From jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com Mon Apr 20 00:16:59 1992
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #331: Msgs 3946-3963
Reply-To: traveller-request@wrgate.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
Content-Length: 44480
X-Lines: 1050
Status: RO


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Sun Apr 19 21:00:15 PDT 1992
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #331: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3946  11-Apr-92 d9bertil@dtek.cha Re: Who'll be at GenCon '92? << > :If possibl
3947  11-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU The 4.5th Frontier War (Chapter 2, Part 1 On 
3948  13-Apr-92 anaylor@mihi.une. The Alien Books << Are the Vilani & Vargr / S
3949  13-Apr-92 cat@piggy.fgs.slb Looking for some Vargr Trivia << In the Alien
3950  13-Apr-92                   Solomani & Aslan << I'm not having any luck f
3951  14-Apr-92                   Body Pistols vs. Battledress << The question 
3952  14-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Re: Body Pistols vs. Battledress << OOPS! Cal
3953  14-Apr-92 metlay@minerva.ph Vargr and Aslan and Solomani and Vilani and..
3954  14-Apr-92 PBEM Administrato New PBEM traffic packages at sunbane << I jus
3955  15-Apr-92 surman@vortex.lgs Virtual Raelity & Frictionalless Surfaces << 
3956  15-Apr-92 surman@vortex.lgs Frictionalless? Surfaces << Yes, a misspellin
3957  15-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU The Vargr in MegaTrav << Metlay asked about t
3958  15-Apr-92 metlay@minerva.ph Re: The Vargr in MegaTrav << > Does anyone ev
3959  15-Apr-92 Steve_Higginbotha body pistols and vargr... << Kellogg: >Calcul
3960  15-Apr-92 OUTJFH@UMCVMB.mis Speaking of Virtual Reality... << Just kind o
3961  16-Apr-92 PHB100@PSUVM.PSU. (3955) Virtual Raelity & Frictionless Surface
3962  16-Apr-92 Timothy Soholt    Virtual Reality and Star Trek Holodecks << [R
3963  16-Apr-92 GT0171@SIUCVMB.SI Modem Users Unite! << [This is not a Travelle

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3946
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
Subject: Re: Who'll be at GenCon '92?
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 19:11:16 MET DST

> :If possible, I think it'd be nice to plan an informal get-together.
> :I, for one, would really like to meet some of the faces behind the
> :electrons. :^)
> 
> Me too.  Maybe I'll get lucky and find a way to wing the time off work
> (and away from home).

  I can confirm the rumour that I'll be there, assuming they haven't lost my
pre-registation etc etc.

> Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com

- -bertil-
- -- 
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3947
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 15:49 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: The 4.5th Frontier War (Chapter 2, Part 1 On the Trail)

		ON THE TRAIL
			or
	Is there a doctor in the sector?

			by
		Scott Kellogg
		- I -
	The engine temperature jumped five degrees in two minutes.
"We're coming out of jump." Shtam called from the engine room.
	"Look," muttered Miakr softly, "I'm really..."
	Shtam cut him off.  "Don't worry about it.  I'd have a lot
of trouble handling these engines by myself.  As it is, you may
have saved us all from blowing up.  Misjump is no big deal."
	"Thanks, Shtam."
	The jump drive moaned in sympathy.  "Estimate three minutes
to relativistic space." called Shtam, "Three minutes.  All hands
to stations."
	Up on the bridge Niedrsha lounged in the pilot's chair.  "Ok
Jiet, let's get ready." he slapped her shoulder through the
battle dress.  "Any pirates just better watch out."
	"I'd rather not have to deal with any more battles for a
while." cautioned Jietlshaiepr.  "We're looking for a hospital,
not a fight.  With Drert still in the ozone layer and Shtam minus
his leg, I have enough headaches.  You just find us a starport.
I'll take it from there.
	"Gresha, honey, you'd better be getting inside that turret.
I am NOT looking forward to what reception we may get when we re-
enter normal space.  A misjumped ship is a very juicy target, and
pirate activity has been getting awfully heavy these days."
	"Sure, Jiet." barked the vargr wagging her tail.  "I
wouldn't worry too much though, we're probably in human space.
Human corsairs aren't worth much.  And if we jump into vargr
space I knew most of the corsair leaders."
	"Why'd you decide to hook up with humans then?"
	"Well, Oddball was slowing down."  she laughed, then curling
her lip exposing the sharp canine teeth of her species, "And the
bastards running the Broadsword were bigots.  You folks seem to
appreciate ability rather than physiology.  At least Miakr seems
to..."
		- II -
	The Kliemoshie limped into normal space with a whimper from
the jump drives.  She panted and wheezed at the exertion while
she wiped the haze from her eyes and began to look around, wondering
where she'd got to.
	"We haven't gone too far," thought Niedrsha aloud.  "from
the position of the stars, I'd say no more than six or seven
parsecs.  And we're still in the Massina subsector for certain."
	"Got something." called Jietlshaiepr.  "We're one hundred
diameters out from a gas giant... Looks like there are some
pretty big power emissions, lots of neutrinos, probably a mid to
high tech system.  I hope their hospitals are in as good shape as
their power systems..."
	"Picking up a radar beacon..." she announced.  "Radio signal
incoming."
	A woman's voice came over, "...entified craft, come in
please... Repeat, unidentified craft come in please, this is the
F.A.B. patrol ship Flamboyant.  You will identify yourself
immediately."
	Jietlshaiepr raised her eyebrow. "Hold on a minute here...
This is a tight beam transmission."
	"So?" asked Niedrsha.
	"So, why conceal your presence if you are a patrol ship?"
	"Right... broadcast to the ship and the traffic at the gas
giant.  Come to think of it, relay their messages too."
	Jietlshaiepr hit the broadcast button.  "This is the Zhodani
Courier Kliemoshie, ZC-00113.  State your business patrol ship
Flamboyant."
	"We are on anti-pirate cruise.  Have no record of your
arrival, Kliemoshie.  Stand by."
	Jietlshaiepr tuned the ship's antenna to a tight beam aimed
at the gas giant.  "This is the Zhodani Courier Kliemoshie,
ZC-00113.  Request confirmation of status of patrol ship
Flamboyant."
	She read the sensors, "The Flamboyant is closing on us at
four G acceleration, four hundred tons, streamlined, five point
two five gigawatts from their reactor.  Reads out as a Fiery
class Imperial gunned escort.  Usual armament lasers and particle
accelerators."
	"Flamboyant to Kliemoshie, we have no record of your arrival
in system, please confirm."
	"Viepchakl!" thought Jietlshaiepr. "Kliemoshie to
Flamboyant, have just arrived in system."
	"Got another contact, she announced.  Much larger, ten
gigawatt reactor, eight hundred tons, approaching at five G's.
at extreme range and on intercept course."
	"Flamboyant to Kliemoshie, we have orders to board and
inspect all shipping.  Stop engines and prepare to receive our
party."
	A new voice came over the circuits.  "Kliemoshie, this is
Fan Belt starport control, we have no record of any patrol ship
registered as Flamboyant.  Proceed with caution.  Will send patrol
to investigate."
	"Niedrsha, get us the hell out of here!  Red alert!  All
hands shut airlocks and close battle dress."
	"Engine room.  Give her everything you've got!" shouted
Niedrsha.  The Kliemoshie's frame squealed in protest.  "Gresha,
commence firing!"
	Gresha couldn't hear the order for the rattle of the
sandcaster pumping ablative sand out to shield the fleeing
courier.  She knew her business.  She needed no order.  Laser
light streamed from the turret searching for a victim.
	It swung wide of the target.  The gun ship twisted and
loosed its own onslaught of destructive energy.
	The very space around the Kliemoshie glowed with the
incoming fire as it vaporized the protective sand cloud and
touched the skin of the ship.
	Jietlshaiepr read off "We've been hit.  No damage, just
cooked a bit.  Hull temperature four hundred thirty Kelvin.  No
hull rupture...  I read a flight of ships from the gas giant...
six G's acceleration, including a ship in the twenty thousand ton
range...at this range it will take an hour and thirty eight
minutes to intercept.  Second contact I read out as a Guppy class
cruiser.  Usual armament: lasers, missiles, sandcasters.  It will
be in range in sixty seven minutes."
	"What about the Flamboyant?" called Niedrsha.
	"Closing, interception thirty six minutes."
	Lasers swept out towards the pursuer on target.
	The Flamboyant's hull was momentarily lost in a fog cloud.
	"Good shooting Gresha!  I read that out as a hit to their
fuel tanks." called off Jietlshaiepr.
	"They've still got their teeth." growled Gresha.  "I just
poked their stomach a bit."
	Laser flare obliterated the Kliemoshie's sand cloud.
	"Next one will penetrate." warned Gresha.
	The Kliemoshie began to shudder as Niedrsha redoubled his
efforts to evade.  The spiralling ship rolled and pitched,
straining the ability of the anti-acceleration-grav fields, while her
lasers flamed outward.
	One of the Flamboyant's turrets melted away under the jet of
Gresha's lasers.
	A flash of light, a blast, a shudder.  Part of the
Kliemoshie turned into slag.
	"Report in!  Anyone hurt?"  Called Jietlshaiepr.
	"Shtam here.  Engine Room intact.  Miakr, Vole and I are
Ok."
	"Gresha here.  Turret unimpaired."
	"The Air/Raft bay was destroyed." announced Drert as though
he was talking in his sleep, "Pressure leak in quarters section.
Bulkheads and frame intact."
	"How in Viepchakl does he know that?" wondered Jietlshaiepr.
	Lasers flared out again but found only empty space.
	"Grrraahcht!" barked Gresha in frustration.
	The Flamboyant's lasers reached out and licked the
Kliemoshie's hull.  Fog fumed from the gash draining away the
life blood fuel of the courier.
	"Fuel pressure's goin... gone.  Fuck!" shouted Niedrsha.
	"Fusion plant shutting down!" screamed Miakr.
	All lights went out aboard the courier leaving all in total
darkness.
	Red emergency lights came on dimly.
	"Batteries on emergency power.  That is all I can do.  We
were low on fuel after the jump, now it is all gone." Shtam
announced calmly.
	Silence came down like a sudden nightfall.  The ship was dead.
	Jietlshaiepr finally broke the silence.  "Stand by to repel
boarders."
		- III -
	The ship was quickly depressurized.  Crew assembled in the
lounge armed with gauss rifles.
	"Twelve crew in a Fiery class escort.  Sixteen in a Guppy
class cruiser, plus a complement of sixteen troops." reported
Shtam.  "The Guppy is an ideal pirate raider.  We ran into them
in the merchants.  They have a huge cargo capacity:  able to
accommodate over three hundred tons of ships.  They just open
their clamshells and swallow you.  I saw one eat a free trader
and still have room for two fifty ton fighters."
	"We have to stand them off long enough for the patrols to
arrive.  That's two hours without our engines.  The Flamboyant
will rendezvous in twelve minutes, the Guppy in forty nine."
Jietlshaiepr paced appraising the situation.  "Shtam, how well
can you move without that leg?"
	"With the ship's artificial grav off, I'm fine.  A little
slower but adequate.  It seems to be regenerating itself.  It
beats me what Drert did to it though."
	"Right.  Boarding party...  Tactics...  Suggesions?"
	"Ambush." growled Gresha.
	"Set up where?  Where are they going to come in?"
	"They might not board at all until we're inside the Guppy's
cargo hold." thought Niedrsha.
	"No." said Shtam decisively, "In order to get the ship into
the hold they will have to have men handling her very carefully.
They will not chance our taking on a busy work crew."
	"Well, if I were them, I'd burn through the hull." growled
Gresha, "They want the ship.  Why else call in another ship
capable of carrying her out?  Ships go for good money in this low
tech sector.
	"The front wind screen's easy to smash and board through,
but it'd get the bridge shot up.  Airlock is harder to fix than
the hull.  Hull material is cheap, sections of it are already
damaged.  Probably come in through the Air/Raft bay, it's already
smashed.  Can set up ambush there."
	"Right." nodded Jietlshaiepr.  "Good thinking.  Miakr, you
and Vole inspect the bay, find the best place to setup an ambush.
Niedrsha, you cover the bridge.  Yell if you see anything and get
out.  Shtam, you cover the airlock.  Gresha, you ever been
teleported?"
	Gresha cocked her head confusedly.  "No."
	"I can carry two of us in a teleport.  I bet we could jump
out, get in a few good shots and catch them off guard."
	"We could use the tech fourteen plasma guns:  no recoil."
snarled Gresha with a wagging tail.
	"Exactly."
		- IV -
	"Miakr, their headed your way." radioed Niedrsha from the
bridge.  "Good call Gresha!"
	"How many?" demanded Jietlshaiepr.
	"Eight, two in combat armor, six in vacc suits.  The ones in
combat armor are guarding the airlock.  The rest are headed to
the Air/Raft bay with some laser welders.  The ones in combat
armor have laser rifles, the rest have accelerator rifles.  I
think most have snub pistols as well."
	"They've started cutting." announced Vole.   "Estimated time
of entry:  seven minutes forty seconds... Mark!"
	"Right.  Niedrsha, you get down to the bay and help Miakr.
Gresha, we'll pay a little visit in two minutes, let's move to
the lock."
	Gresha growled softly to herself.
		- V -
	"Grakvozan!  Teleportation is neat!" wondered Gresha with awe
as she found herself outside the ship shoulder to shoulder with
Jietlshaiepr.
	Twin figures floated out side the airlock of the Kliemoshie.
	Twin plasma bolts leaped across the vacuum.
	Twin explosions.
	Twin figures spiraled into the vacuum, leaving a cloud of
vaporized organs and metal.
	"Better than I'd hoped for.  All right team, come out the
airlock, we may be able to press this attack home."  Jietlshaiepr
turned.  The bay was hidden by the bulk of the ship.  "Bring out our
gauss rifles as well.  If we get aboard the Flamboyant, plasma guns
are a bit much."
		- VI -
	With the power off the airlock had to be opened by hand, but
Niedrsha and Miakr had gotten through by the time the sentries
were missed.
	Two vacc suit helmets peered around the bulk of the hull
before they were seared off by Gresha and Jietlshaiepr.
	"That'll scare the fuck out of 'em." observed Niedrsha.
	"Four on four." thought Miakr.  "Let's take 'em."
	They split up and jetted around the ship's hull to see the
four pirates in flight.  The Flamboyant's airlock was wide open.
Miakr opened up on the trailing pirate.  Gauss needles flew
undeflected, and unerringly to the target which clamped its leg
as it fired at Niedrsha.
	The accelerator rifle bullet rammed its way through
Niedrsha's armor over his right arm, almost spoiling his aim.
His own gauss needles went home on the smallest of the pirates.
The helmet simply exploded.  The corpse continued to float toward
the Flamboyant's looming hull.
	Suddenly, Drert appeared next to Niedrsha and both vanished.
	Two plasma bolts struck the third pirate which completely
vaporized the fleeing man.
	Bullets clicked off Jietlshaiepr's armored torso.
	"Hey you!  Lay off my chest!"  An indignant blast of plasma
subdivided the fourth pirate from it's groin and lower legs which
tumbled into the vacuum.
	Miakr's second volley of shots shredded the remaining
pirates legs.  The body hung limply, suspended in space.
	The Flamboyant started moving.
	"Viepchakl!" shouted Jietlshaiepr.  She teleported into the
open airlock and was slammed against the side of the ship.  She
quickly looked through the view port and then teleported inside.
	She would have jumped a kilometer had it not been for the
ceiling.
	"Hi Jiet!  Welcome aboard." laughed Niedrsha as Drert stood
over him.
	"To the bridge.  How's your arm?"  without waiting for an
answer she ran ahead.
	"Never better."
	None of them had been aboard a Fiery class escort before but
the bridge was pretty easy to guess at.
	The pilot heard them coming.  She had a snub pistol trained
at the corridor and loosed high explosive bullets at Jietlshaiepr
as she burst through.
	Six shells exploded harmlessly on Jietlshaiepr's chest
plates.
	"Leave my tits alone, bitch!"  Jietlshaiepr slapped the
panicked pilot in the mouth.  The strength enhancement of the
battle dress rocked her head back and laid her neck at an ugly
angle.
	Niedrsha pulled her from the console and swung the ship into
a spin.  "Fuck those Imperial designers!"  He soon had it under
control and headed back to the Kliemoshie.
	Jietlshaiepr grabbed the scanners.  There was one more crew
member aboard.  The Guppy class cruiser would rendezvous in
twenty six minutes.
	"One last crew member aboard." she explained, "I'll take
care..."
	"Not any more." said Drert simply.  He then sat down on the
deck and began opening the chest of his battle dress.
	"How..." she started to ask, but noticed Drert was lost in
an examination of his belly button, then checked the scanners.
the only life on board was them.
		- VII -
	The crew was quickly transferred to the Flamboyant.
	"Ghrresh!" barked Gresha from the dorsal turret, "Where is
the particle accelerator?"
	"What's wrong?" shouted Jietlshaiepr.
	"This is a missile turret.  There's an Air/Raft bay here
instead of the particle barbette and... Grraaah!  Verracht!  This
ship carries nuclear missiles!"
	"What!?"
	"This turret is armed with nuclear missiles!"
	"Guppy class cruiser, twenty one minutes to interception."
read off Shtam.  "Patrol cruisers:  one hour forty minutes.  I
make the large ship in the patrol out as a Viepchakl class Battle
rider.  I think we should give some of these missiles back to
their rightful owners?"
	"My sentiment's exactly, Shtam." nodded Jietlshaiepr.
	"Graah, just say the word, Jiet and I'll stuff some
plutonium down their throats." snarled Gresha.
	Shtam studied the sensors.  "They are coming in on a nice
lateral course.  No sandcasters in operation, no evasive action,
just a nice fat target.  They have even opened the cargo bay
doors."
	"Gresha," sighed Jietlshaiepr, "They're hungry, why don't
you give them a nice mouthful or two?"  She stretched herself in
such a way that, even with her battle dress on, made one want to
throw back one's head and howl.
	"Well Jiet," laughed Gresha, "I'll try but I just don't have
your... qualifications."
	The black face plate of her battle dress hid her reaction.
"Stand by for evasive action.  Hands to what ever stations you can
find.  Gresha, fire when ready."
	A soft shush announced the departure of the nuclear warhead
laden missiles.
	"Nukes away!...  Engine's hot and running."
	"Evasive action!" barked Jietlshaiepr.  "She's starting to
evade.  Where are those lasers?"
	Drert fired on the gaping maw of the approaching cruiser.
Just as the bay began to close the laser strike bore in blasting
the decks adjoining.  Fuel leaked into space flaming briefly as
it combined with the leaking air of the ship and then snuffing
out as flame met vacuum.
	The jaws jammed fast leaving a leaking flaming mouth open to
vacuum.  Seconds later the missiles streaked into the hungry
mouth of the cruiser.
	A blinding flash came out of the belly of the cruiser.  The
silhouetted form of the top half of the ship was barely visible
above the brilliance of the brief fission powered star.
	Half of the ship tumbled, glowing white hot and radioactive
from the blaze.  End over end she tumbled for three seconds then
it flared again and was gone.
	An expanding cloud of radioactive plasma blew into space.
		- VIII -
	Jietlshaiepr slouched back in the command chair exhausted.
She opened the clamshell helmet of her battle dress and sighed.
"All right." she purred.  "Now, I am a little bit tired of being
shot at today.  Shtam, you said that the ship headed towards us
is a Viepchakl class battle rider."
	"Yes.  She is unmistakable."
	"Ok, now.  The only ship that carries the Viepchakl in this
area is based in Tloql sector at Chronor.  That being the Zhdant
itself:  a one million ton battle carrier.  What on the moons of
Zhdant is the pride of the Consular Navy doing here?  Fan Belt is
an independent system." she pondered aloud.  "Well, I guess we'll
just have to talk to them.  But as soon as we hit the starport,
we're going to bed."
		- IX -
	It took some explaining indeed.  The ship turned out to be
the Viepchakl itself, named for the once worshiped moon of Zhdant
which still bore some reverence or irreverence as the case may
be.  The captain of such a ship commands respect.  But, the last
thing he expected to hear was a report from an overtired and
voluptuous noble who had just captured the ship he was supposed to
be rescuing her from.
	The questions came tumbling out.  Where was the owner of the
Kliemoshie:  Dr. Malenkoviepr?  Why did the ship misjump?  How
did they contact the Flamboyant?  How did they take the
Flamboyant?  Were there any injuries that needed treatment?  Were
there any survivors among the pirates?  And where did they get
Ultra top of the line Zhodani Noble Commando battle dress and
Imperial plasma guns?
	Fortunately, the captain was familiar with those Zhodani who
worked with the Ine Givar and some sticky little questions got by
with the slimmest answers.
	The Flamboyant was towed to the starport by the Viepchakl
while the Kliemoshie was refueled by three Zhdits class D.E.'s
and brought in under armed escort.
		- X -
	Jietlshaiepr never got a chance to keep her promise.  Four
minutes after docking Jietlshaiepr was requested to see
Tlievriashav.  Request it was, and polite too, but one does not
make the High Consul of the entire Ikar sector wait.
	Five hours later, a quite exhausted, curvaceous commando
trudged up the ramp of the courier.
	"Better start packin' your stuff, crew.  The Kliemoshie's
being commandeered tomorrow at thirteen hundred hours."
	"What!?" came the unanimous response of disbelief.
	"Tlievriashav's taking her.  He needs a courier for his
consular cruiser.  His own was destroyed or captured by probably
the self same pirates we just fought.
	"We are to be given possession of the Flamboyant, *minus* the
nuclear missiles.  We have to go to Massina first but then she'll
be turned over to us."
	"Massina Belt!" exploded Miakr, "Why there?"
	Jietlshaiepr looked at him startled. "Well, they want to run
a number of tests on the ship to find out what they can from it.
To get a lead on these pirates.  Best place to run the tests is at
the sector capital."
	"What about Dr. Malenkoviepr?" asked Niedrsha.
	"We'll need a ship to find him.  And the old "Moshie" is
going on to bigger circles."
	"Why?  What's going on here?" asked Shtam.  "Why does a big
wheel like Tlievriashav want a broken down shot up old courier like
the Kliemoshie?"
	"You've all heard of Horltheur?  Highest tech planet in the
Ikar sector, and one of the most volatile.  There's been a war."
	"Big war?" asked Shtam.
	"Yeah, nuclear.  The whole northern continent was just about
wiped out.  The Zhdant is going there escorting hospital ships
from the Consulate and Fan Belt.  Tlievriashav needs a courier,
and the Kliemoshie is the only one available.
	"Big political push:  influence gathering.  The Imperium is
sending a fleet of it's own hospital ships.  Accompanied by their
fleet.  The Darrians, the Sword Worlds, The Dynchia, all the
governments, big and small, they're all sending ships.  A big
humanitarian effort that all sides can milk for propaganda values,
and maybe save a few lives in the bargain."
	"How does the Fan Belt fit in?" wondered Niedrsha.
	"It's the medical capital of the sector.  We can gain
influence with them while we prove to all that the Consulate is
just as humane as the Imperium if not more so."
	"Wait a minute, what about recompence for the doctor?" asked
Gresha.
	Jietlshaiepr laughed.  "Now this is the crazy part, the doc
will get his money, but he's not receiving money for the value of
the ship, he's getting the *replacement* value.  Full cost of a
new courier.  And I have custody of the money till he is found:  one
hundred and one million, six hundred seventy one thousand, six
hundred and fifty credits.
	"Now you've got the whole story.  We'll have enough time
here to use the medical facilities before we leave for Massina."
She stretched out in a mouth watering way, leaned over calmly and
picked up Niedrsha and threw him over her shoulder.
	"Now, Niedrsha, there are a couple of things I need to go
over with you..."  Suddenly, they were gone.  Or rather, they
were gone, their clothes stayed behind.  They stood there like a
bizarre artwork for a moment in the positions Jietlshaiepr and
Niedrsha had been in.  Then, they slowly floated to the deck of
the cabin.
	"Now that," observed Gresha admiringly "is a trick I've GOT
to learn."
 ========================
Stay tuned folks...

