star-Gypsies
>
>Greetings!
>
>I and a few players had an interesting idea last night.  I do not know if
>this had been mentioned on the list before.
>We came up with the possibility of "Star Gypsies" in Traveller.
>
>This could provide beucoodles of adventure hooks!
>
>Awaiting comments.

Don't know if I've posted this before; apologies to the list if so.  From a
long-unfinished Contact! article:


Contact! Romany

Location:  Anywhere in human space, but probably the bad section of a
run-down Class C or D starport.

Situation:  You are the purser of a merchant ship down on her luck. You are
desperately trying to find paying passengers to fill up her staterooms
before liftoff, when a shabbily but colorfully dressed man approaches you
and offers to make a deal. His son, he says, has married a beautiful girl
and they are very happy together.  Her family, however, has moved to a
neighboring system, and the girl is almost dead from missing them. Being
poor, he himself cannot afford two high passage tickets, or even two middle
passage tickets at standard rates. Low passage is out of the question:  it
is against their religion.  Besides -- what if only one of the young lovers
should survive? What he proposes is to pay for one middle passage ticket,
and then you let the couple both ride on it, double occupancy.

Action:  If you agree, a dozen or so of these brightly clad individuals
appear on your gangway, out of equally bright but shabby vans. These people
range in age from babies in arms to one great old grandmother, who presides
over the whole circus in a language you've never heard before. You soon
lose count of the number of bags, boxes, children, animals ("pets", you are
told), and miscellania that are loaded into and out of the cabin, saying
goodbye, or going along as a last-minute gift. Finally, the hatch is closed
on those tearfully remaining behind with the vans.

Conflict:  Once in jumpspace, you have a moment to check on your two odd
passengers, who have not left their cabin since the voyage began.  They do
not wish to be disturbed, says the young man. Maybe it was the unusual
drain on the life support system, or maybe it was just a funny smell coming
from the cabin, but something leads you to get the captain and override the
lock in his presence. Inside are not two but seven of these people,
together with a number of their livestock. The women start a wailing that
sets your teeth on edge; the men come forward, both to offer some later
recompense (work, perhaps?) and to forestall any move on your part to
collect right now.  Any attempt at threats, physical force, or coersion
will be met with indifference, misdirection, counterthreats, or promises --
anything to keep you from acting until you reach your next port. By then,
it will probably be quite enough to simply be rid of them. Such is your
first encounter with Romany -- the Gypsies.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1998 #999
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