Scott

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3948
From: anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor)
Subject: The Alien Books
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 16:07:21 EST

Are the Vilani & Vargr / Solomani & Aslan worth getting ....

If you do could you give me a detailed account of what they contain ?

Edmund



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

Archive-Message-Number: 3949
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 13:21:53 PDT
From: cat@piggy.fgs.slb.COM (Rather B. Fishing)
Subject: Looking for some Vargr Trivia

 
In the Alien volume on Villani and Vargr by DGP, there are two reference
to a group called the Society of Equels ("Dzen Aeng Kho") based in the
Gvurrdon system in the Dzveronguoe Sub-Sector.  Both are passing references,
one of which is buried in the example of systems in vargr space.  The other
reference makes a passing mention as the Dzen Aeng Kho as being a somewhat
restrictive government (compared to the merchant line being described
in the text).

I am sorry I can't cough up page numbers - my traveller
references reside far from this terminal, and I was lucky enough to
remember the piece of paper with the name and planet info...I've only been
forgetting to post this inquiry for three or four weeks now...

What I'd like to know is: is there any info on this organization anywhere?
Or is the name dropping of the Dzen Aeng Kho all there is?  Inquiring minds
(me and my GM) want to know...

Thanks!

Catie Helm
cat@piggy.fgs.slb.com


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3950
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 21:46:28 -0700
From: R. Dired <rrn@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Solomani & Aslan

I'm not having any luck finding this. I have V&V, and want this one as
well, but no store here (Seattle) has S&A as far as I can tell, nor have
they had any success in getting one. Any help would be greatly appreciated
(can you get one direct from DGP, and whatever happened to AI?).

	-Thanks,
	Hans

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3951
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 10:04 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Body Pistols vs. Battledress

The question got asked how does the body pistol fare vs. Battle dress?

I checked it against classic trav combat:
At close range (less than 1 meter) a person with body pistol-1 can hit a
person wearing the stuff on a roll of 12. (assuming dex is average)

At less than 5 meters a person with pistol-2 can hit someone wearing the
stuff on a roll of 12.

At medium range it would require pistol-13 to hit with a rolled 12.

Scott Kellogg

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3952
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 10:57 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Re: Body Pistols vs. Battledress

OOPS!

Calculator slipped!  That should have been
Body Pistol-9 as minimum to hit a person wearing battledress @ medium range.

But on the other hand, I'm sure you see the point...

Scott

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3953
From: metlay@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu (metlay)
Subject: Vargr and Aslan and Solomani and Vilani and....
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 12:42:09 EDT


The Traveller Alien series (aborted at two out of five books by the abrupt
departure of DGP from the Traveller business, may they go Chapter 11 for
their sin (not of abandoning us, but of stupidity: AI looks like the dumbest
game since, well, since MegaTraveller. But I digress)) contains a lot of 
useful data on the history and cultural background of these four races, 
including character rollup info, but without the advanced character gen
stuff in the old GDW series. Since the two series do not conflict with
one another in any substantive way (all you rules lawyers out there who
want to argue missing lines and skill eligilbilities, please shut up and
go away), I regard them ALL as essential, ten volumes in all (two by DGP
and eight by GDW).

Catie, the only data on the Society of Equals that has ever been published
anywhere is what you have before you. Sorry.

BTW, was anyone else as offended as I was at "Wolfsport"? What a totally
bozotic and monochrome representation of the Vargr. And here I'd been
hoping that the Antares article was a sign of an upward trend....

- -- 

Mike Metlay
metlay@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu
Atomic City, P.O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3954
Subject: New PBEM traffic packages at sunbane
From: PBEM Administrator <pbem-request@engrg.uwo.ca>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 12:07:56 PDT


I just finished creating 20 new PBEM packages available at Sunbane via
ftp and via email from here (Metolius). The data in the new packages are
the PBEM turns which appeared on the TML in 1991 and in 1992.

To get the packages, ftp to sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca [129.100.100.12], and
cd to the pub/traveller/pbem directory. In there you will find files
named PB1 through PB35. The new files are PB16 through PB35. If you've
been reading the TML or PBEM the last couple years, you will probably
not want to bother :-).

James
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Traveller PBEM Administrator & Email Scatologist		James Perkins
pbem-request@engrg.uwo.ca   via London, Ontario, CA to Beaverton, Oregon, USA

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3955
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 10:49:36 -0500
From: surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
Subject: Virtual Raelity & Frictionalless Surfaces

I wrote earlier about virtual reality.

Jim Baranski replied:
>Star Trek's Virtual Reality on the Holodeck's requires not only Holograms, but
>also  Transporter technology matter replicators, as well as mighty
>sophisticated software.

Virtual reality systems are being created now and certainly present
day US doesn't have Transporter technology. 

I would imagine a similar setup to a Holodeck is feasible in Traveller.
If holodisplays are available for workstations they should be easy
enough to erect in a larger setting, such as a building. Now, I'll
agree that simulating other sensory data might be a little difficult
but they could be introduced as chemical sprays. I would imagine
pharmacology has advanced enough that hallucinogenic drugs are
pretty common and powerful. They could allow one to experience all
sorts of sensations.

>It's pretty far beyond Traveller technology.

I'll agree with the Matter Replicators but wasn't there a module or
two that introduced Transporter technology?

>I even have trouble swollowing it in Star Trek.  Picard sez people choose the

You could say that for most of their technology! I have a hard time
with the low tech planets they visit, especially the Federation ones.

Another point I'd like to bring up is frictionalless surfaces. What
would be the technology level required to produce it? Could it be
produced with varying results, such as level 1 would be 10%, level
2 20% and so on, or is the nature of the material such that it would
be all or nothing? 

Mike



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

Archive-Message-Number: 3956
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 11:46:12 -0500
From: surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
Subject: Frictionalless? Surfaces

Yes, a misspelling! :-) Caught myself but not before I mailed it! Oh well!

I was thinking of fictional at the time so...

It should be frictionless not frictionalless.

Mike
who_is_not_an_English_major


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3957
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 11:55 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: The Vargr in MegaTrav

Metlay asked about the recent Wolfsport in Challenge:

Simplistic?	Yes.
Ill concieved?	Yes.
Boring?		Yes.
Would I use it?  No.
Is this what we have come to expect from MegaTrav?  Yes.  (Sigh!)
Offensive?	Well, I'm not a Vargr myself, but if I were... :-)

Sorry, but there is a lot more to Vargr than furry humans with tails,
claws, fangs and short tempers.  If one went by the description of Vargr
one often finds in Challenge etc, you have to wonder how it is these
hyper-aggressive morons managed to survive long enough to settle an area
that is about as large as the Imperium if not larger!

Another disturbing trend I've found in recent magazines is the lack of
thought going into the prep of the adventures they've put out.  In Wolfsport,
the players are challenged to a fight in an arena with the current champion.
The author then goes on to outline a lot of possible outcomes and actions the
players might take.

But NOWHERE does he even mention the idea that the players might enter the
arena, take on a highly motivated, very strong vargr with Infighting-4, and
tactical skill, who is hopped up on combat drug, and LOSE!  This seems the
most likely outcome to me!

Another recent article had the players trapped in a room with a sniper on the
roof.  They were required to climb up a rope ladder to get to him while under
fire from the sniper.  The sniper had a gauss rifle and Combat Rifleman-5!
SURE!  How many players are gonna be left?

Another recent article had the players find several Zhodani hiding in a
packing crate.  No mention of what the heck they are doing.  They're just
there.  Ah-Yup!

Does anyone ever think about these things but me?  Evidently the Challenge
staff doesn't.  (Sigh!)

Scott Kellogg
BTW, Metlay, which article on Vargr in Antares are you referring to?  Maybe my
collection is missing something.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3958
From: metlay@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu (metlay)
Subject: Re: The Vargr in MegaTrav
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 14:19:26 EDT


> Does anyone ever think about these things but me?  Evidently the Challenge
> staff doesn't.  (Sigh!)

>From what I'm given to understand, they're so desperate for articles that
they'll publish ANYTHING. Too bad I'm writing a thesis, or I'd clean out
my slush pile for them....

> Scott Kellogg
> BTW, Metlay, which article on Vargr in Antares are you referring to?  
> Maybe my collection is missing something.

An old issue of CHALLENGE has an article set on the politics of the 
Antares and Julian realms, with bits on human/vargr relations. It
really did a lot to fill out the thin spots in the character I'm
running in the PBEM....


- -- 

Mike Metlay
metlay@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu
Atomic City, P.O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3959
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 13:24:57 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: body pistols and vargr...

Kellogg:
 
>Calculator slipped!  That should have been
>Body Pistol-9 as minimum to hit a person wearing battledress @ medium
range.
>
>But on the other hand, I'm sure you see the point...
 
I must have missed something here.  Why would anyone want to shoot a man in
Battledress with a body pistol?
 
 
Metlay:
 
>BTW, was anyone else as offended as I was at "Wolfsport"? What a totally
>bozotic and monochrome representation of the Vargr. And here I'd been
>hoping that the Antares article was a sign of an upward trend....
 
Bozotic???
 
So why can't some Vargr be idiotic?  After all some humans are.  I thought 
the scenario was fair-to-moderately silly, though I would have enjoyed 
handing that Vargr his head if the scenario had been run in our campaign.
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3960
Date:         Wed, 15 Apr 92 23:59:07 CDT
From: OUTJFH@UMCVMB.missouri.edu
Subject:      Speaking of Virtual Reality...

Just kind of an interesting side note. Looked at a copy of Newsweek today
and there was lot's of stuff about mapping the brain. Including some new
technology breakthrough that maps the electrical activity in the brain. They
call it 'squid'. Anyway, my first thought was - if they can read it (apparently
as some interference pattern), I wonder how long till they can do the opposite
and induce activity remotely in the brain.... Been a while since I saw the
movie Brainstorm.

Just random thoughts,

Joe (finally back) Heck

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3961
From: PHB100@PSUVM.PSU.EDU
Date:    Thu, 16 Apr 92 08:51 EDT
Subject: (3955) Virtual Raelity & Frictionless Surfaces

>Another point I'd like to bring up is frictionalless surfaces. What
>would be the technology level required to produce it? Could it be
>produced with varying results, such as level 1 would be 10%, level
>2 20% and so on, or is the nature of the material such that it would
>be all or nothing?
>
>Mike
>
Here are my two cents worth with the caveat that I am not a Chemist/Physicist/
Materials Scientist.

I would say that any particular material would have a constant coefficient of
friction, with perhaps, slight variations due to different alloying materials
and manufacturing techniques used.  However, it should be possible to make new
materials with lower and lower coefficients of friction, probably dependant on
tech level.
     up to TL  8 normal
           TL  9 20% Friction Free
           TL 10 30% FF
           TL 12 50% FF
           TL 13 60% FF
           TL 15 80% FF
           TL 16 90% FF
           TL 17 99% FF

It will probably be 'impossible' to create matter that is totally friction-
free, but forcefields are another matter. 8+)  Another thing to consider is
the other characteristics of the material.  Is it brittle?  Melts at low temps?
Hard to machine?  Poisonous to humans?

What would it be used for?  Sidewalks? (probably not)  Engine bearings? (yes)
Wheels? (no, wheels depend on friction to work)  Recreation?  (sure)  How about
the equivalent of water slides (have to be totaly enclosed or you would flip
out at the first turn) or downhill skiing? (you can only go straight down the
hill cause you need friction to turn)  Other than things like engine bearings,
the biggest use would be recreation.

An alternative to frictionless materials is the 'Friction field generator'
(invented by James Blish in one of his _Cities_in_Flight_ books).  I can't
remember the exact explanation given (which may have been BS anyway...), but
the effect was to reduce (or increase!) the friction coefficient of ANY matter
within its field.  I would tend to place this invention at TL 19 or more.

I had this great idea several years ago for a material, one of whose secondary
characteristics, is that it was frictionless.  It had other properties which
I won't go into here, because one of the guys in the campaign listens in here
(hi Jay!), and I may start it up again in the future.  If anyone is interested,
I'll be happy to explain further by email.

- ----------
In the dark no one can hear the color of your eyes.
Disclaimer:  This is me.  Do I sound like anyone else?

Paul Baughman          PHB100 @ psuvm.bitnet
                       baughman @ gis.psu.edu
- ----------
Captain Sir Michael Talmoth,  UPP:  BA5A8B

"You see me now a veteran,
     Of a thousand psychic wars,
         I've been living on the edge so long,
             Where the winds of Limbo roar.
- -- BOC


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3962
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 9:18:12 PDT
From: Timothy Soholt <soholt@aludra.usc.edu>
Subject: Virtual Reality and Star Trek Holodecks

[Resent to the correct address with a better subject line -- James]

Someone whose name I just erased from this file writes:

> I would imagine a similar setup to a Holodeck is feasible in Traveller.
> If holodisplays are available for workstations they should be easy
> enough to erect in a larger setting, such as a building. Now, I'll
> agree that simulating other sensory data might be a little difficult
> but they could be introduced as chemical sprays. I would imagine

Presumably they use something to make tech 13 holodynamic controls
work. I always figured it was some sort of energy pulse to the
appropriate neurons that fooled the operator into thinking he was
dealing with a set of physical controls.

- -- Tim Soholt (soholt@aludra.usc.edu), The Man With No .sig

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3963
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 10:50:36 CST
From: GT0171@SIUCVMB.SIU.EDU
Subject: Modem Users Unite!

[This is not a Traveller topic, but it is of direct importance to users
of computers and modems, which most of us are. Please carefully read
this document and make your own choice whether to respond or not. I know
I will! Thanks to Keith Phemister for sending me this, and to Geoff
Speare for writing the original -- James]

Two years ago the FCC tried and (with your help and letters of protest)
failed to institute regulations that would impose additional costs on modem
users for data communications.

Now, they are at it again.  A new regulation that the FCC is quietly working
on will directly affect you as the user of a computer and modem.  The FCC
proposes that users of modems should pay extra charges for use of the public
telephone network which carry their data.  In addition, computer network
services such as CompuServ, Tymnet, & Telenet would also be charged as much
as $6.00 per hour per user for use of the public telephone network.  These
charges would very likely be passed on to the subscribers.

The money is to be collected and given to the telephone company in an effort
to raise funds lost to deregulation.

Jim Eason of KGO newstalk radio (San Francisco, CA) commented on the
proposal during his afternoon radio program during which, he said he learned
of the new regulation in an article in the New York Times.  Jim took the
time to gather the addresses which are given below.

Here's what you should do (NOW!):

 1- Pass this information on.  Capture the information which contains
    the text you are reading now.  Find other BBS's that are not
    carrying this information.  Upload the ASCII text into a public
    message on the BBS, and also upload the file itself so others can
    easily get a copy to pass along.

 2- Print out three copies of the letter which follows (or write your
    own) and send a signed copy to each of the following:

         Chairman of the FCC
         1919 M Street N.W.
         Washington, D.C. 20554

         Chairman, Senate Communication Subcommittee
         SH-227 Hart Building
         Washington, D.C. 20510

         Chairman, House Telecommunication Subcommittee
         B-331 Rayburn Building

Here's the suggested text of the letter to send:

   Dear Sir,

   Please allow me to express my displeasure with the FCC proposal
   which would authorize a surcharge for the use of modems on the
   telephone network. This regulation is nothing less than an attempt
   to restrict the free exchange of information among the growing
   number of computer users. Calls placed using modems require no
   special telephone company equipment, and users of modems pay the
   phone company for use of the network in the form of a monthly bill.

   In short, a modem call is the same as a voice call and therefore
   should not be subject to any additional regulation.

   Sincerely,
   [your name, address and signature]

It is important that you act now.  The bureaucrats already have it in their
heads that modem users should subsidize the phone company and are now
listening to public comment. Please stand up and make it clear that we will
not stand for any government restriction on the free exchange of
information.

[end text]

Geoff Speare
OMG
geoff@omg.org

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
From traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
From cat@piggy.fgs.slb.COM (Rather B. Fishing)
From KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
From "C. Roald" <HOBBIT@AC.DAL.CA>
From "Carl Fago" <CDF1@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
From surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
From bart@sisters.cs.uoregon.edu
From "VEAMF1::BARANSKI"@VSDEC.NUSC.NAVY.MIL
From jlp@math.byu.edu (Jan L. Peterson)
From jdietz@sdcc13.UCSD.EDU (J'Dietz)
From ntm1169@dsac.dla.mil (Mott Given)
From "C. Roald" <HOBBIT@AC.DAL.CA>
From surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
From surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
From bonnevil@stolaf.edu (Steven Bonneville)
From KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
From richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
From richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
From KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
From jduffin@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Joshua Duffin)
From d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
From James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
From gwh@lurnix.COM (George William Herbert)
From ntm1169@dsac.dla.mil (Mott Given)
From pedro@eltn.utwente.nl (Pedro A.C. Tavares)
From ntm1169@dsac.dla.mil (Mott Given)
From richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Return-Path: jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #332: Msgs 3964-3989
Reply-To: traveller-request@wrgate.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
Content-Length: 40485
X-Lines: 969
Status: RO


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Sun Apr 26 21:00:14 PDT 1992
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #332: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3964  16-Apr-92 cat@piggy.fgs.slb Frictionless materials, frictionless bearings
3965  17-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Diamond thin film coatings in future technolo
3966  17-Apr-92 "C. Roald"        Re: Frictionless Surfaces << >I would say tha
3967  17-Apr-92 "Carl Fago"       Re: Modem Users Unite! (again??) << This FCC 
3968  17-Apr-92 surman@vortex.lgs Re: Frictionless Surfaces << The question abo
3969  19-Apr-92 bart@sisters.cs.u Frictionless Toilets (Re: TML biweekly Msg 39
3970  20-Apr-92 "VEAMF1::BARANSKI Frictionless Surfaces << Anyone remember the 
3971  20-Apr-92 jlp@math.byu.edu  (3968) Re: Frictionless Surfaces << > The que
3972  19-Apr-92 jdietz@sdcc13.UCS Re: (3968) Re: Frictionless Surfaces << [Rese
3973  20-Apr-92 ntm1169@dsac.dla. Questions on computer version - MegaTraveller
3974  21-Apr-92 "C. Roald"        Challenge submissions? << Did I hear somebody
3975  21-Apr-92 surman@vortex.lgs Re: Frictionless Surfaces << Bart Massey writ
3976  21-Apr-92 surman@vortex.lgs (3973) Questions on computer version - MegaTr
3977  21-Apr-92 bonnevil@stolaf.e Stories (Re: Frictionless Surfaces) << The st
3978  21-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Pseudo-Biological Robot Tech Level Limbo. (Ho
3979  21-Apr-92 richard@agora.rai Re: MegaTraveller Computer Question << Mott G
3980  22-Apr-92 richard@agora.rai Re: Pseudo-bio Robots ... << Scott asks about
3981  22-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Re: Challenge submissions? << Yup, supposedly
3982  21-Apr-92 jduffin@pnet51.or Re: Frictionless surfaces (sources) << [Resen
3983  22-Apr-92 d9bertil@dtek.cha Yawn! << [I thought TMLers would be intereste
3984  22-Apr-92 James T Perkins   What is the PBEM? << Hello Mott, and welcome 
3985  22-Apr-92 gwh@lurnix.COM    Re: Challenge Submissions << I said so re: Tr
3986  23-Apr-92 ntm1169@dsac.dla. MegaTraveller 2 << James: Thanks for the repl
3987  23-Apr-92 pedro@eltn.utwent players of 2300AD; rules << Hello everybody! 
3988  23-Apr-92 ntm1169@dsac.dla. What is the PBEM? (fwd) << James, thanks for 
3989  23-Apr-92 richard@agora.rai Challenge Magazine << So post the name of the

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3964
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 15:23:42 PDT
From: cat@piggy.fgs.slb.COM (Rather B. Fishing)
Subject: Frictionless materials, frictionless bearings

 
Mike Surman queried: 

> Another point I'd like to bring up is frictionalless surfaces. What
> would be the technology level required to produce it? Could it be 
> produced with varying results, such as level 1 would be 10%, level 2 
> 20% and so on, or is the nature of the material such that it would be
> all or nothing?

In terms of practical applied physics, we currently know of no
material or combination of materials, which, when in contact and
sliding past one another, are frictionless.  Molecules are bumpy
little bastards, even in low friction combinations like teflon and
polyethylene, or steel and lubricating oil.  Even in low friction
materials, molecules interact with one another, bumping and stripping
electrons and destroying molecular bonds, pulling and wearing away
both materials.  The entire science of bearings is involved in
"getting the friction out" by engineering design (compare replacing a
sleeve or journal with a ball bearing) or by adding lubricants.

I don't think there will ever be a frictionless material, unless of
course someone finds a way to make "smooth" molecules, which according
to our physics, both newtonian and relativistic, is impossible.  On
the other hand, who knows what strange physics the future holds?  I
opine, however, that the nature of molecular interaction, (which is
the level at which friction is well explained), will not be subject to
change even as our knowledge of physics expands.  

Even today, there are remarkable low friction materials.  Most of
these materials have significant problems which prevent them from
being generally available for widespread commercial applications.  The
typical problems are strength of the material (bearings are subjected
to some pretty hefty stresses), bonding failure when bonded to a
stronger material, and cost, to name a few.  Given that we have the
technology today to make really low friction materials, albeit
expensively, I would estimate that by, say TL10, most of the problems
we have today will go away.

Why bother with frictionless materials?  The area of mechanical
engineering where you want no friction is in bearing design.  And true
frictionless bearings were invented in the 1970's for the european
space program.  <The French Government (through the government
corporation which manufactures the rocket engines for the eureopean
space program) owns the patent rights.>  Each bearing is custom
designed, so they are VERY VERY expensive.  There is no bearing
surface - the components never touch because the rotor is suspended
inside a magnetic field.

The largest frictionless bearing so far was made for a IR gas turbine
at a power plant - the rotor (ie, the turbine shaft) was to the tune
of 10s of tons (I want to say 20, but I'm pulling figures out of my
memory - I really should go home and look the numbers up, but I
confess I'm being lazy).  So size is not a limitation.  Also, the
position of the rotor inside the field is actively controlled by an
analog filter (a frightening concept in this modern day of digitized
controls) - the resonance frequencies of the rotor can be filtered out
so the rotor can actually spin at a speed GREATER than its critical.
All of this is possible NOW (life is stranger than fiction...) though
at very large price tag.

>From a traveller perspective, I would say the frictionless bearings
become available at our current TL; the price tag, power consumption,
and physical size fall with increasing TL (the bearing is an
electromagnet - now think about the size required for an electromagnet
to float a 20 ton turbine shaft...).

Is anyone interested enough in frictionless bearings for me to go home
and generate some traveller charts for them?  (I think they're rather
esoteric myself...for traveller purposes, I would just go ahead and
assume that I could use them cheaply by, say, TL12.)

I suspect I'm getting pedantic at this point, so I'll wrap this up.

Steve Higginbotham asked, I suspect somewhat incredulously:

> Why would anyone want to shoot a man in 
> Battledress with a body pistol?

Would you believe desperation?

(Time to go back to my corner...before I get into any more trouble...)

Catie Helm 
Finder Graphics, Inc. - A Schlumberger Company
Corte Madera, California, USA


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3965
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 12:04 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Diamond thin film coatings in future technology (RE: Frictionless)

A quick note on high tech bearings:

A few years back, I was working at the Naval Research Lab in DC in diamond
thin film coatings.  This technology has a lot of applications in future
technology.

For one, diamond has a very low co-efficient of friction.  Diamond coated
bearings will not only be extremely durable, but have very low friction.
Diamond is also a very good heat conductor.  Therefore cooling these bearings
will be a lot easier.

Durable,
Low friction,
Good Heat conductivity,
Good optical qualities,
Good semiconductor.

Sounds pretty good don't it?  Problem is that right now, we can't grow single
crystal diamond films.  Not yet, but pretty soon.  They are studying a lotta
techniques to get these things working.  Just before I left I heard about a
new idea that was producing good results.  (They were going after the patent
so I'm not sure if I can say much.  Ask me in a couple years...)

But basically growing diamond films is very easy.  Polycrystalline films are
dead simple.  You can grow them with an acetylene welding torch.  The trick is
getting the right temperature in the flame and the correct temperature on the
substrate.  You also have to worry about the purity of your acetylene and
oxygen in your welding torch.

If you've got the right conditions, you will grow a diamond coating.  The
rate of growth is currently very slow, but that's one of the things they are
working on.   One of they guys at the lab wanted to grow a diamond about a
kilgram in mass to give to Cher (Don't ask!)  However, I did a little back of
the envelope calculations and found that it would take 300 years or so to
grow at current rates.  (Cher won't be looking so great in 300 years...)

However, even these dirty polycrystalline films could be polished down to a
smooth surface for use in bearings.  Then the problem of adhearance to the
substate comes in.  The polycrystalline lattice has weak points in it and these
can lead to failure.

Other uses of diamond:
Diamond doped with boron makes an excellent semiconductor.  It is much faster,
more durable, and radiation hard than silicon, gallium arsinide, and silicon
carbide.  With the added heat conductivity of diamond it will be a LOT easier
to pack a lotta circuits into a diamond computer chip and your diamond
supercomputer won't have to be cooled with liquid nitrogen.

Diamond also has some very nice optical properties.  It is much more
transparant in certain frequency ranges than glass or quartz.  So your TL 13+
x-ray lasers may be using diamond optics for their lenses and mirrors.

At the current rate of R&D, I'd guess that diamond  thin films,
semiconductors and optics will be available at TL9.  But Diamond computers
will hold off till TL 10.  (They'll have to redevelop a lot of circuitry
etching techniques which are currently geared toward silicon)

For those of you who were there and remember, This is what Tweel and 'Vouf
were arguing about (and annoying everyone :-) for weeks in the PBEM.  (I think
that discussion was the spark that demanded that the PBEMCHAT line be set
up! :-)  Diamond films for use in cooling and monotoring Jump drives.  If you
coated a starship with a diamond thin film coating doped with boron, you could
then cool the grid more efficiently, and monitor the grid by etching circuitry
into that film you can install sensors to monitor the grid.

Tweel originally suggested that the grid could be reduced to an evaporated
thin coating of lanathaum and coat that with a thin film of diamond to
protect it.  'Vouf then quashed that one by bringing up the possibility of
battle damage.  In the end the proposal was to coat the grid with diamond
thereby helping the cooling which would decrease the mass of the needed
lanthanum and thereby decreasing the cost of the drive.  OF course all of this
is arguing about non-existant jump technolgy, but I'm sure that you get the
point that diamond could be VERY useful for trav technology.

Scott Kellogg
PS.  Catie, *I'd* like to hear more about the magnetic frictionless bearings.
It's always useful to know what technolgy can *REALLY* do *NOW* when your
trying to work in a setting that tells you what technolgy will be doing
several hundred years from now!  Thanks!

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3966
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 17:12 -0300
From: "C. Roald" <HOBBIT@AC.DAL.CA>
Subject: Re: Frictionless Surfaces

>I would say that any particular material would have a constant coefficient of
>friction, with perhaps, slight variations due to different alloying materials
>and manufacturing techniques used.  However, it should be possible to make new

One thing that you may want to note is that the coefficient of friction 
is a property of two substances sliding on each other, so wood on ice 
has a very different coefficient of friction from wood on sandpaper.

>     up to TL  8 normal
		  ^^^^^^ What does "normal" mean?
>           TL  9 20% Friction Free
....
>           TL 17 99% FF

"Frictionless" means no friction. Zero.  I think you're thinking of 
smaller and smaller coefficients of friction, and a far more natural way
to list that would be to say the coef. of friction of the slipperiest 
substance known decreases by an order of magnitude with each tech level:
ie.  0.001, 0.0001, 0.00001, etc.

I'm curious as to why anyone really cares about improvement in 
low-friction substances.  Surely this sort of thing just gets lumped 
into "improved engine efficiency", or some such.

>An alternative to frictionless materials is the 'Friction field generator'
>(invented by James Blish in one of his _Cities_in_Flight_ books).  I can't
>remember the exact explanation given (which may have been BS anyway...), but

"May have been..." ?

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

>It is important that you act now.  The bureaucrats already have it in their
>heads that modem users should subsidize the phone company and are now
>listening to public comment. Please stand up and make it clear that we will
>not stand for any government restriction on the free exchange of
>information.

Incidentally, guys, don't make the argument based on "free exchange of 
information", because they're not trying to restrict what you say. 
They're just trying to make you pay more for a piece of equipment that
sits on your desk.

Object because modem users should not subsidize the phone companies.

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

>I don't think there will ever be a frictionless material, unless of
>course someone finds a way to make "smooth" molecules, which according
>to our physics, both newtonian and relativistic, is impossible.

Quantum mechanics disagrees.

If you count "zero viscosity" as equivalent to "zero friction",
we know of at least two frictionless substances: Helium-4 at 
temperatures below 4 K, and Helium-3 at temperatures below 1.5 K.
(If for some reason you care about the exact temperatures, look them up. 
Don't quote me.)  Both substances undergo phase changes to superfluid 
states, and develop some distinctly strange properties. And before 
anyone says that these temperatures are too cold to be useful, remember 
two things: we're talking about working in space, where the ambient 
temperature is on this order of magnitude, and that ten years ago, 
it was thought that superconductivity could only occur at these 
temperatures.

      c.r.

- --
I don't know what's weirder--that you're fighting a stuffed animal, or
that you seem to be losing.		-- Susie

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3967
Date:    Fri, 17 Apr 92 17:42 EDT
From: "Carl Fago" <CDF1@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Modem Users Unite! (again??)

This FCC action seems to be a constant net-myth like sending of cards to that
kid in England, etc.

Now, it may be the real thing again, but I would like to see some sort of
documentation that it _is_ real.  Say a Docket Number or some such official
mucky-muck that we can reference and read.  That way we netters avoid being
more of a nuisance to the FCC than a force to be reckoned with.

 *-=Carl=-*  INTERNET - cdf1@psuvm.psu.edu    | Be wary of strong drink.     |
             DELPHI - WULFGAR  GEnie - C.FAGO1| It can make you shoot at tax |
 Carl Fago   State College, PA                | collectors -- and miss!      |


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3968
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 19:20:37 -0500
From: surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
Subject: Re: Frictionless Surfaces

The question about frictionless surfaces came up because of a
science fiction novel I remembered reading (title & author currently
forgotten). The material wasn't used for bearings but plumbing. I 
remember the character in the story used a toilet, which was 
completely dry, and watched as his excrement slid away.

Besides, it sounded like a good topic to discuss! It's always
interesting reading science fiction and applying it to the game. :-)

Mike


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3969
Subject: Frictionless Toilets (Re: TML biweekly Msg 3968 V26#10)
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 92 21:28:26 -0700
From: bart@sisters.cs.uoregon.edu

surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman) writes:
> The question about frictionless surfaces came up because of a
> science fiction novel I remembered reading (title & author currently
> forgotten). The material wasn't used for bearings but plumbing. I 
> remember the character in the story used a toilet, which was 
> completely dry, and watched as his excrement slid away.

Give the (deservedly) anonymous author a no-prize for a clearer
understanding of low-friction technology than toilet
technology.  The principal reason toilets have water in them is
to prevent odors escaping.  Not only is the brown stuff
submerged in water during use but, much more importantly,
Crapper's celebrated invention is designed so that there is
always a water barrier between the user and the main sewer
line.  Without this barrier, one's home would soon begin to
smell like a sewer.  The flushing action is designed mainly to
carry offensive materials through the barrier.  Consider the
predecessor of the flush toilet, in which a *very* low
coefficient of friction exists between the target material and
the transport on the way to the final disposal destination
:-).  Not something I'd want in my home.

					Bart Massey
					bart@cs.uoregon.edu

"Build a better toilet, and the world will stand in line outside
your door with legs crossed."

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3970
Date:    Mon, 20 Apr 1992 10:41:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: "VEAMF1::BARANSKI"@VSDEC.NUSC.NAVY.MIL
Subject: Frictionless Surfaces

Anyone remember the couple of stories by... is it Poul Anderson?  About the
crew of a spaceship trying to hide from some enemies in a system which had some
interesting planets?

One planet had the substance called "buckyballs", which were a frictionless
carbon substance which was all that was left after the rest of the biosphere
sublimed away.

Another planet had some kind of liquid acid life form that slowly ate
*anything*, starting with the ship's landing gear, and working up...

The Buckballs were a real interesting 'frictionless' substance, and supposedly
possible.  I thought I remembered seeing newspaper article on thier research
last year...

Jim Baranski

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3971
From: jlp@math.byu.edu (Jan L. Peterson)
Subject: (3968) Re: Frictionless Surfaces
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 92 10:57:09 -0600

> The question about frictionless surfaces came up because of a
> science fiction novel I remembered reading (title & author currently
> forgotten). The material wasn't used for bearings but plumbing. I 
> remember the character in the story used a toilet, which was 
> completely dry, and watched as his excrement slid away.

I think this was "A World Out of Time" by Larry Niven.  An excellent
book, highly recommended.  Try to imagine the earth after a million
years or so, now a satellite of Jupiter.

	-jan-
- -- 
        Jan L. Peterson		Network Systems Manager
EMail:  jlp@hamblin.math.byu.edu
Mail:   Math Department -- 292 TMCB; BYU; Provo, UT 84602 (USA)
Phone:  +1 801 378 2183		FAX:  +1 801 378 2800

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3972
From: jdietz@sdcc13.UCSD.EDU (J'Dietz)
Subject: Re: (3968) Re: Frictionless Surfaces
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 92 17:26:31 PDT

[Resent to traveller@metolius.wr.tek.com, the correct address - James]

> The question about frictionless surfaces came up because of a
> science fiction novel I remembered reading (title & author currently
> forgotten). The material wasn't used for bearings but plumbing. I 
> remember the character in the story used a toilet, which was 
> completely dry, and watched as his excrement slid away.
> 
> Besides, it sounded like a good topic to discuss! It's always
> interesting reading science fiction and applying it to the game. :-)
> 
> Mike
 
I remember something similar from "David Starr, Space Ranger", space
opera by Isaac Asimov.  Much of the science is somewhat drechlich,
but he pointed out in several cases that surfaces without surface
tension (probably not actually frictionless) would save water on
Mars, where every drop is precious.
 
Is that what you were thinking of?
 
Jack
- --
Jack Dietz              Suit, Heated: See Heatsuit.
// jdietz@ucsd.edu        -- Megatraveller Imperial Encyclopedia

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3973
From: ntm1169@dsac.dla.mil (Mott Given)
Subject: Questions on computer version - MegaTraveller
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 92 11:43:23 EDT

[Resent to traveller@metolius.wr.tek.com, the correct address - James]

  I have a beginner type question on the computerized version of the
  game MegaTraveller.  

  1) I am having a hard time being able to control my spaceship to land it on 
  a world.  I haven't found the instruction manual very helpful.  I wind up 
  running out of fuel before I can land anywhere.  Sometimes I can get close
  to a world, but cannot land on it.  I even find it difficult to navigate well
  enough to get close to a world.  Any suggestions?
  
  Also, what are the PBEM's mentioned in previous bundles?

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3974
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 92 02:11 -0300
From: "C. Roald" <HOBBIT@AC.DAL.CA>
Subject: Challenge submissions?

Did I hear somebody (Mike?) say Challenge magazine was desperate for 
submissions?  I think Mike is OOT now, so somebody else please field the 
question.

     c.r.

- --
Free to roam the heavens in Man's noble quest to investigate the 
weirdness of the universe!	-- Spaceman Spiff

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3975
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 92 07:30:18 -0500
From: surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
Subject: Re: Frictionless Surfaces

Bart Massey writes:
>Give the (deservedly) anonymous author a no-prize for a clearer
>understanding of low-friction technology than toilet
>technology.  The principal reason toilets have water in them is
>to prevent odors escaping.  Not only is the brown stuff
>...

No doubt about it! But I imagine if a society is advanced enough
to create a frictionless surface it also has the means to keep
odors under control. Then again, I didn't say it was a good idea
only an interesting one! :-)

As to the particular novel, A World Out of Time by Niven and 
David Starr, Space Ranger by Asimov were mentioned. I was thinking
about Childhoods End by Asimov. Now, I'll have to search my library
and find it!

Mike


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3976
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 92 08:05:56 -0500
From: surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
Subject: (3973) Questions on computer version - MegaTravelle

It's been awhile since I played but here's my .02 cr worth!

Which MegaTraveller game do you have 1 or 2?

MegaTrav 1 has problems in the earlier releases. If you have an early
release write to Paragon for an update. How to tell if you have an
earlier release? Since I don't have the game with me it would be just
as easy to call Paragon and find out. [ Really helpful, huh! :-)]

Flying the ship is about as bad as trying to control the combat.
MT2 simplifies both and is more flexible. First off, this may sound
dumb but, make sure you have enough fuel. It's easy to forget to
refuel, usually you do it just once then you remember the next time!
I did! Second, each position on the ship controls different functions.
Switching between them is a pain, again it's easier in MT2. If you're
in the wrong station the other stations keep on doing what they were
told previously. Which is ok most of the time but to land the ship
stop movement in orbit around the planet. Once in orbit select land
and that should do it. 

Skill level of your characters also plays a part. If they are not
high enough it is difficult to control actions. Weapon skills being
a prime example! If you watch your lower level skill characters
shoot the beams fly all over the place. The same goes for piloting
and nav skills. Accuracy at lower levels is really poor.

Mike


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3977
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 92 10:25:05 CDT
From: bonnevil@stolaf.edu (Steven Bonneville)
Subject: Stories (Re: Frictionless Surfaces)


The stories that Jim Baranski and Bart Massey are talking about sound like
Larry Niven / Jerry Pournelle collaborations.  I think that the friction-
less toilet appears in _Mote In God's Eye_, as one of the Brownies' 
constructions aboard the _MacArthur_.  The story reads a lot like something
out of Classic Traveller, black globes and all.  Sequel due out soon, but
it stands alone.

There is a story about hiding from enemies in a solar system with
some very dangerous planets in one of the "Man-Kzin Wars" books too, which
are usually Niven collaborations with Pournelle and at least one other
author.  It seems that his contract with the publisher for the _Mote_
sequel stipulates that it will be the next Niven/Pournelle book, but
says nothing about three-way collaborations.... :)

- --Steve Bonneville
<bonnevil@stolaf.edu>


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3978
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1992 16:43 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Pseudo-Biological Robot Tech Level Limbo.  (How low can you go?)

Hey guys,

Got a question for ya.  Been on my back burner for a while.
Pseudo-biological robots.  How good are they at passing for the real thing?

According to What little we know, TL 15 is minimal for attempting to pass for
human.  To me, that sounds kinda high and lesser levels of deception might be
possible.  For instance:  If someone wanted a pseudo-biological border guard,
how hard would it be for them to pass for a human in that occupation?

I think that it would be relatively easy to build a robot that could pass a
cursory inspection.  The main difficulties would be getting the robot's body
language correct.  You might build a motorized manequin, but all the
articulations would be difficult.  Getting the skin to move properly as it is
the muscle simulators move underneath it.  Particularly important (at least in
human models) would be getting the facial muscles right.  It won't pass for
human if it smiles like a gargoyle!

Ok, now DGP says that the TL 15 pseudo-bio Aybee from their adventures can pass
as a human with exceptional success.  I haven't read all their adventures, but
seems that they managed to fool 98% of those they came in contact with.

Ok, what about a TL 14 attempt at a pseudo-bio?  There is an Aslan Pseudo-Bio
in 101 robots.  They indicate that it does have problems interacting in all
situations, but clearly it CAN pass in some situations.

Go lower.  What about a TL 12 or 13 pseudo-bio?  I would guess that pass in
fewer and fewer cases, but I would guess that it could still manage to pass
as an East German Border Guard or a Yankee State Trooper. :-)
I know a few professors who could very well *BE* TL 11 pseudo-bios!  (YAWN!)

A quick breakdown of Pseudo-Bios in their ability to fool people:
(I tried to come up w/ examples you folks might have seen before)

TL 17+	Virtually indistinguishable  (Think of the replicants from Blade
	Runner)

TL 16	Extremely good in normal circumstances.  (Think new Star Trek:  Lore)

TL 15	Quite good in normal circumstances.  Can fool most people virtually
	all the time.  (Think of the pseudo-bios in Alien(s)).

TL 14	Ok.  Can fool most people, best only under certain circumstances.
	Limited in their ability by their area of experience.  You don't wanna
	talk to a robot programmed as a pilot on the topic of music or art
	appreciation.  (Think of the androids in the old Star Trek:  I Mudd)
	("I am not programmed to respond in that area...")

TL 13	Can fool people only in the proper circumstances.  Otherwise almost
	immediately distinguishable as a robot.  (Think Data from the new
	Star Trek)  If you get them off the subject of their own expertise,
	they are hopeless.  The movement is kinda stiff.  Facial expression
	Not quite up to snuff.

TL 12	Can fool people only if the robot shows no emotion.  Has all the acting
	ability of Arnold Shwartzeneger.  Has virtually no knowlege outside of
	their application programs.  Facial expression:  must maintain a
	poker face.  Movement more stiff.  (Terminator, Gunslinger from
	Westworld)

TL 11	Can fool people only if it stands still.  Walk is awkward - looks
	funny.  (Think Lurch from the Addams Family)

TL 10	No better than a contoured robot.

How 'bout the effects of the TL can vary dependant upon who is interacting
with the robot.  Thus a human dealing with an Aslan pseudo-bio would have more
difficulty figuring it out than the same human with a human pseudo-bio.  Say
a robot would be effectively one or two tech levels higher in it's ability to
fool sophonts.  Thus you could have a Aslan pseudo-bio at tech 14 deceive
humans as well as a TL 15 human configured bot.  (Or maybe a TL 12 Hiver bot!)
(Who knows?  Maybe the Hiver you've been dealing with is a robot.  Then again,
Maybe *ALL* The Hivers are robots...  Who'd notice the difference?  Who'd
care?)

Anybody got any ideas on this?  I'm real curious.

Scott Kellogg

It was announced yesterday that British comedian and actor, Benny Hill passed
away over the weekend.  The news was greeted with sighs of relief from scantily
clad women everywhere.
	(Fade out running for cover in fast motion chased by...)

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3979
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Re: MegaTraveller Computer Question
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 92 20:07:40 EDT


Mott Given asks:
:  1) I am having a hard time being able to control my spaceship to land it on 
:  a world.

What always worked out for me was to:
  find the world I wanted to land on
  head toward it at about 10 - 15 speed units
  slam on the breaks when I was really close.
  
If I remember, the slam on the brakes routine was a spacebar, or mouse
click in the center box of the velocity/attitude control thingy.  It took
me a few days to get the hang of it.  Then it was easy.


:  I haven't found the instruction manual very helpful. 

So what else is new?  If they'd pay me, I'd write 'em a good one.  :=)

:  I wind up running out of fuel before I can land anywhere.  Sometimes 
:  I can get close to a world, but cannot land on it.  I even find it 
:  difficult to navigate well enough to get close to a world.  

The trick is to slow down *rapidly* when you're near a planet.  The 
only effective way I ever found is described above.  Trying retro-
thrust is just too slow.  If you can get stopped, or at least crawlingly 
slow, the starport will just capture you.

Navigating is another one of those things I sorta dislike.  You have to
have a player with Pilot-2.  For the first month or two I played, I 
resorted to using strictly vertical and strictly horizontal movements.
Much easier to control.  When you leave hyperspace, immediately stop.
Then look at the relative planet locations, compare that with the planet
(star system) maps in the book, and take a straight vertical/straight
horizontal route to the planet you want.

Hope that helps.
- -- 
Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3980
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Re: Pseudo-bio Robots ...
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 92 5:41:24 EDT

Scott asks about distinguishing whether a robot is trying to pass
as a human (or vargr, or whatever, I suppose).  I think a good
follow-on spculation might be more like:

How do you tell when, because of implants, replacements, and symbionts,
a biological has "crossed the threshold" and become a robot?  Or can
pass as a robot in some circumstances?  

Remember at TL15, replacement of parts is pretty commonplace.
- -- 
Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3981
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1992 11:26 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Re: Challenge submissions?

Yup, supposedly Challenge is lookin fer stuff for MegaTrav.  Considering the
quality of the MegaTrav stuff they've been putting out, they might be kinda
desparate.

At the moment, I'm trying to get the Horde ready to send off to them.  As it
is already a complete article, It won't take much work for me to get it in
an acceptable format for them.  (I hope)

And yes, I do mean the Horde that you all have horde too much of lately.  :-)

Scott Kellogg

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3982
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 92 17:05:48 CDT
From: jduffin@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Joshua Duffin)
Subject: Re: Frictionless surfaces (sources)

[Resent to traveller@metolius.wr.tek.com (the correct address) - James]

I think the most likely source for the frictionless toilet is Niven and
Pournelle's _The_Mote_in_God's_Eye_.

About the short stories involving buckyballs and the acids: That was part of a
Man-Kzin Wars collection (edited by Niven).  I'm not sure who the author was,
though.  Buckyballs are not only possible, but have been developed: their
presence in the story was most likely influenced by their discovery.  There
was an article in Scientific American about them, not too long ago.  They are
not frictionless, but low-friction, like the other things that have been
discussed here.

UUCP: {crash, kksys}!orbit!pnet51!jduffin    | Life is complex.  It's made
ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51!jduffin@nosc.mil    | up of real and imaginary
INET: jduffin@pnet51.orb.mn.org              | parts.


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3983
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1992 05:58 PST
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
Subject: Yawn!

[I thought TMLers would be interested in this as well - James]

  Well, Gothcon XVI is over, and I've had two days to sleep on, so I'm
beginning to feel ok again:)

  The traveller activities this year was rather limited, just one adventure
about the misfortunes of a broke crew of a type-S. Compared to last year,
the auction was a desert: All traveller things for sale was an "Azhanti"
in an acceptable box, and one set of the basic MT books. [Last year we had
an almost complete set of JTAS for example].

  I managed to get a mint Amber disgustingly cheap, and reading it have made
me reflect on one aspect of the traveller universe:
  Nutty Theory #2 (#1 was "How the Imperium Really Fell"):

  Grandfather is an Amberite:)

- -bertil-
- -- 
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3984
Subject: What is the PBEM?
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 92 11:49:03 PDT
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>


Hello Mott, and welcome to the TML.

ntm1169@dsac.dla.mil (Mott Given) writes:
> Also, what are the PBEM's mentioned in previous bundles?

The PBEM is a strange undertaking, where about 40 current and former TML
members are players in a giant play-by-electronic-mail game of
Traveller. The game, originally run by Richard Johnson, is now
co-refereed by our own Mark Cook and metlay. While player slots in the
game are limited, listener slots are always open. For more answers to
specific questions, please write pbemref@engrg.uwo.ca, which is a mail
address that echoes mail out to both Mark and metlay.

Also, check out the short blurb in the TML Orientation message I sent
you when your address was officially enabled for TML delivery.

James

__   __/         /   /	    Internet Traveller Mailing List, Administrator
    /     /  /  /   /	   James T. Perkins in Beaverton, Oregon, USA
 __/   __/__/__/ _____/   traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3985
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 92 12:59:04 PDT
From: gwh@lurnix.COM (George William Herbert)
Subject: Re: Challenge Submissions


	I said so re: Traveller materials (I don't
know about other systems).  Everyone should go write
something 8-)

- -george william herbert
gwh@lurnix.com  gwh@ocf.berkeley.edu

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3986
From: ntm1169@dsac.dla.mil (Mott Given)
Subject: MegaTraveller 2
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 92 7:19:42 EDT

James:
  Thanks for the reply on PBEM.

Michael Surman:
  Thanks for the reply on MT2.  I got it and it is a lot better than MT1.
  I was wondering how MT2 was programmed?  What language is it done in?
  Does it use object-oriented programming?  How are the graphics done?
  How is the sound done?  How did the programmers learn how to program 
  games like this (are there any books on doing game programming like this)?

  I have an idea for people working on programming games like MT.  How about
  using genetic algorithms to introduce an element of randomness and of
  Darwinian adaptation?

  I was wondering how to get my spaceship to do a jump when I am travelling?
  The manual does not seem very helpful on this point (to me at least!).

  Also, does this group have a list of Frequently Asked Questions on how to
  do XYZ in the computerized versions of MT?  If not, such a list might save
  the mailing list from seeing the same beginner questions posted as new
  people are added to the list.


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3987
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1992 12:34:00
From: pedro@eltn.utwente.nl (Pedro A.C. Tavares)
Subject: players of 2300AD; rules

Hello everybody!
Just joined the list a couple of weeks ago and was quite impressed by the
level of the discussions.

Is anybody out there playing 2300ad?  I just have the basic rules and would
like to discuss some extra rules I came up with and to hear about other
solutions...
Also... could someone explain me what the TL's stand for. In particuraly
what's Megatraveller TL and 2300ad TL (begining of star exploration, Stutter
drive)

One last question among the pbem archives I've been browsing through I came
up with to concepts I would suposse to be the same: gravitics and
reactionless propolsion.  I also don't understand why chem rockets are use
when gravitics would do the job (are gravitics range sensitive????)

====================================
Pedro A.C. Tavares
Faculteit der Technische Natuurkunde
Twente Universiteit
pedro@eltn.utwente.nl
====================================


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3988
From: ntm1169@dsac.dla.mil (Mott Given)
Subject: What is the PBEM? (fwd)
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 92 7:14:15 EDT

 
 James, thanks for the reply on what PBEM is.

 I would like to know more about how MegaTraveller 2 was actually programmed.
 What language is it written in?  Does it use object-oriented programming?
 How are the graphics done?  How is the sound programmed?  Are there any 
 books around that describe how the features in games similar to it are 
 programmed?
 I have an idea for people trying to program games like MT.  How about using
 genetic algorithms to introduce an element of randomness, and of Darwinian
 adaptation, to the game?

 Michael Surman:
  Thanks for the reply on MT2.  I got MT2 and it is a lot better than MT1.
  One problem that I am having with the computer game MT2 is trying to figure 
  out how to do a jump while I am travelling in space.  The manual doesn't
  seem very helpful on this point?  Also, I wonder if this list has a list
  of Frequently Asked Questions on the computerized versions of MegaTraveller?

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3989
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Challenge Magazine
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 92 5:55:27 EDT

So post the name of the appropriate person for articles, and for artwork,
together with the address of the magazine, so we'll know who to harrass.
:=)

If you have a copy of their current "writers' guidelines" please synopsise
that so we don't send in useless material.  If y ou don't, you might
ask for what, in particular, they're looking for before you waste a
stamp.

James -- which bundle has the Gary Thomas submission guidelines from that 
thing in Boise we wnt to a year and a half ago?  Maybe we should recover
that and re-post?
- -- 
Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com
Qui custodii ipsos custodes?

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
From traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
From KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
From richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
From MacGyver <macgyver@cis.ohio-state.edu>
From Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
From James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
From James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
From cadpoole@atlas.cs.upei.ca (Dale Poole)
From cat@fgssu1.fgs.slb.COM (Rather B. Fishing)
From cat@fgssu1.fgs.slb.COM (Rather B. Fishing)
From "C. Roald" <HOBBIT@AC.DAL.CA>
From ptd2@po.CWRU.Edu (Palmer T. Davis)
From anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor)
From anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor)
Return-Path: jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #333: Msgs 3990-4002
Reply-To: traveller-request@wrgate.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
Content-Length: 43918
X-Lines: 1031
Status: RO


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Sun Apr 26 21:00:26 PDT 1992
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #333: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3990  23-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Robot Brains and Cyborgs << Howdy, Richard as
3991  24-Apr-92 richard@agora.rai Robots and Cyborgs and droyne. Oh my! << Actu
3992  24-Apr-92 MacGyver          Re: (3986) MegaTraveller 2 << > Thanks for th
3993  24-Apr-92 Steve_Higginbotha 2300AD << Pedro A.C. Tavares: >Hello everybod
3994  24-Apr-92 James T Perkins   Re: Robot Brains and Cyborgs << KELLOGG@DUCVA
3995  24-Apr-92 James T Perkins   New TML Package: Writer's Guidelines << I une
3996  24-Apr-92 cadpoole@atlas.cs RE: Cyborg Brain and Robots << >Howdy, >Richa
3997  24-Apr-92 cat@fgssu1.fgs.sl frictionless (magnetic) bearings << Magnetic 
3998  24-Apr-92 cat@fgssu1.fgs.sl cybernetics << Reagarding cybernetics, Scott 
3999  24-Apr-92 "C. Roald"        PBeM announcement << Project Journal / K. Hun
4000  25-Apr-92 ptd2@po.CWRU.Edu  How does 2300AD improve on Traveller:2300? <<
4001  25-Apr-92 anaylor@mihi.une. Computer Enhancements << In a game today a pl
4002  26-Apr-92 anaylor@mihi.une. Starship Combat << Just wondering what people

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3990
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1992 12:05 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Robot Brains and Cyborgs

Howdy,

Richard asks about cyborgs and how do ya tell them from normal people or
robots.

Well, if I remember right, there was an old medical technology TL chart in
The old DGP Grand Census.  It may be reprinted in the World builder's handbook.
It said (from memory) that at TL 12, 'advanced prosthetics' were available.
To my mind that means either:

A) prosthetic limbs that are indestinguishable to most observation.

	or

B) advanced prosthetic organs which are capable of replacing critical internal
organs.  I'd guess that a prosthetic eye would be about TL 12.  It probably
won't look much like a normal eye, but at TL 13 a robotic eye would be
indestinguishable from a normal one.

Of course all these will be immediately detectable by a densiometer scan.

But I also remember that at TL 9 limb regeneration is possible, and at TL 12
they talk about regeneration of complex things like eyes.  So, to be frank,
I'm not sure why the question of cyborgs come up.  If you want to have a new
limb, you can grow it just as easily as have one built for you.  There will be
people who want cybernetic stuff built into them, but that would be rather
more rare than the guy who lost an arm and wants it back.

Now, the cyborgs would then be cyborgs by CHOICE.  And depending on how
obvious the individual wants it to be, above TL 12 you'll need a densiometer
to pick them out.  Even at TL 12, if the addition is small and carefully kept
to be the same density as surrounding tissue, an implant might be VERY hard
to detect.  X-Ray?  Build it out of plastic.

To quote an ancient chinese saying "Where there are electronic counter
measures, there are electronic counter counter measures."  If you want your
implant hidden, you can make it hidden.  Then it would take a more advanced
sensor scan to pick it up.  Such scans probably exist, but they are not
normally in use.

It's like trying to hide a body pistol.  The higher the TL pistol, the higher
the TL sensors it's designed to fool. :-)

As to the question:  Can a cyborg pass for a robot?  Well, if he was designed
to do so, sure.  But who would wanna be designed that way?  To fool a
densiometer scan your insides would have to look like the insides of a robot.
That means massive replacement of your organs with cybergear.  Also, I'd bet
your brain and it's massive support equipment will show up on a densiometer
scan.  I'm not really sure how to address the question I'm afraid.  Under what
circumstances would a cyborg wanna pass for a robot?
	------------------------------
Back to Pseudo-Bios.
I know zip about software programming.  Pascal and Basic are my limits.  I
can't address the difficulties of Programming these babies.  I'd get jumped
real quick by the real computer jocks out there.  But, I'd bet that at
differing tech levels, software engineers could handle the task with equal
ability, the main trouble is getting the hardware in shape to where a good
enough program can be run.

Quick look at brain design:
The education of a robot is effectively limited to how many storage units can
be stuffed in the robot.  Thus we can assume that given unlimited cash we can
build it to any education level we want.

Brain intelligence is limited though.  At TL 8 the max intelligence is
negative 3.  But at TL 9 we get parallel CPU components and the max
intelligence is then limited to Tech level minus 3.  Thus:
TL	Intelligence
9	6
10	7  etc. etc.

At TL 12 you can run Low Autonomous Programming and the cost of an intelligent
brain goes down.

So, I think that even a TL 9 brain is up to the task of fooling a person into
thinking it is an organic being under LIMITED circumstances.  (Hmm, how many
TMLers out there have actually met in the flesh... hmmmmmm? |->

So the problem is not so much the brain hardware, nor the software really.
But getting both to the point where the robot can act organic under more and
more circumstances.  Trying to fill in the gaps in the robot's conversation
that would not be there in a human.  Most humans have some sort of opinion on
every topic you can imagine (look at me and my big mouth!).  But if a robot
is mainly programmed for something like flying what happens when the question
of music comes up?  Then of course you could program it to be reticent on such
topics, but that's a cop out.  It is also a tactic that could be explioted.
(Blade Runner:  "Tell me about your mother...")

What do the software jocks say?  James?  Mark?  Richard?

Scott Kellogg
"Dreams are stranger than reality..."  - Me at 3 am the other night.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3991
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Robots and Cyborgs and droyne.  Oh my!
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 92 5:52:04 EDT

Actually Scott,
I suspect the real issue is not why would someone wanna pass as a
robot.  Possibly there is an issue of why a robot would want to
pass as a human.  It's the civil rights issue.  "When is X sentient?"
"Wehn is Y _sapient_?"

Additionally, if I know I am able to (and can afford to) become "human"
again by regeneration - why not become mostly robot to experience or 
perform something of which I'm otherwise incapable?  Visit Jupiter for
instance.

Well that gets us to, .. why not just do it virtually and let an automaton
take all the risks?  If we can build an automaton that's capable of holding
my awareness well enough without being sentient in and of itself...
:=)
- -- 
Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com
Qui custodii ipsos custodes?

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3992
From: MacGyver <macgyver@cis.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: (3986) MegaTraveller 2
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 92 10:18:39 EDT

>   Thanks for the reply on MT2.  I got it and it is a lot better than MT1.
>   I was wondering how MT2 was programmed?  What language is it done in?

	as far as I know, it uses C with Assembly. 

>   Does it use object-oriented programming?  How are the graphics done?
>   How is the sound done?  How did the programmers learn how to program 
>   games like this (are there any books on doing game programming like this)?

	no, it doesn't use any object-oriented programming. What it does
have however, are several well made databases which stores items/rooms,
etc etc. They learned how to do it by trials & errors, not to mention
experience.. I don't think there is any book on how to program this
type of games. 


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3993
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 92 10:54:07 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: 2300AD

Pedro A.C. Tavares:
 
>Hello everybody!
>Just joined the list a couple of weeks ago and was quite impressed by the
>level of the discussions.
>
>Is anybody out there playing 2300ad?  I just have the basic rules and
would
>like to discuss some extra rules I came up with and to hear about other
>solutions...
 
Did someone say 2300AD???  I'll be glad to natter about it either in public
(here) or private (get my E-mail address off the header).  Anytime.
 
 
>Also... could someone explain me what the TL's stand for. In particuraly
>what's Megatraveller TL and 2300ad TL (begining of star exploration,
Stutter
>drive)
 
The two types of TL are totally unrelated to each other.  If you don't do
MT, then explanations would be a waste of time.  Suffice it to say that
MT has a MUCH higher TL than 2300AD, except for the stutterwarp, which is
not part of MT, and which is a much better drive than MT's Jumpdrive.
 
 
>One last question among the pbem archives I've been browsing through I
came
>up with to concepts I would suposse to be the same: gravitics and
>reactionless propolsion.  I also don't understand why chem rockets are use
>when gravitics would do the job (are gravitics range sensitive????)
 
Recently GDW came up with "Hard Times", which was an excuse to lower the TL
of the Imperium significantly.  In it they assumed that if civilization 
started to crumble, that 4000 year old technologies would be easier to
maintain than modern ones (ie that a world that has used grav exclusively
for 4000 years would find it easier to build new chemical rockets than to
build new grav generators).  So MT introduced chemical rockets for the poor
locals to use (and for the PCs to sneer at).
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3994
Subject: Re: Robot Brains and Cyborgs 
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 92 10:22:25 PDT
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>


KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU writes:
> what happens when the question of music comes up? Then of course you
> could program it to be reticent on such topics, but that's a cop out.
> It is also a tactic that could be explioted. (Blade Runner: "Tell me
> about your mother...")

> What do the software jocks say?  James?  Mark?  Richard?

Talk is cheap, here's my two cents worth.

When it comes to "true" AI, existing programming models are insufficient
to the task. The challenge to explicit programming becomes far too
great, requiring the AIT to auto-program itself a result of life
experiences. AIs are likely to have a very different set of initial
experiences than humans, and would take a large amount of interaction to
recognize and categorize human interaction and mimic it. Of course, once
such a pattern is established in one piece of hardware, the
implementation can be cloned, with fairly convincing results.

James

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3995
Subject: New TML Package: Writer's Guidelines
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 92 11:40:19 PDT
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>


I unearthed the TML messages that had GDW and DGP article submission
guidelines (from 1990) and created a new TML "Package" out of them. Some
of the material in them is still generally useful.

You may retrieve it via anonymous ftp from:

	host		sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca [129.100.100.12]
	directory	pub/traveller/misc
	file		WR1

Or request the WR1 package by email from:

	traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)

Allow up to two weeks for the TML Admin to respond.

James

__   __/         /   /	    Internet Traveller Mailing List, Administrator
    /     /  /  /   /	   James T. Perkins in Beaverton, Oregon, USA
 __/   __/__/__/ _____/   traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3996
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 92 16:13:32 -0300
From: cadpoole@atlas.cs.upei.ca (Dale Poole)
Subject: RE: Cyborg Brain and Robots



>Howdy,

>Richard asks about cyborgs and how do ya tell them from normal people or
>robots.

Well, indeed he did!

[SCOTT discusses TLs of replacement parts]

>But I also remember that at TL 9 limb regeneration is possible, and at TL 12
>they talk about regeneration of complex things like eyes.  So, to be frank,
>I'm not sure why the question of cyborgs come up.  If you want to have a new
>limb, you can grow it just as easily as have one built for you.  There will be
>people who want cybernetic stuff built into them, but that would be rather
>more rare than the guy who lost an arm and wants it back.

I think part of the problem of choosing cyberware over regeneration could
be a simple matter of time.  In order to have a properly 'designed'
regenerative part, whould suggest the involvement of sample DNA.  After a
sample is taken, then the limb or organ is grown from 'scratch', which
would take some time.  While various biochemical accelerators could be
used to hasten the process, I think there would still be required, a
significant amount of time to grow the limb.

Then it has to be attached to your body, the chance of freak rejection
has to be eliminated, any shock to the body from re-attaching a significant
addition (in terms of blood supply, nervous system reactivation, etc),
and THEN thelong process of regaining meaningful use from the new part
begins, also moderately lengthy.

This is all wonderful, if you have the time and money.

But for the working Joe on a working Joe's wage, who needs a new arm pronto
or else he loses his ability to support himself, a prosthetic is a more
suitable answer.


>Now, the cyborgs would then be cyborgs by CHOICE.  And depending on how
>obvious the individual wants it to be, above TL 12 you'll need a densiometer
>to pick them out.  Even at TL 12, if the addition is small and carefully kept
>to be the same density as surrounding tissue, an implant might be VERY hard
>to detect.  X-Ray?  Build it out of plastic.

>As to the question:  Can a cyborg pass for a robot?  Well, if he was
>designed to do so, sure.  But who would wanna be designed that way?

Well, it would certainly be a matter of taste, but there is no end of
example amongst humanity, of people who just LOVE to alter there
appearance with things as simple as makeup, to bones, rivets, zippers,
pins and assorted other 'heavy metal'.  So I'm sure cybernetic eyes are
probably a trendy item somewhere, as would be a pump action shotgun
mounted in an artificial limb, if you happen to be an enforced for some
cheap mob in the gritty part of town 'Just About Anywhere'.

Of course this doesn't become muchof a concern for many Trav Characters,
who are mostoften taken from the ranks of the elite armed forces or
similar services.  But I can certainly see many opportunities for
deep cover Scouts, serving as spies, where it would be of advantage to
have a body on the borderline...IE, one that could alternately pass as
Biological or Cybernetic, depending on the circumstances.

In a room full of robots, if the baddies are out to get you, you sure as
hell wanna match in with the rest of the 'bots!

        ------------------------------
>But, I'd bet that at
>differing tech levels, software engineers could handle the task with equal
>ability, the main trouble is getting the hardware in shape to where a good
>enough program can be run.

I agree!  It's my feeling that those proponents of an intelligent machine
are too wrapped up in making it appear EXACTLY like a human.  Why not let
mechanical engineers solve the problem of an ambulatory machine with senses
that work at a level, good for simulating human senses first.

Once the little sucker can move around, then start programming.  It seems
to me that if you abandone the idea of trying to duplicate how human body
structure works, in a machine, then you can go on to invent a new series of
joints that are strong and flexible.  When that happens, THEN let's see
how we can apply these new dynamic joints to a human shaped bot.

After that, it should be a piece of cake!  [Hahahahahaha]


>Scott Kellogg
>"Dreams are stranger than reality..."  - Me at 3 am the other night.

Dale Poole
"Strangers are dreamier than reality..."  - Me, just now.  Really!


cadpoole@atlas.cs.upei.ca

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3997
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 92 12:31:46 PDT
From: cat@fgssu1.fgs.slb.COM (Rather B. Fishing)
Subject: frictionless (magnetic) bearings



Magnetic Bearings (this might get a bit pedantic, so you may just
		   want to skim...we techno-weenies can to be a bit
		   much at times...)

Since you (well, one of you) asked, here is some more info on magnetic
bearings which are currently available.  The government owned
corporation in France which owns the rights to magnetic bearings is Le
Socie'te' Europe'enne de Propusion (SEP).  A partnership between SEP
and SKF (the big Swedish bearing company) called Le Socie'te' de
Me'canique Magne'tique (S2M) manufactures the mag bearings for the
european market.  A partnership between S2M and Kollmorgen Corp (yes,
the same people who make periscopes) called Magnetic Bearing Inc (MBI)
manufactures mag bearings for the North American market.  <I used to
work for Kollmorgen, just in case anyone was wondering where my info
was coming from...>

I've just dug through too many pages of technical manuals (in English
and French, and boy is my French ever rusty!!!) on mag bearings, and
have reduced a brain-frying amount of mechanical engineering down into
some simple statements and statistics.

A mag bearing is like a funky cross between an induction motor, an
eletromagnet and a PID controller.  The idea is to pick up a rotor in
a magnetic field.  No rotor is rigid really - even big shafts have
resonance modes, and bouncing modes, and bending modes...  If you've
done any engineering mechanics, you're familiar with this sort of
behavior (and if you're not familiar, take my word for it please, or
curl up with your favorite physics book, followed by Fung or Shanes or
Den Hartog...)  So considering that the rotor wants to bend and bounce
and expand and flex and misbehave in general, the magnetic bearings
act on the rotor, pushing and pulling it with magnetic force to keep
it in a desired position.  The control on the mag flux is achieved
with an active ANALOG PID controller.  A digital controller is
apparently too slow, since the variable that's measured and acted on
to control the flux is current and there's a SQUARE relationship
between current and flux.  The current changes too fast for any
digital sampler to deal with - the aliasing problems are unreal!  So
the controller is a good old fashioned analog filter...awesome,
state-of-the-art 1930's technology...

In terms of force and power, it takes 8000 watts to get a bearing
force of 5 tons (english units) per bearing quadrant.  This means to
elevate and control a 20 ton shaft, you need 8000 x 5 watts ( four
radial bearing units and one thrust bearing) = 40000 watts.  All
things considered, in terms of power consumption, that's pretty cheap.
That's about the same amount of power as running 60 microwave ovens at
full power simultaneously...  Mind you, a set of the really big mag
bearings are to the tune of a million bucks american...  The RPMs
available to big shafts with mag bearings are in the low single
thousands (which may seem high to you mechanical types, but remember
that mag bearings allow a shaft to survive the passage through the
critical - the only limitation on the shaft rotation is the strength
of the material when subjected to centrifugal forces).

The itsy bitsy mag bearings, for specialty items like turbomolecular
pumps, small cryogenic compressors, neutron choppers (don't ask me
what it is - I'm just quoting some S2M literature here) use up only a
little power - 120 watts per bearing quadrant for shafts less than a
kilo, But the RPMs are in the 100,000s!  A set of little mag bearings
is cheap - in the tens of thousands range of dollars.

(So you're probably all thinking that that's the last time you
encourage me to expound on something...  Sorry if I got pedantic - I
suffer from nerd attacks every now and then...  I can usually tell
when I'm in the middle of an excessive nerd attack at my weekly
traveller game, since Jim the GM and everyone else is giving that long
suffering look again...  Life is so hard for us nerds...  I shoulda
listened to my Mom and gone to music school...)

Catie

- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Catherine Helm
Finder Graphics, Inc. - A Schlumberger Company
Corte Madera, California, USA
- -------------------------------------------------------------------


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3998
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 92 12:33:10 PDT
From: cat@fgssu1.fgs.slb.COM (Rather B. Fishing)
Subject: cybernetics



Reagarding cybernetics, Scott posted:

> Well, if I remember right, there was an old medical technology TL 
> chart in The old DGP Grand Census.  

The old Travellers' Digests issues 12, 13, and 14 have a three part
article called "Body Parts" I cannot remember seeing any other rules
on the subject (though if someone knows of some, please point me to
them).  I've used these rules, and can say honestly, they were
difficult to decipher; but once my GM and I had figured out how to use
them, we came to the conclusion that these rules are workable though
they contain what we consider to be many unreasonable constraints,
principally in cost and in functionality.

> Now, the cyborgs would then be cyborgs by CHOICE. 

No, not necessarily (my opinion...).  Using the Digest article
mentioned above, you have to take a roll to suceed at getting your
regrown or cloned body part.  Sucess is not guarenteed, even at TL15.

We decided that there are probably good circumstances under which a
character will fail at regrowing or cloning new body parts.  Radiation
damage is one such circumstance, a degenerative neurological condition
would be another.  Uncooperative dice and a hard-nosed GM are
another...

Then there are the price considerations: prosthetics are cheap,
regrowns are next in price, bionics are more expensive, and cloned
parts are most expensive.  Not every portside bum is going to be able
to foot the bill for regrowns or bionics.  Only the very rich can
afford cloned parts.  You also have to find a doctor with the right
skills to carry out the appropriate procedure, and you must have the
time to go through the surgery and therapy.

I have a character currently in play who got shot up too many times
during character generation.  We used the info in Digest 13 to see
what sorts of parts my character got as replacements.  I've been
running this character for a half a year now, and there are
improvements I would make to the rules presented in Digests 12, 13,
and 14.

First, the psychological impact of improved mechanical body parts is
not addressed well in the Digest article.  I would add a variety of
responses available to a character upon receiving artificial parts,
though I don't think I would include the "cyberpsycosis" from the
Cyberpunk games.  That sort of "bad attitude" is what makes the
cyberpunk games cyberpunk, and including it into Traveller is counter
to the flavor of the game as I've always played it.  If I wanted to
cyber-out, I'd go play cyberpunk, ok?  For adjustment problems, I
would include the self-esteem degradation mentioned in the article,
plus various stress related conditions from mild anxeity through
catatonia (as an extreme reaction to not being able to cope).  I'd
also include some required furtive behavior, since there are parts of
space where people with artificial parts aren't welcome.  Remember, if
you look at the MT literature, cyborgs are property, not people in
Margret's corner of the universe...  And remember the SSMM?  I
wouldn't want to be standed on old Terra with too many prostetics
attached...

I would include an explaination for why there is a gap between
prostetics and bionics.  To my mind, there should be no gap, or an
obvious technological reason for the difference.  Working within the
rules, I have justified the difference by there being two different
technologies for replicating motion, and the bionic one must be more
compact and more efficient - how else to you account for the improved
strength and agility in the same volume?  But using that philosophy
has led me to the question of why aren't all pseudobio limbs of the
bionic variety.  If I were writting the rules, that's what I'd do:
pseudobios must be of the bionic variety since the whole concept of
pseudobio presupposes customization.

I would also allow more than one gadget per limb, but I don't think
I'd allow a person to become a walking weapons platform...buying
battledress makes much more sense to me.  Myself, I'd much rather have
a date with a cyborg that looked like a person instead walking missile
rack, 'ya know...  

I confess I have swiped some of the gadgets from Cyberpunk for my
character.  I thought the cyberpunk pop-up flashlight hidden under a
fingernail was fun, so my character has one...  She is a rather
practical kinda gal after all.  I rejected the entire concept of
jacking in and out of a vast net-space - there are some old classic
traveller rules regarding human/computer interfacing and they always
seemed reasonable to me.  The interface is absurdly expensive
(probably articificially so), and also the withdrawal symptoms after
being disconnected were logical to me.  Traveller, after all, is about
good 'ol fashioned nuts'n'bolts space-hopping...if I wanted to go do
netrunning, I'd go play cyberpunk, ok?

I never thought that I'd ever consider writing Traveller oriented
cyborg rules, since I too was waiting around for the DGP volume on
Robots and Cyborgs...  Now I keep hearing that DGP has dropped MT
altogether.  Is this really true?  All of us in my traveller group
would like to know more about the details (we've been lurking on this
list only since the beginning of March).  

Catie

- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Catherine Helm
Finder Graphics, Inc. - A Schlumberger Company
Corte Madera, California, USA
- -------------------------------------------------------------------




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

Archive-Message-Number: 3999
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 92 23:27 -0300
From: "C. Roald" <HOBBIT@AC.DAL.CA>
Subject: PBeM announcement

Project Journal / K. Hunt-Thomas:

2292/01/11 22.35
....Finished setup today.  Manipulators complete; touch-sensitivity has met all 
specs.  [list of benchmarks deleted.]  It is still not clear where the spurious 
signals were comimg from, but the reliability has been perfect since we rewired 
it.  That was the last stumbling block; everything else has been in place since 
Tuesday. First full-operational set for 09.00 tomorrow.

2292/01/12 08.55
Set to start system.  Complete dump of initial conditions stored in linked file 
dated 08.50. Everything seems set, so will begin as scheduled.

- --------

>From visual records, Lab 19, 2292/01/12 08.59

[Present: Dr. Karl Bach, Dr. Kristophe Hunt-Thomas (Project Director), Tally 
Killebrae, Dr. Raisa Kolmov, Dr. Bellin Steiner, Julia Toromatsu (Project 
Administrator), Kirby Wallace, Dr. Tor Wilson. Dr. Hunt-Thomas is standing 
before a workbench, typing briefly. He stops, looks about at the audience, and 
takes a deep breath.]

"I suppose this is it. Don't know what to say, so I'll skip the speech.  Here 
goes..."

[Dr. Hunt-Thomas taps the ENTER key.  An awkward-looking patchwork 'bot in the 
middle of the cleared area jerks slightly, then begins to roll slowly forward.]

"Happy Birthday, Kip."

- --------

Project Journal / K. Hunt-Thomas:

2292/02/11 14.05
Kip is one month old now.  Development is flat.  MMU movements still randomised,
with occasional long periods of immobility--apparent patterned movements of 
01/25 have not been repeated.  Raisa wants to end the trial; she's itching to 
make some changes to the pattern-building nets. Karl argues that it's still much
too soon.  I agree; will continue trial until at least April.

2292/02/16 18.42
Progress at last.  Kip's collision frequency is down 20%, with a statistical 
reliability of 0.95.  Raisa and I are examining internal states to correlate 
with behaviour...

2292/02/27 11.20
Kip is now following Karl about the lab. Karl has begun trying to play with 
Kip.

- ---------

Progress Report: Toromatsu (ZL GeolSurv Hab 09/Nibelungen III) to Reichmann (ZL 
Munchen/Earth), 2292/04/11 [encoded] ///

Dr. Hunt-Thomas reports that the experimental artificial intelligence KIP is 
showing excellent progress.  Its motor skills are rated equivalent to one-year 
development in humans.  There is no significant verbal development and no 
indication of comprehension at this date, but it is much too early for such to 
be expected.

Dr. Hunt-Thomas indicates progress is sufficiently intriguing that he will 
continue this trial indefinitely.

- -J. Toromatsu

- ----------

>From visual records, Lab 19, 2292/07/02 13.25

[Present: Dr. Karl Bach, Dr. Kristophe Hunt-Thomas, Tally Killebrae. 
Killebrae tosses a small, brightly-coloured to Kip's MMU.  Kip catches it and 
tosses it back; the throw is short.  Killebrae laughs, and scoops it up on the 
bounce.  She then begins playing keep-away with Kip, whose arm extends and 
retracts clumsily following Tally's dancing hand.]

"Kip want ball? Kip want ball? Here it is--take it, Kip."

[She taunts Kip, dangling the ball before it's sensor eyes. It's manipulator 
jerks up and knocks the ball from her hand.  Kip then darts away, chasing it.
Kip yells in triumph.]

"Haaa! Keep get ball! Keep get ball!"

[Kip bowls headlong into Dr. Bach, and goes down in a tangle of manipulator arms
and whirring wheels.]

- ----------

>From K. Hunt-Thomas' private journal:

2292/09/28 01.45

We did it! Kip asked "Why?" today--Karl agrees that's the most convincing sign 
of intelligence he can think of.  Exhilarating, terrifying...my thoughts are 
muddled and I can't sleep.  It was barely nine months ago we started him up, and
already convincing curiosity.  It's hard to calculate equivalent subjective time
for him, but Karl rates it at six years of development in nine months. That's 
deceiving, though, because his progress has been accelerating. Where will he be 
at in another nine months?

It scares me, in a way. Half a dozen myths are floating through my head, and I'm
sitting on the pointy end of all of them.  Opening Pandora's Box, stealing fire
from the Gods...I've done it and now I have to figure out what I've done.  I'm 
reminded disturbingly of Victor Frankenstein.

And the other half of the fear is for Kip: what kind of place can he have in 
this world? There's no precedent. I'll do everything I can for him, and he'll 
still be alone in a way no human has ever been.

- --------





Welcome to the Frankenstein Project.  This will be a summer pbem, since I 
believe the Official TML MegaPBeM will be closing down for the summer, and I 
have the time to do stuff now.  Plus I have this idea I have to do SOMETHING 
with.


GAME SETTING

The game will be set in the universe of 2300AD.  The characters are making the 
first serious shot at creating an artificial intelligence.

The project is being conducted in a small spacehab--a converted geological 
survey outpost--because repeated experience has shown that such projects do best
in isolated incubation, because Zassenbach-Liouville wants to keep the project 
secret, and because they don't want to chance letting something get loose that 
they aren't prepared to deal with.  The characters will be the only ones aboard 
the hab.


TECHNICAL SPECS

I'm going to try to steal all the best parts of the TML pbem, so this game will 
be fairly freeform as well, with all the significant characters run by players. 
(Excepting Kip. Kip is MINE.)  I am going to set an absolute limit of 12 
players--I'm guessing that's enough to get a fairly dynamic game going, without 
overloading the ref any more than necessary.

I'm going to try to compile regular turns, which hopefully can be smaller and 
more frequent than the TML pbem.

The game is set in 2300AD, but no knowledge of the game system will be required.


CHARACTERS

I'm going to warn you all about this now.  As a ref I'm going to be pretty 
strict about what kinds of characters I'm going to allow in--some of you will 
have fairly narrowly-defined roles to fill.  My goal is to get a moderately 
coherent game set up from the beginning, to avoid the problems later.  Once the 
game is started, though, I'll let you do your thing.

The following positions will be filled. (While I have set names and genders for 
many of these characters, such details are of course negotiable.)

o  Dr. Kristophe Hunt-Thomas, Project Director.  
	One of the most brilliant scientists of his generation.  Holds 
	doctorates in computer science (intelligence systems), and 
	developmental psychology.  Driving force behind the project.

o  Julia Toronaga, Project Administrator.
	Responsible for Zassenbach-Liouville's interests; link between project
	and corporation.

Project Scientists (alphabetical order)

o  Dr. Karl Bach, Psychologist (Hab Medic)
o  Dr. Raisa Kolmov, Software
o  Dr. Bellin Steiner, Robotics/Manipulator systems
o  Dr. Tor Wilson, Chip development/Software

Technicians

o  Tally Killebrae, Photonics
o  Kirby Wallace, Robotics/Machinist

Station Staff

o  Engineer (Station maintenance)
o  Assistant Engineer
o  Hydroponics/Life Systems Tech
o  Security Officer

The project scientists and technicians were chosen from among the best 
available.  Note also that the less glamourous station staff could prove 
tremendously important in the adventure if things don't go well.


APPLICATIONS

In principle, all you need to do is send me a note saying you're interested.  
However, if I get more than twelve expressions of interest, I'll be trying to 
select the best players, rather than just the quickest on the <r> key.  If I 
haven't seen your work in the TML PBeM (or if you're Aslan or Ring-natives that 
I haven't seen much of), samples of your best writing are encouraged.

Also, many of the characters are research scientists, and I would hope their 
players will be able to write thoughtfully on the subject.  If you want one of 
those roles, try to show you have something to say.  This is SF, after all.


DEADLINE

If you're interested, I want to know about it by FRIDAY, MAY 1, 1992. I will be 
out of town for much of the time between now and then, so don't be concerned if 
I'm not replying to your messages.


DISCLAIMER

The fact that I'm offering to start up a pbem is clear proof of my insanity, so 
don't say I didn't warn you.


TEASER

"True artificial intelligence has so far eluded the computer makers.  Seemingly 
successful systems self-destruct within a few years of activation; the cause is 
usually diagnosed as a psychosis..." 
	          ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA, "Artificial Intelligence", (c) 2300




						colin roald,
						ref, The Frankenstein Project.

- --
Free to roam the heavens in Man's noble quest to investigate the weirdness 
of the universe!	-- Spaceman Spiff

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4000
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 92 03:44:53 -0400
From: ptd2@po.CWRU.Edu (Palmer T. Davis)
Subject: How does 2300AD improve on Traveller:2300?


>Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1992 12:34:00
>From: pedro@eltn.utwente.nl (Pedro A.C. Tavares)
>Subject: (3987) players of 2300AD; rules
>
>Is anybody out there playing 2300ad?  I just have the basic rules and would
>like to discuss some extra rules I came up with and to hear about other
>solutions...

Funny you should mention 2300... it's been sort of the thing I've been
fiddling with the most lately.  After finals are over, I should have time
to send in my collection of 2300 ship designs (and sc template), as well
as the "2301 Star Cruiser" supplement I've been working on.  Basically,
it consists of the following changes to 2300 Star Cruiser:

  1. The optional damage multiplier rule from _Invasion_ is *not*
     optional.  Actually, we've been playing it that way all along;
     I was surprised to see it presented as an optional rule.  I 
     thought that they had just made an error in the original rules,
     since the Martel is supposed to have an armor factor of 10....

  2. The speed of light is enforced.  It takes 2 seconds for a signal to
     travel one hex, and another 2 seconds per hex for a reply.  Distant
     ships appear to be in the hexes they occupied at times in the past,
     this is enforced by a referee or with plotting.  Negative modifiers
     apply to "to hit" chances based on how old the information used in
     firing is.  The negative modifiers are reduced somewhat by remote
     operator skill, which now works somewhat differently.

  3. Optics, scanners, and fire control systems may be used as contigency
     search sensors.  They have an active or passive sensor value of 0,
     always require a roll to detect, may only attempt to detect targets
     already detected by some other friendly unit, and may only detect
     or maintain detection on one target each.  This was added to prevent
     remote objects with no sensors (i.e. the Ritage-2) from becoming 
     worthless due to the speed of light rule.

  4. Remote objects may be programmed (by writing a plot), and can follow
     simple programs without tying up a communicator channel.  Remote 
     objects with sensors may be programmed to do things relative to 
     sensor contacts that they are maintaining (i.e. "close with target 
     1").  Attacks made without a human operator suffer the usual penalty.
     When a remote object runs off the end of its plot, it goes to all stop.

  5. Computer hits on human ships are localized.  When a computer critical
     is rolled, roll on the damage table again, treating hull as critical,
     damage control as surface fixture, and continuing as power plant.  The
     resulting system becomes inoperable until the hit is repaired; if the
     second roll is computer, it acts like an old computer hit.  Kafer ships
     have centralized data processing facilities, and use the old rule.

  6. Speed is a function of local gravitation.  A formula is given for
     "tunnel length" as a function of the local gravitational field;
     The tunnel length factor varies from 1 in the maximum gravity in
     which stutterwarp operation is possible to (365*30) in interstellar
     space; it's generally about 2 or so in the life zones of main
     sequence stars.  Negative modifiers apply when shooting at ships
     moving at very high speeds.

  7. Long range detection is defined.  Rules are presented for determining
     when a ship is aware that *something* is out there, and maximum ranges
     are given for detecting ships that illuminate their active sensors.

  8. Rules for nuclear weapons are presented.  They are only useful against
     ships in orbit or at "all stop", or ships with low warp efficiencies
     in gravitational fields with low tunneling lengths.

>Also... could someone explain me what the TL's stand for. In particuraly
>what's Megatraveller TL and 2300ad TL (begining of star exploration, Stutter
>drive)

MT and 2300 are not the same universe.  This used to be somewhat more 
confusing when the game was marketed as Traveller:2300....

>(are gravitics range sensitive????)

Yes, which is why there are thrusters.

Now, a question: I have the old Traveller:2300 rules.  What's different
(other than the fix to the way armor works presented in the Kafer modules)
about 2300AD?  Are there any substantive changes to the game, or did 
they just clean up the *atrocious* way they organized the Traveller:2300
rulebooks?

- -- PTD --

[James: minor administrative note: I "live" at ptd2@po.cwru.edu now.
The "davisp@scl.cwru.edu" account that the list is presently going to
..forwards it here, and will be going away May 10.  Would you mind
changing my address?  Thanks....]

- --
                      ______    "It may be better to be a live jackal than a
Palmer T. Davis       \ \/ /     dead lion.  But it is better still to be a
<ptd2@po.cwru.edu>     \/\/      live lion.  And usually easier."  -- RAH

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4001
From: anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor)
Subject: Computer Enhancements
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 92 20:56:13 EST

In a game today a player requested of me equipment that could enhance
his handguns skill (ie heads up battle disply or somethin) . 


What do people out there use ??????

BTW To the person who is (or was?) playing 'Vouf in the PBEM, 
do you have any stats for thos cyber gloves of his ?????

Edmund



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

Archive-Message-Number: 4002
From: anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor)
Subject: Starship Combat
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 92 22:11:10 EST

Just wondering what peoples views are on certain things ......

I have a few queries about (well starship combat I guess), 

1) It seems that the chance to use passive scanners is equal to use
active scanners . Whats the point of this if the active scanners give your
position away ???? . Why not simply increase the chance to use passives
by one level . 

2) Starship movement ???? The book says manuever drive affects the spend at 
which a vessel can move . ie moving at speed 5, a manuever 3 can either
slow down to 2, or speed up to 8 . Okay thast clear, but how did a manuever
ship get up to speed 5 anyway (The book doesnt mention anythin about constant
acceleration (Well I couldnt find it)) . 

3) Agility or Pilot . Thats a bit harsjh, I allow the pilots to add their
skill to the agility . (I mean han solo, his ship had an agility of at least
5, and he himself a pilot skill of at least 5 also) . If you look at it this
way, 2 fighters have agl 6 each, this means they are perfectly matched,
skill really doesnt come into it (unless they are at level 7) . But I also
let the pilot add his skill to the chance to hit . This simulates a pilot
attempting to out manuver the other and place his vessel in a better 
firing position . 

4) Computer or Gunnery . Again a bit harsh, considering all the big naval 
vessels carry gunners (I mean some of these ships have computers - 9), I
again, let the gunner add his skill to the computer rank . 

5) I had a player come up to a disabled corsair in a gig, armed with a 
laser turret, fire point blank rank at the vessels bridge, well I said 
the shot totally wasted it, what are other people views . 

6) Also the same pilot attempted to shoot a G-Carrier escaping from the 
vessel . What are the rules for starship vs vehicle ?????

Someone was I believe going to totally refine the system for 30 second
turns, in 15 km squares .......... I was wondering if they have
a finished copy (or notes) could they please email it to me ???? (That is
if it is no bother .....)

7) Oh yeah, With ranges, do you subtract the number of hexes away craft are
for the range DM's ?????

8) Any idea what the rewards are for taking out a corsair (inhabited system)
, I said 250,000 Cr (Was it too much, too little) ????

9) Finally In starship combat, A fuel leak, is it only 1 Ton, once, one
a round, and does this affect ships performance (jumping, manuevering) etc

I Think thats about it ........

Please any comments at all (no matter how big or how small), please
either email (or post) . 

Edmund

PS Have Fun


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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com Mon May  4 13:49:50 1992
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), 76234.2216@compuserve.com (Striker),
        bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #334: Msgs 4003-4017
Reply-To: traveller-request@wrgate.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
Content-Length: 40192
X-Lines: 978
Status: RO


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Mon May  4 09:56:58 PDT 1992
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #334: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
4003  26-Apr-92 "Something wicked AI Satellites and a thanks... << I've got a q
4004  26-Apr-92 Steve_Higginbotha 2300AD again... << Palmer T. Davis: >Now, a q
4005  27-Apr-92 A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.S comments on a few questions << >1) It seems t
4006  24-Apr-92 "C. Roald"        2300AD << >Is anybody out there playing 2300a
4007  27-Apr-92 metlay@phyast.pit Re: Smart weapons and cybergloves << > Date: 
4008  27-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Robots/Cyborg/Clone/Regrown/Prosthetic/Bionic
4010  28-Apr-92 anaylor@mihi.une. Free Traders << When I was wondering through 
4011  28-Apr-92 pedro@eltn.utwent 2300AD Character Generation << CHARACTER GENE
4012  28-Apr-92 pedro@eltn.utwent 2300AD Combat Rules << These are the combat r
4013  28-Apr-92 richard@agora.rai Re: Robot Brains and Cyborgs << <Scott Kellog
4014  28-Apr-92 Cynthia_Higginbot Sensors, anyone? << Sometime ago I posted an 
4015  28-Apr-92 Steve_Higginbotha Free traders, again... << Yes, I know everyon
4016  28-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Prehistoric Vargr Behavior << Hey folks! Stra
4017  28-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Artificial Intelligence << I said: : What do 

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4003
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1992 12:25 EST
From: "Something wicked this way comes..." <STU_RWMORRIS@VAX1.ACS.JMU.EDU>
Subject: AI Satellites and a thanks...

	I've got a question for all of you veteran travellers out there.  I'm
currently attempting to create a warbot satellite (something traveller seems 
horribly amiss with -- satellites).  Does anyone have any suggestions as to 
how such a satellite would be created?  Would any of the books help me out 
(besides the basic MegaTrav. set)?  Wouldn't a lot of the equipment be smaller 
because of the lack of need for living crew?  I would think that this satellite
would be considered a robot, but I don't own the Robot supplement of old Trav.
Anything specific in that book?
	I would like this information as soon as possible, as I will be 
unsubbing from this list by the end of the week (summer).  I'd like to express
a quick thanks to everyone around here who has helped me, inadvertantly or 
on purpose, and especially good ol' James Perkins for sending me the volumes of 
Traveller archives.  But don't despair...come next semester, I'll be back...

	Lucifer >:}

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4004
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 92 13:22:15 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: 2300AD again...

Palmer T. Davis:
 
>Now, a question: I have the old Traveller:2300 rules.  What's
>different (other than the fix to the way armor works presented in the
>Kafer modules) about 2300AD?  Are there any substantive changes to
>the game, or did they just clean up the *atrocious* way they
>organized the Traveller:2300 rulebooks?
 
Differences between Traveller:2300 and 2300AD...
 
Hmmm...
 
More information about the aliens.  All the little changes made during
the Modules published between one and the other (which is mostly
trivial).  Addition of rules for skill improvement.  Re-arrangement
into a rational rules-set.  Task level changes: Simple from 3+ to 2+.
Routine from 7+ to 6+, and so on...  Characteristic mods to tasks are
now characteristic divided by 4 (drop fractions), instead of 5 (drop
fractions.
 
I guess that sums it up...
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4005
Date:    Mon, 27 Apr 1992 9:12:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU (Brandon Cope)
Subject: comments on a few questions


>1) It seems that the chance to use passive scanners is equal to use
>active scanners . Whats the point of this if the active scanners give your
>position away ???? . Why not simply increase the chance to use passives
>by one level . 
	
	Active scanners *should* have a better chance to pick up a target

>3) Agility or Pilot . Thats a bit harsjh, I allow the pilots to add their
>skill to the agility . (I mean han solo, his ship had an agility of at least
>5, and he himself a pilot skill of at least 5 also) . If you look at it this
>way, 2 fighters have agl 6 each, this means they are perfectly matched,
>skill really doesnt come into it (unless they are at level 7) . But I also
>let the pilot add his skill to the chance to hit . This simulates a pilot
>attempting to out manuver the other and place his vessel in a better 
>firing position . 

	While some will find this system abusive, I don't see any problems 
with it. BTW, the _Millenium Falcon_ isn't that maneuverable itself -- it
probably wouldn't be higher than agility 2-3. It's main drive advantage is
that it is very fast in hyperspace -- twice as fast as other ships. (I have
Star Wars: the RPG). While in 'real' space combat, the distances and times
involved would most likely make the machine more important than the pilot, but
that is hardly exciting for PCs. I prefer to run my space combats more 'Star
Warsish' -- not very realistic, but its pretty fun

>4) Computer or Gunnery . Again a bit harsh, considering all the big naval 
>vessels carry gunners (I mean some of these ships have computers - 9), I
>again, let the gunner add his skill to the computer rank . 

	Makes sense. See above.

>5) I had a player come up to a disabled corsair in a gig, armed with a 
>laser turret, fire point blank rank at the vessels bridge, well I said 
>the shot totally wasted it, what are other people views . 

	If 'wasted' means 'destroyed completely', then no, I would say the
result was a bit extreme. Missile turret, yes; laser turret, no.


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4006
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 92 21:27 -0300
From: "C. Roald" <HOBBIT@AC.DAL.CA>
Subject: 2300AD

>Is anybody out there playing 2300ad?  I just have the basic rules and would
>like to discuss some extra rules I came up with and to hear about other
>solutions...

I collect the rules, but haven't played much.

>Also... could someone explain me what the TL's stand for. In particuraly
>what's Megatraveller TL and 2300ad TL (begining of star exploration, Stutter
>drive)

Tech levels are a mechanic from Megatraveller, which incorporates many 
societies at all levels of sophistication. Well, ok, not ALL, but you 
get the idea.

2300 can't be easily rated, because it occupies a different universe, 
with different mechanics.  No gravitics, different aliens, and in particular, 
a completely different mumbo-box that gets you from one star system to the 
next. (And IMHO, a much more interesting one.)

    c.r.

- --
Free to roam the heavens in Man's noble quest to investigate the 
weirdness of the universe!	-- Spaceman Spiff

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4007
From: metlay@phyast.pitt.edu (metlay)
Subject: Re: Smart weapons and cybergloves
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 92 13:23:00 EDT


> Date: Sat, 25 Apr 92 20:56:13 EST
> From: anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor)
> Subject: (4001) Computer Enhancements
> 
> In a game today a player requested of me equipment that could enhance
> his handguns skill (ie heads up battle disply or somethin) . 
> 
> What do people out there use ??????

This varies strongly based on what the ref will let you get away with.
The cybernetic guidance systems that Richard tacitly approved for the
weapons 'Vouf uses in the PBEM were scaled down by a huge amount when
Mark and I took over. 

> BTW To the person who is (or was?) playing 'Vouf in the PBEM, 
> do you have any stats for thos cyber gloves of his ?????

I couldn't run them if I didn't. The gloves themselves, as run in
the PBEM, are one-of-a-kind works of art, and require no particular
rules underpinning. Mark relies on me not to go any further overboard
with them than I have already, and I should point out that they carry
strong negative points as well-- until recently, 'Vouf was physically
dependent on the gloves, and the rest of the party can only guess at
the psychological love/hate relationship he has with them even now....

Rob Dean and I have toyed with putting together a rules system for them
for publication in CHALLENGE, and that has (along with my article on 
nonlethal weapons cowritten with Hans Rancke-Madsen) stalled due to my
work commitments. I do hope to finish both eventually, with their help
and that of Mark Cook, who has also consulted with me on these matters.

- -- 

Mike Metlay
metlay@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu
Atomic City, P.O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4008
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1992 17:01 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Robots/Cyborg/Clone/Regrown/Prosthetic/Bionic

Richard sez:
}Possibly there is an issue of why a robot would want to
}pass as a human.  It's the civil rights issue.  "When is X sentient?"
}"Wehn is Y _sapient_?"

Well, depending on your views, the question might be better phrased as why
would the designters of a robot want it to pass for human.  And in the
traveller universe full of guns, starships, intrigue etc.  I think the answer
to THAT one is obvious.

If on the other hand, the robot is sufficiently sophisticated to WANT anything,
It is above the common tech levels of traveller.  Artificial Intelligence with
wants/needs/desires is tech level Seventeen.  Not a common problem to deal
with.

As to the question of civil rights, It would completely depend on the local
culture I'm afraid.  In the Solomani rim, forget it!  What I'm after is more
a role playing example for robots of differing tech levels.  After all, a
player could choose to play his TL 21 artificial intelligent pseudo-bio robot
as a very wooden version of Mr. Data, and another player might choose to play
his TL 12 pseudo-bio robot as a perfectly normal human being.  How do you know
what to act like?

}Well that gets us to, .. why not just do it virtually and let an automaton
}take all the risks?  If we can build an automaton that's capable of holding
}my awareness well enough without being sentient in and of itself...

Jacking into a system, I have always thought of as TL-13 technology.  There
are rules for doing it @ TL15, but that was for a specific implant that was
highly mobile and you could access a computer remotely.  I would imagine that
TL 13 would allow you to control a robot-body from a specially designed
console.  Ok, so the controlled body won't be sentient, but you could pick up
the sensations from it easily enough.  Of course at TL 13 that would require
that you have a bunch of stuff installed into your head that you mightn't want
there, it might be dangerous, but it might be possible.  I seem to remember
reading a story a long time ago about exploring Jupiter, not from a robot body,
but a genetically engineered body.  It was using a radio link bettween the
operator in a satellite and the body on the 'surface'.  (Yeah it was an old
story when Jupiter still had a 'Surface'.)

As to Cyborg stuff:
Regrown/cloned/prosthetic/bionic
I would imagine that most insurance would cover the regrowing of limbs.  If it
is the cheapest option, I'd guess it would be workable.  After all, most
insurance has clauses about loss of limbs included in life insurance, and most
companies provide employees w/ such insurance now.  But for the cases of
people who can't get regrown through wierdness and die rolls, then the
insurance would have to try to replace the limb somehow.  Prosthetic or
whatever.  The ones who will be outta luck are those w/out insurance or those
who get hit by those without insurance.  I seem to remember my life insurance
has a lot of money riding on my arms, legs, eyes and ears.

But, I don't see prosthetics being all that easier to have than bionics,
clones, regrowns or whatever.  After all, as it is now, Prosthetic limbs ARE
custom made.  After all, how many people have their limbs severed in exactly
the same way?  It's not like a shoe store!
	"Hey Bob?  Looks like this guy's gonna need a size six left arm...
Check in the back ok?"

As for cyber/prosthetic psychosis, Well, how many of the handicapped go through
psychosis when they are fitted with an artificial leg now?  I'm afraid I
haven't met many of people who are missing limbs, but they're pretty normal.
(except that they actually LIKE the new Star Trek! :-P )

And with the option of regrown, I don't see where the army of cyborgs we've
been hearing about lately is coming from.  How many people out there are gonna
have artificial parts?  My guess is not many  (apart from the odd cultures and
botched medical cases.)  Wouldn't it be easier to get a TL9 regrown arm than
a TL 12 bionic arm?

Scott
"Help!  I've fallen, and I can't reach my arm!"

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4010
From: anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor)
Subject: Free Traders
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 92 13:12:10 EST

When I was wondering through my collection of archive material (The stuff
I managed to get before my uni restricted out of campus FTP and Telnet .)
I saw a for posts from people talking about the high cost of free traders
and how they are not economically viable . I am not sure about the outcome 
of these discussions but here are some ideas I was mussing about with .....

1) Starship Commerce can really be viable by large corporations . Those
are the only people whop can really afford starships and to keep them up . 
This is not a new idea, in fact I guess fairly standard . But what of the
poor honest free trader . Well in order to explain the existance of free
traders, you must realize they are the exception not the rule . 

Most starship travel and cargo hauling would be undertaken by corporations . 
They could offer guaranteed services, large tax rebates could ensure that 
the vessels were in top condition, they have a high access to security etc . 

I mean as a small time business who had to transport your precious commod-
ities who would you trust ? The cleaming Tukera lines or some battered
old free trader run by captain ahab who has a wooden leg . 

So how do free traders fit into it . Well yes they are rare, they pick up
the more unprofitable cargos or run the speculative markets, or get the
smaller, luctrative cargos . 

Back to the old character generation, a merchant character gets his hands 
on a starship (Including most of the time the coorporation captains) . But
this is for the characters, not for the general populace . The average 
coorporation captain will retire to a life of ease when he leaves the 
merchant service . The reason why players get starships is becuase the
whole point of the game is adventure on the "High Seas" . It would be
rare for an ex corp captian to buy a vessel, and this rare captain would 
be a player . (I mean whats the point in generating a merchant captain to
go and live a life of ease straight afterwards : Ref "What does your
character do ?", Player "Oh I dunno, hang around the jukuzzi") . 

Where do these players get the starships from ???? Well for coorporation
captains thats easy . The average coorporation has to update its 
equipment regualry, this makes good business sense . What does the corp
do with this mothballed freighter, sells it to one of its former employees
(It would not be scared of compedition from its former employee cause the
new owner simply just would not matter (His vessel is very "small fry")) .

Free Traders get their vessels from say a fellow free trader whose retiring,
a bankrupt orgainization, etc . 

The payments are large for paying of a vessel agreed, BUT those people
want to be merhants they didnt get talked into it . The corp captains
could be in it because they want to be independant . 

The intestellar markets are geared up (So I think) for corporations
running the space lanes . The free traders are the independants struggling
to make a living off the "crumbs" the bigger fish dont worry about . But
the intestellar markets can keep a free trader (providing he makes the right
decisions (Sorry for the "He" all the time, its to save effort, not cause
I'm sexist)) above water, or very wealthy . 

The bank repayments are large on a free trader (About 175,000/Month),
but remember banks, as they are today, are geared up to make their money
off the big companies . Compare interest rates today, something like 13%
for the average small business, and 20% for the corp) . A bank lending
money to an independant is risking it . Space travel is hazardous, money
consuming, and stressful . There is a very good chance they will not see
their money again . Consequently the large interest rates, high repayments .
(I mean theres none of this just having to pay the interest each year) . 

Why become a free trader . Throughout history people admire the underdog, 
and people want independance . Having to rely on others or work for others
is not as good as relying on yourself, or working for yourself . 

The Free Traders are a very hardy and select breed . There is no grey areas
in the free traders, you either survive or you dont, those who do, 
successfully prosper in the dog eat dog enviroment of merchantile space . 
These people are reveared, admired . They have adventures beyond comparison
(well to the average planet bound factory worker) . There is a definite
romantic appeal to the free trader . Also free traders (the really good ones)
can survive and prosper, just like any profession with high risk, and 
possible high gain, there will always be someone working in it . 

I hope this helps accept the high cost and running of independant 
merchant vessels, and the rather large repayments due . It helps to 
remember though that in merhantile space, a free trader is an exception,
not the rule, but the free traders that exist, are exceptional . 

Edmund

(Or <sigh> as its been pointed out to me, my real name is michael, so please
dont get confused) 

Any Comments ????????

(At all ......)



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

Archive-Message-Number: 4011
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1992 09:58:55
From: pedro@eltn.utwente.nl (Pedro A.C. Tavares)
Subject: 2300AD Character Generation


CHARACTER GENERATION


Strenght (1d10)
1       Size -2     
2-3     Size -1
4-7       Size
8-9     Size +1
10      Size +2


Life Level = (3 * Size)/10 + 5          (drop fractions)
Conscoiusness Level =  + * Life Level   (drop fractions)

Mass (Kg) = (3 * Size) + 50         or (3 * Size) + 45 + 1d10
Height (cm) = (3 * Size) + 150      or (3 * Size) + 145 + 1d10

Modifiers      Mass Height
Mesomorph      +35   -35
Endomorph      +20   -20
Ectomorph      -20   +20
   Female      -10   -10


Human Proportions im meters
                    Male      Female    Height=1
Height              2.0        1.8       1.0
Arms Span           2.0        1.8       1.0
Horizontal Reach    1.5        1.2       0.75
Vertical Reach      2.6        2.3       1.3

Note: this table was taken with no change from other sources (I'll try to
remember which) and is not in complete agreement with the female
modifiers above.


Note on carrer: a character that chooses a carrer with a high physical
component (sports, military, etc) may use starting experience to rise
his/her strengh with the following cost: Given the value of (Str-Size),
below 0 costs one point to rise one str value; from 0 to +1 2 points, and
from +1 to +2, 3 points;  Above this value Str can only be raised by
deploying as many experince points as the wanted value.



Natural Advantages
Roll 1d6 for number of advantages/disavantages.  Roll d% for each: if the
roll doesn't result in a valid number ignore (don't throw again!).  
For variable bonus/penalty roll 1d6 and see table below.  Higher bonus may
be 
allowed if the character is going to role play them correctly.  Use of 
experience can also be allowed to raise bonus or lower
penalties: treat as unrelated (or worse).
I don't usually let the players know their bonus or penalties at
first, unless they are obvious.


1d6
1-3  +1
4,5  +2
6    +3 


Physical bonus:
1 Ambidextry
2 Acute Smell (variable)
3 Double jointed (bonus to escape control, climb, use dex; variable)
4 Voice (bonus to any activity involving speech; variable)

Psychologycal bonus:
20   Absolute Direction (variable)
21,22     Absolute Timing (variable)
23   Alertness (bonus to sense/see/hear something; variable)
24   Animal Empathy (variable)
25   Empathy (variable)
26   Danger Sense (sometimes the character feels that is in danger; var)
27   Eidetic Memory (facility to remember what you hear/see; variable)
28   Lightning Calculator
29   Psionic Ability, unfocused (see notes)

Other:
40-42     Wealth (variable; the base chance should be modified for
geagraphy)
43   Patron

Physical penalties:
50   Color Blindness
51   Lame/Permanent Wound (use hit location/potencial wound)
52   No Sense of Smell/Taste (osmonia)
53   Mute
54   Stuttering
55   Deaf
56   Blind
57   Voice (negative equivalent to voice advantage; variable)

Psychological penalties:
70   Addictivness (variable)
71   Dyslexia (skills involving reading/writting is seriously affected)
72   Phobia (var: 1,2=mild; 3=severe; GURPS page 35)
73   Bad Memory (variable)
74   Lack of numerical ability (skills involving maths is affected; var)

Other:
90-92     Poverty (variable)
93   Social Stigma (variable; this usually applies in only one culture)
84-88     Dependents (family, etc)


Notes: 
A character with some of the above penalties should be allowed to
correct them (medically, by proteses, etc, as for poor sight or hearing)
Empathy, Animal Empathy, Danger Sense and alertness are all forms of
inate psionic abilities.  I don't use psionics (at least not so
far) but I think these add a little spice to the game.

(well... I believe that at least, the system for chosing these
bonus/penalties is original)

====================================
Pedro A.C. Tavares
Faculteit der Technische Natuurkunde
Twente Universiteit
pedro@eltn.utwente.nl
====================================


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4012
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1992 09:18:29
From: pedro@eltn.utwente.nl (Pedro A.C. Tavares)
Subject: 2300AD Combat Rules

These are the combat rules that I made up for 2300AD.
I'm also posting some stuff for character generation on a separate mail (may
mailer doesn't agree with large documents..).  When I have the time I'll
send a few more rules that aren't at the moment written in English.

I very interested in knowing about your opinions and alternatives for these
rules.




COMBAT RULES AND MODIFIERS

FIRE  MODIFIERS
- -------------------------------------
Target Position
Crouching/Kneeling/Sitting         -1
Crawling/Lying Down                -2
Target Size: meters
up to 0.25                         -2
 0.25 - 1                          -1
    1 - 5                           0
    5 - 10                         +1
  above 10                         +2
Movement
Firer is running                   -1
Firing from vehicule               -1
.... at double Speed/evading        -2
Target Speed (1) 
Target is Stationary               +4
Target is Running                  -1
up to 150 m/action                  0
150 - 300 m/action                 -1
300 - 600 m/action                 -2
600 above m/action                 -3
Eyesight (2)
Blind                              -8
Poor/one eye                       -1
Excepcional                        +1
Wounds (effects are cumulative)
Attacker Wounded (shock or stun)   -1
Weapon arm wounded                 -1

Using wrong hand                   -1
Firing two weapons                 -1
Shooting at crowds (3)             -1
- -------------------------------------
(1) Not for missile fire.  For area fire only if target enters or leaves.
(2) This modifier is not applicable for weapons with targetting systems
that do not rely on direct visual contact from the firer (VDU's for
example).
(3) If misses there's 25% of hitting anyone in line of fire.


MEELE MODIFIERS (strike and blocking) 
- -------------------------------------
Subtract opponent Dex from your own

Wounds (effects are cumulative)
Attacker wounded (shock or stun)   -1
Weapon arm wounded                 -1
Legs wounded                       -1

Higher than oponent                +1
Attacking from behind              +3
Surprise attack                    +5

Using wrong hand                   -3
Attacking with two weapons         -2
Using two handed wpn single handed (1)

Wearing full rigid armour          -?
Using long weapon in close combat  -2
Blocking with a shield             +2
- -------------------------------------
(1) As penalty use 5-STR


Carefull Aiming
Sniper delays initiative level by 1 and stays unmovable for this
initiative call and the one he shoots in;  add 1 to the roll on the Aimed
Fire Task for Sidearms and 2 for rifles and weapons fixed on mounts.

Hasty Attack
The firer can attemp to attack one initiative level sooner but receives
the penalty of one difficulty level (40%).  This can be regarded as
equivalent to an hasty task.

To Hit Special Location: roll on hit location table and sum/subtract the
numbers on this table to close in on the desired location:

Range       Location Mod              Hit Chance Mod
Close       3+Marksmanship            Head          -3
Effective   1+Marksmanship            Upper Torso   -2
Long        Marksmanship              Hand/Foot     -2
Extreme     No Effect                 Arm/Leg       -1
            
Shooting Blind: treat shot at two difficulty levels higher.  Can hit
anyone in targeted area.

Fumble on Hit Roll: a fumble happens when a natural 1 is rolled for and
attack.  Consequence is (simple rule) any one random figure in the line
of fire is hit or (second rule) roll on table below.  If weapon is jammed
the user can make one unjamming roll each action.

Fumble Effects, 1d10                               
     1   no effect
2 -  8   hit a random figure in line of fire.
9 - 10   weapon is jammed: roll 6+ on 1d10 to unjam
    11   weapon is inoperational: MQ-DAM = 0
    12+  -1 at roll of 12, -2 at 13, etc.
Notes:  Add damage points and subtract user skill on the weapon.
Aplly these mods for unjamming also.

NOTE!!!: this last table refers to MQ (mechanical quality) and DAM (damage).
I don't have these rules in English but I'll post them as soon as possible.

====================================
Pedro A.C. Tavares
Faculteit der Technische Natuurkunde
Twente Universiteit
pedro@eltn.utwente.nl
====================================


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4013
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Re: Robot Brains and Cyborgs
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 92 5:45:33 EDT



<Scott Kellogg says>
: what happens when the question of music comes up? Then of course you
: could program it to be reticent on such topics, but that's a cop out.
: It is also a tactic that could be explioted. (Blade Runner: "Tell me
: about your mother...")
:
: What do the software jocks say?  James?  Mark?  Richard?

ME!?  A software jock!?  Scott you've been sampling the biochem' 
department's throwaways!  . . . but as James says...
:Talk is cheap, here's my two cents worth.
I'll be happy to philosophise for you.

I'll only mildly disagree with James.  I suspect that it is _almost_
within the skill of TL8 programming to create an AI that is concerto
qualified.  Of course it would do nothing else.  I assert it's more a 
matter of hardware than software at this point.  We can do anything,
given enough code.  :=)

Actually, my view of machine intelligence is that when it arrives,
it will in no way mimic human intelligence.  Well, maybe superficially.
After all, the robot - Si creature that it is, rugged, semi-immortal,
with different sensor apparatus, has about as much in common with us 
as does the fruit fly.

- -- 
Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com
Qui custodii ipsos custodes?

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4014
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 92 07:22:05 CST
From: Cynthia_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Cynthia Higginbotham)
Subject: Sensors, anyone?

     Sometime ago I posted an article on proposed modifications to
installation of sensors in starship construction.  Since then, I have
heard...nothing. Nada. Zip.
     Did anyone like it? loathe it? see it at all?  I know I got the TML it
came out in -- did anyone else?  Did the vagaries of Internet routing over
spring break send it into a black hole??  Someone? Anyone?

                              --- Lost soul in the wilderness


- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

cynthia_higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4015
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 92 09:14:05 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: Free traders, again...

Yes, I know everyone is tired of hearing me rant about the economics of MT
starships.  Tough, I'm doing it again...
Adam Naylor:
 
<generally about free traders>
 
>Most starship travel and cargo hauling would be undertaken by
>corporations.  They could offer guaranteed services, large tax
>rebates could ensure that the vessels were in top condition, they
>have a high access to security etc.
 
Anyone can offer guaranteed services.  And the only tax breaks you see
in the Imperium are the "subsidized merchants", not the Megacorps.
 
 
>I mean as a small time business who had to transport your precious
>commodities who would you trust?  The cleaming Tukera lines or some
>battered old free trader run by captain ahab who has a wooden leg.
 
Neither.  I would trust a gleaming free trader run by an ex-Oberlindes
man.  Incidently, why should free traders be "battered"?  Some of them
(most of them, from the character generation table) are brand new
ships.
 
 
>So how do free traders fit into it.  Well yes they are rare, they
>pick up the more unprofitable cargos or run the speculative markets,
>or get the smaller, luctrative cargos. 
 
Nonsense.  If they get the "more unprofitable" cargos, they'll go
broke.  And most people seem to agree that the speculative market is
most of the interstellar shipping there is.  It's also the most
profitable.
 
 
>Back to the old character generation, a merchant character gets his
>hands on a starship (Including most of the time the coorporation
>captains).  But this is for the characters, not for the general
>populace. The average  coorporation captain will retire to a life of
>ease when he leaves the merchant service . The reason why players get
>starships is becuase the whole point of the game is adventure on the
>"High Seas" . It would be rare for an ex corp captian to buy a
>vessel, and this rare captain would be a player . (I mean whats the
>point in generating a merchant captain to go and live a life of ease
>straight afterwards : Ref "What does your character do ?", Player "Oh
>I dunno, hang around the jukuzzi") . 
 
Hmmm...
This ignores the detail that it costs about KCr30 per year to "live a
life of ease".  And the average pension for those merchant characters
is about KCr12.  Which is about enough to live a social status 4. 
Which I suspect is far from a "life of ease".  Most of those merchant
captains (in our game) buy a ship because they retire at 42 (or so),
and have 50-100 years left in their life and don't choose to spend it
living in squalor somewhere.
 
 
>Where do these players get the starships from ???? Well for
>coorporation captains thats easy . The average coorporation has to
>update its equipment regualry, this makes good business sense . What
>does the corp do with this mothballed freighter, sells it to one of
>its former employees (It would not be scared of compedition from its
>former employee cause the new owner simply just would not matter (His
>vessel is very "small fry")) .
 
This is almost reasonable.  Of course if they sell all their
mothballed freighters that way, then they are creating quite a lot of
competition for themselves.
 
 
>Free Traders get their vessels from say a fellow free trader whose
>retiring, a bankrupt orgainization, etc . 
 
Then why are they mostly brand new?  At least you pay new prices for
them.
 
 
>The payments are large for paying of a vessel agreed, BUT those
>people want to be merhants they didnt get talked into it . The corp
>captains could be in it because they want to be independant . 
 
The payments are too large to achieve breakeven.  And I always assume
that these guys want to be merchants to make money, not to lose it.
 
 
>The intestellar markets are geared up (So I think) for corporations
>running the space lanes . The free traders are the independants
>struggling to make a living off the "crumbs" the bigger fish dont
>worry about . But the intestellar markets can keep a free trader
>(providing he makes the right decisions (Sorry for the "He" all the
>time, its to save effort, not cause I'm sexist)) above water, or very
>wealthy . 
 
You have to be wealthy just to buy a ship (MCr7+ down payment on a
free trader).  Most wealthy people don't get that way by investing in
things that lose money.  And if my use of the word "guys" bothers
anyone, please do a Find and Replace to change "guys" to "entities". 
Thank you.
 
 
>The bank repayments are large on a free trader (About 175,000/Month),
>but remember banks, as they are today, are geared up to make their
>money off the big companies . Compare interest rates today, something
>like 13% for the average small business, and 20% for the corp) . A
>bank lending money to an independant is risking it . Space travel is
>hazardous, money consuming, and stressful . There is a very good
>chance they will not see their money again . Consequently the large
>interest rates, high repayments .  (I mean theres none of this just
>having to pay the interest each year) . 
 
Interesting.  My calculations show that starship loans run 5.575%
annual interest.  Hardly back-breaking.  And, last time I looked, big
corporations usually pay LESS interest than little guys.  Last time I
tried to get a loan, the Prime Interest Rate was 11%, but the bank
wanted 17% from me.  If the loans are riskier, you usually charge MORE
interest, not less.
 
>Why become a free trader . Throughout history people admire the
>underdog, and people want independance . Having to rely on others or
>work for others is not as good as relying on yourself, or working for
>yourself . 
 
I dispute the "underdog" notion.  But being independent is something
many people strive for.  But buying a starship that MAY make money, if
you are lucky, isn't the way to achieve independence.  Buying a
starship that makes money hand over fist is.  Or dropping MCr6 of the
down payment into a bank at 3%, and buying a Travellers' Aid Society
membership with the other MCr1 is a good way to achieve independence.
 
 
>The Free Traders are a very hardy and select breed . There is no grey
>areas in the free traders, you either survive or you dont, those who
>do, successfully prosper in the dog eat dog enviroment of merchantile
>space .  These people are reveared, admired . They have adventures
>beyond comparison (well to the average planet bound factory worker) .
>There is a definite romantic appeal to the free trader . Also free
>traders (the really good ones) can survive and prosper, just like any
>profession with high risk, and possible high gain, there will always
>be someone working in it . 
 
Well, if most free traders are merchant captains who want out of the
rat race, then THEY aren't affected by the romantic appeal.  And the
average factory worker (even the exceptional one) is unlikely to see
the MCr7+ required to get into the business.  But there will certainly
be people who want to do it, just to prove that they can  beat the
odds.
 
 
>I hope this helps accept the high cost and running of independant 
>merchant vessels, and the rather large repayments due . It helps to 
>remember though that in merhantile space, a free trader is an
>exception, not the rule, but the free traders that exist, are
>exceptional . 
 
No, it doesn't.  Starships are still too expensive.  Remember, most of
the discussion about the costs of those ships doesn't include mention
of ownership.  A free trader (type A) owned by Tukera STILL won't make
any money.

But the point about free traders being the exception, rather than the rule,
is a good one.
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4016
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1992 14:21 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Prehistoric Vargr Behavior

Hey folks!

Strange offer fer ya:
In prepping for the PBEM and all things Trav and Travellerish,
I've been doin' a little research on wolf behavior in the wild:
trying to get a better handle on role-playing Vargr by looking
at the social interaction of their ancestors.  Admittedly, the
behavior would be about as relavent as looking at humans by
reading about apes, but it is a starting point...

Anyway, a friend of mine sent me a rather long file on Lupine
behavior.  It's got some interesting little tid bits in it,
I think it will be useful for *me*.  But it has little to do
with Traveller.  Therefore, not *quite* appropriate to the TML.
It is also rather long.  So, if you want it, I will send it to
you.  I suppose, if their is enough responce I can send it on
to the list, but if not I'll send it to ya'll individually.

Scott
I always was a bit of a wolf |->

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4017
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1992 16:40 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Artificial Intelligence

I said:
: What do the software jocks say?  James?  Mark?  Richard?

Richard Sez:
}ME!?  A software jock!?  Scott you've been sampling the biochem' 
}department's throwaways!

Hey!  Who told *you* about my Jekyll-Hyde formulae!??!

On AI programs:
}I assert it's more a
}matter of hardware than software at this point.  We can do anything,
}given enough code.  :=)

That's my guess, but then again, I'm strictly a computer-0 type myself.

}Actually, my view of machine intelligence is that when it arrives,
}it will in no way mimic human intelligence.  Well, maybe superficially.
}After all, the robot - Si creature that it is, rugged, semi-immortal,
}with different sensor apparatus, has about as much in common with us 
}as does the fruit fly.

Sounds cool, but what would *that* be like?  What would it think like?
I'd guess it would mostly depend on who built it and for what purpose it
was designed.  And for the moment, in traveller, we are supposing that
the robots are built by the known traveller races.  These races will build
bots with purposes in mind, specific to their own percieved needs.  That is
gonna limit how alien the bot is in relation to it's creators.  Building
an intelligence that you can't use might be an interesting experiment, but
not one with much practical application.

But, also, AI is *supposed* to be TL 17.  So will it REALLY take 9 tech
levels from now to get a true AI?  I doubt it.  Does anybody else out there
bemoan the downgrading of TL16?  I seem to remember that TL 16 was supposed
to be the 'magic' level when they quoted A.C. Clarke in Supp 3 Spinward
Marches.  Now it seems that the Darrians weren't really that great after all!
I don't know how their TL 16 fleet is supposed to have survived the thousand
years or so it's been sitting around dormant!?   Seems to me all their TL 16
gadgets would have broken down LONG ago.  Making them essentually TL 13!

Rambling on...

Scott

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com Mon May  4 13:56:57 1992
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), 76234.2216@compuserve.com (Striker),
        bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #335: Msgs 4018-4030
Reply-To: traveller-request@wrgate.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
Content-Length: 45117
X-Lines: 995
Status: RO


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Mon May  4 09:57:13 PDT 1992
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #335: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
4018  28-Apr-92 Cynthia_Higginbot free traders << Cynthia rambles at length... 
4019  28-Apr-92 Mark F. Cook      Re: Robot Brains and Cyborgs << I've got seve
4020  29-Apr-92 BARANSKI@VEAMF1.N prosthetics, bionics, regrown & cloned << I'm
4021  29-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Re: Sensors anyone? << Cynthia brought up the
4022  29-Apr-92 Robert S. Dean    Re: Sensors anyone? << Scott Kellogg (2G Kell
4023  29-Apr-92 Robert S. Dean    Re: (4018) free traders << Cynthia Higginboth
4024  29-Apr-92 Robert S. Dean    Re: (4015) Free traders, again... << Steve Hi
4025  29-Apr-92 Steve_Higginbotha weapon limits in MT << Rob Dean: >I tend to a
4026  29-Apr-92 Steve_Higginbotha sensors and jammers... << Scott Kellogg: >But
4027  29-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Re: Hardpoints anyone? << }Scott Kellogg (2G 
4028  29-Apr-92 Steve_Higginbotha free traders, yet more... << Rob Dean: >Right
4029  29-Apr-92 William Dow Riede Merchants and Money << anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au
4030  29-Apr-92 david richardson  Out of print items << Other than swaps at con

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4018
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 92 20:12:32 CST
From: Cynthia_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Cynthia Higginbotham)
Subject: free traders

        Cynthia rambles at length...
 
Mike Metlay:
 
>> In a game today a player requested of me equipment that could enhance
>> his handguns skill (ie heads up battle disply or somethin) . 
>> 
>> What do people out there use ??????
 
>This varies strongly based on what the ref will let you get away with.
>The cybernetic guidance systems that Richard tacitly approved for the
>weapons 'Vouf uses in the PBEM were scaled down by a huge amount when
>Mark and I took over. 
 
....personally, I just steal heavily from 2300AD rules on Cyberware, or 
from GURPS Ultratech/Cyberpunk.  Works fine, lasts long time.  And of
course, there's that long forgotten article on prosthetics/bionics from
Traveller's Digest #whatever...
 
Scott Kellog:
 
>And with the option of regrown, I don't see where the army of cyborgs
we've
>been hearing about lately is coming from.  How many people out there are
gonna
>have artificial parts?  My guess is not many  (apart from the odd cultures
and
>botched medical cases.)  Wouldn't it be easier to get a TL9 regrown arm
than
>a TL 12 bionic arm?
 
    I tend to agree with you, especially at high stellar TLs.  With the 
ability to regrow everything in prime condition, I have defined TL 14/15
medical as being able to "put you back together if there are enough large
pieces left", the tricky part being the brain, of course.  They can even
regrow your brain, but if there isn't enuff left, no memories.  (Not until
someone perfects memory recording & transfer at TL17 or so.  Of course,
at "lower" TLs like 15 we have the possibility of taking a blank mind and
building an artificial personality on it...kind of like an organic robot.
I can imagine some unpleasant possibilities for some of the more fascist
governments out there...)  In a Hi Stellar society, a cyborg, or a cripple
(handicapped person, physically challenged -- pick yer fave PC word) is,
frankly, a freak.  Something almost never seen, and subject to a lot of 
attention and stares.   Kind of like the old folks in Logan's Run.
    On the other hand, at lower tech levels, if robotics technology runs 
ahead of medical tech on a particular world, it may be easier to use cyber-
netic replacements than to regrow/transplant natural parts.  This is 
uncommon, but far from impossible; one route for cyborgs, if you want them.
Other fun possibilities: at pre/early stellar TLs, they may have perfected
transplants -- but they may have a shortage of voluntary donors.  Organ-
legging for fun and profit, heh, heh.  (SF Historical note: it was not a
cyberpunk author who invented organlegging.  It was another, non-cyber-
punk-type author who came up with the idea of implanting electronics in
your skull so your brain could talk directly to the computer. Anybody 
else remember who these mystery authors were?)  
    And then there are the aforementioned odd cultures where robotics and
medicine have progressed hand-in-hand, where people use machine tools to
extend their brains and bodies in a more intimate fashion than most.  
Places where people choose to have cyberware plugged into their brains,
and body parts replaced with enhanced cybernetic parts.  Efate is one
such place (in my universe).  Note that at Efate's medical TL, no cyber-
modification is irreversible; you get tired of bionic eyes, have 'em 
removed and real ones regrown.  It just takes time and money.  Of course,
most of Efate's neighbors, and most spacers think Efate is just plain
weird, if not unnatural.
 
Edmund, who is really Michael:
 
>I saw a for posts from people talking about the high cost of free traders
>and how they are not economically viable . I am not sure about the outcome

>of these discussions but here are some ideas I was mussing about with
......
        Me and Steve were some of the people discussing that... See also
Hans Rancke and Rob Dean.
 
> But what of the
>poor honest free trader .   <stuff omitted>
        First, let's correct this delusion that free traders are poor.  
Anyone hauling around MCr 4 to MCr 60 in assets (depending on his equity)
is not poor; said anyone could sell off his interest in the ship and 
retire as a multi-millionaire.  
 
>I mean as a small time business who had to transport your precious commod-
>ities who would you trust ? The cleaming Tukera lines or some battered
>old free trader run by captain ahab who has a wooden leg . 
        Well, in the REAL world, Capt Ahab is charging much LOWER PRICES 
than gleaming Tukera lines to haul your commodities, so you insure your
commodities for much less than what you save by shipping with Capt Ahab
for say, a year, and take the risk.  Of course, in the Imperium, where
megacorp interests are carefully protected by Imperial law, you have these
FIXED shipping rates that kill the small hauler...  He can't discount
when his costs are cheaper than the big boys, and he can't raise his prices
when they're higher.  Wait until Hard Times hits my PBEM; Imperial price
regs will go out the window.
 
>So how do free traders fit into it . Well yes they are rare, they pick up
>the more unprofitable cargos or run the speculative markets, or get the
>smaller, luctrative cargos . 
        My assumptions: lucrative routes (like Efate-Louzy, Rhylanor-
Porozlo) have much of the commodities hauling locked up in semi-
permanent contracts.  Since those routes are profitable year-in and year-
out, and the markets are constant, somebody on planet A makes widgets 
specifically for export to planet B; he contracts with shipper C to haul
widgets from A to B and sell them on B, for the next 1-20 years.  Either
that, or he contracts to sell his widgets to trading company D, who hauls 
them on his own ships to planet B and sells them.  Since the market is 
fairly constant, and constantly profitable, and the price of interstellar
transport won't change (fixed by law), company A will stick with the same
shipper C or trader D as long as they are willing to haul from A to B.
C or D has a guaranteed income for as long as the contract lasts, A has
a guaranteed buyer, and B has a guaranteed source of A-widgets.  Thus, 
most profitable commodities tradable between A & B will be locked up in
long-term contracts.  Note that shipper C or trader D need not necessarily
be a megacorp or other huge company; they just have to have been in the
right place at the right time to negotiate a contract, and be able to
maintain a regular schedule.  C or D can be one free trader; what it can't
be is a tramp freighter.  Most PCs own tramp freighters -- i.e., they
don't want to do the safe Rhylanor-Porozlo run 25 times a year for 40 
years, they want to wander a bit.  At least, I hope they do.
        So what do "tramp" free traders do?  They pick up "spot" cargoes;
those cargoes available because the regular carrier couldn't take them
for some reason, because they're a new product or one not normally exported
or for some other reason aren't exported regularly enuff to be the
subject of a contract.  BTW, there's nothing to stop PC-owned ships from
operating a regular route, and picking up some of those lucrative
contracts;
the March Harrier in the Traveller Adventure is an example of a ship on
a regular route (a subsidized merchant, in fact) whose crew finds adventure
where they go... of course, one of the rewards of the adventure is getting
your subsidy contract paid off so you don't have to stick to that fixed
route...
 
>(I mean whats the point in generating a merchant captain to
>go and live a life of ease straight afterwards : Ref "What does your
>character do ?", Player "Oh I dunno, hang around the jukuzzi") . 
        Which is why I assume that PC ship owners don't sell off their 
interests in their ships and retire to a life of luxury...
 
>Free Traders get their vessels from say a fellow free trader whose
retiring,
>a bankrupt orgainization, etc . 
        So who built the free trader in the first place?? Those little
ships aren't good for anything else, they were purpose-built in a shipyard
to be free traders.
 
>The bank repayments are large on a free trader (About 175,000/Month),
        No, they're not.  Run some numbers thru a calculator and find out
what you would be expected to pay per month on a 40-year loan of $45
million at real-world rates...
 
>Compare interest rates today, something like 13%
>for the average small business, and 20% for the corp) . 
        Maybe in Australia.  In the U.S., big corps get their loans at
the Prime Rate, which is significantly  lower than what Joe
SmallBusinessman
gets from his town bank.
 
>their money again . Consequently the large interest rates, high repayments
 .
>(I mean theres none of this just having to pay the interest each year) . 
        Large interest rates??  A standard starship loan is about 5%
annual interest!  What kind of interest rates do they charge Down Under?
And don't forget the rather hefty collateral represented by a starship;
one can leverage VERY large loans based on that... or should be able to,
if your GM's running things anything like the real world.
 
>Why become a free trader . Throughout history people admire the underdog, 
        Because, if you can come up with the seed money, you can get
mind-blowingly wealthy?  Why did Bill Gates write software?
 
>Also free traders (the really good ones)
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                     any idiot with two brain cells to rub together...
 
>can survive and prosper, just like any profession with high risk, and 
>possible high gain, there will always be someone working in it . 
 
>I hope this helps accept the high cost and running of independant 
>merchant vessels, and the rather large repayments due . It helps to 
 
        I do agree with you that the cost of a building a merchant vessel
is too high for the picture Traveller paints of the independant mercantile
community, but I don't feel like going into that whole can of worms again.
 

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

cynthia_higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4019
From: Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM>
Subject: Re: Robot Brains and Cyborgs
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 92 23:41:04 PDT

I've got several blocks of included text, so please bear with me.

Scott Kellogg asks...

> what happens when the question of music comes up? Then of course you
> could program it to be reticent on such topics, but that's a cop out.
> It is also a tactic that could be explioted. (Blade Runner: "Tell me
> about your mother...")
>
> What do the software jocks say?  James?  Mark?  Richard?

'Software jock'.  Hmmm.  I *like* that.  I wonder what HP would
think if I had it added to my new business cards. :^)

In response, James writes...

> When it comes to "true" AI, existing programming models are insufficient
> to the task. The challenge to explicit programming becomes far too
> great, requiring the AIT to auto-program itself a result of life
> experiences. AIs are likely to have a very different set of initial
> experiences than humans, and would take a large amount of interaction to
> recognize and categorize human interaction and mimic it. Of course, once
> such a pattern is established in one piece of hardware, the
> implementation can be cloned, with fairly convincing results.

.... and Richard writes...

> I'll only mildly disagree with James.  I suspect that it is _almost_
> within the skill of TL8 programming to create an AI that is concerto
> qualified.  Of course it would do nothing else.  I assert it's more a
> matter of hardware than software at this point.  We can do anything,
> given enough code.  :=)

I think James and Richard are both partly right. :^)

For those of you who haven't been watching it, there's a *WONDERFUL*
5-part series, sponsored in part by the ACM (that's the Association
of Computing Machinery, for those of you with non-software backgrounds),
being shown on PBS TV called "The Machine that Changed the World".  As
you may have guessed by the title, the subject is digital computers.  It
just so happens that this weeks episode (entitled "The Thinking Machine")
was about the attempts (and failures) to develop a true machine intelligence.
Specifically, one that could pass the Turing Test.  (If you don't know
what that is, drop me a line and I'll explain it.)

According to current experts in the field, hardware *is* the limiting
factor.  As early as the late-50s, there were experiments (mostly conducted
by the U.S. Army) attempting to create artificial intelligence.  Later,
in the 60s, there were numerous attempts in the private sector.

They all failed.  By 1980, with one exception, they were all terminated.
The only experiment still currently underway is the 'Cyke' (for
'Encyclopedia') Project in Texas.  They've been constructing their
database for over ten years and they maintain that they've still got
a long ways to go.

The problem is that for years, experts insisted that you didn't have to
model the brain (hardware).  All you had to do was successfully model
the 'mind' (software).  The trouble is, they haven't been able to figure
out exactly how a human brain programs itself as a person grows up.

The cloest anyone has come to success falls into two catagories: expert
systems and neural networks.

Expert systems can be developed on conventional computer hardware, and
are remarkably successful, but they're confined to a single, narrowly
defined area of expertise.  Outside that area, they're useless.  To be
a true AI is to be able to cope with *any* subject intelligently (but
not necessarily expertly).  Even the ability to gracefully admit ignorance,
in what appears to be a sentient fashion, is currently beyond the scope
of even the most ambitious AI yet constructed.

Neural networks, on the other hand, are not so much programmed, as they
are 'taught', using methods very similar to teaching a person.  There
are three main problems with them.  Number one, they can't be built
complex enough yet to come even close to storing the number of experiences
that a human brain can hold.  Number two, even the researchers that build
them aren't exactly sure how they 'learn' the lessons they are taught.
And that leads directly to problem number three.  Since it isn't clear
how a neural network 'learns', it hard to tell exactly *WHAT* it's
learning.  It may not be what you think.  Here's a real example.

In the early 1960s, the U.S. Army decided to build an AI (primitive
neural network) which could do high speed tactical recon photo analysis.
The goal was to have the AI rapidly identify enemy tanks in aerial
photos.  To do this, the Army took over 2,000 aerial photos, all of
outdoor scenes (forested, open fields, and combinations thereof).
Half of the photos contained one or more tanks (some in plain sight,
and some partially concealed by foliage).  The other half did not
contain any type of vehicle.  About 90% of these photos were used to
'teach' the AI the difference between the two types of photos.  When
the instruction was finished, the remaining photos were presented for
analysis.  The AI scored 100% on the test photos.

Then, just to make sure that the AI was programmed correctly, the Army
went out and took more photos of both types (with and without tanks),
and presented them to the AI for interpretation.  It failed almost
totally.

It turned out that in the original set of photos, all the pictures
containing tanks were taken on one day (a sunny day) and the 'empty'
pictures were taken on another day (an overcast day).  All the AI
ended up learning was how to tell between nice weather and not-so-nice
weather.

End of experiment.

It would appear, based on the last 35+ years of research, that a true AI
cannot be programmed.  It must learn, the same way that humans (or animals,
for that matter) learn.  Even the basis data, from which learning begins,
must consist of some fairly non-intuitive information.  This is what the
'Cyke' project is all about.

They discovered very early in their experiment, that the single biggest
hurdle for a budding AI to overcome is that of understanding the context
of human communication.  Here are two examples.

        "Jane looked through the glass window of shop at the red bicycle.
         She very badly wanted it."

        "Jane looked at the red bicycle through the glass window.  She
         pressed her nose up against it as she stared."

To humans, it is very apparent that 'it' in the first sentence refers
to the bicycle, but 'it' in the second sentence refers to the glass
window.  An AI would be unable to make the distinction because of it's
lack of understanding of human context.  Humans develop this ability
automatically in early childhood.  A compute must be taught explicitly.

To this end, Project 'Cyke' is attempting to teach a computer human
context by brute-force.  They are programming an entire encyclopedia
into the database of their AI, but they're not just including what
one would find in a normal encyclopedia.  They must also include those
bits of information that, to a human, would seem so ridiculously obvious
that no one would ever think it necessary to codify them.  For example,
under the encyclopedia entry for "Abraham Lincoln", they are including
data points like:

        * When Lincoln became president of the United States and was
          in Washington D.C., his left foot was also in Washington D.C.

        * Lincoln's name and date of birth stayed the same during his
          entire life.

        * Lincoln's children were always younger then Lincoln.

        * When Lincoln died, he remained dead, although some of his ideas
          and knowledge of him continued to exist.

Sounds pretty obvious, huh?  Well, not to a computer.  The researchers
on the 'Cyke' Project are still many years away from testing their 'baby',
but they run it every night to have it look for inconsistancies in it's
database, to establish correlations on it's own.  Some of the results
have been... strange.  For example:

    SetOfPersons = Preeminent

Cyke says all people are preeminent.  This an artifact of the fact that,
so far, all of the individuals programmed into the database (with the
exception of the project researchers themselves) have been famous people.
Therefore *ALL* people are famous.  Or how about:

    SetOfNationsSameGovernmentSameReligion = SetOfNationsSameOrganizations

Cyke says all nations with the same general government type and same primary
religion are also members of the same organizations.  (I.e. all moslem
monarchies are members of OPEC.)  My example here is almost certainly wrong,
but Cyke's correlation may be correct.  The researchers are attempting to
validate or invalidate the premise.

And the work continues.

Richard also writes...

> Actually, my view of machine intelligence is that when it arrives,
> it will in no way mimic human intelligence.  Well, maybe superficially.
> After all, the robot - Si creature that it is, rugged, semi-immortal,
> with different sensor apparatus, has about as much in common with us
> as does the fruit fly.

Sad, but probably true.  Thank God for PGMPs, huh? :^)

So Scott asks...

> Sounds cool, but what would *that* be like?  What would it think like?

Beats me (and everybody else too, I suspect).  Ask us what the color 'blue'
tastes like.  That's an easier question to answer. :^)

I've got a more specific question: would 'garbage collection' routines
for an AI (should they need to exist) be analogous to human dreaming?

Actually, I'm saving my *GOOD* answers to your question for Colin Roald's
summer PBEM (I hope).

Later,
                        "Nothing becomes real till it is experienced -
                         even a proverb is no proverb to you till your
                         life has illustrated it."
                                        - John Keats

                        "I can only assume that a 'Do Not File' document
                         is filed in a 'Do Not File' file."
                                        - Senator Frank Church,
                                          Senate Intelligence Subcommittee
                                          Hearing, 1975
        - Mark C.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4020
Date:    Wed, 29 Apr 1992 10:04:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: BARANSKI@VEAMF1.NUSC.NAVY.MIL
Subject: prosthetics, bionics, regrown & cloned

I'm of the opinion that a mechanical prosthetic will always be cheaper (well,
*most* of the time) then the higher forms of replacements, and as such will
always be in use to some extent.  Bionics and prosthetics might be used by
people who for some strange reason cannot tolerate a organic replacement. 
There might also be those who cannot tolerate mechanical replacements and would
require organic or cloned replacements.  In a society were most 'handicaps' can
be corrected, I expect that the social attitude toward 'cripples' might take on
a negative context.  

prosthetic:  cheapest.  ugly, only minimally lifelike (pink plastic).  Can be
supplied the quickest, but does require a retraining period.  the minimum
replacement to nullify a "handicap" or "cripple".  Usually used by the state to
allow cripples to be productive again and off welfare, or by people who cannot
afford a better replacement.

Bionic: expensive.  can be lifelike, but even more expensive.  Provides
greater then normal abilities.  Used mostly by those who want the greater then
normal abilities, or those who cannot tolerate organic replacements.  Can be
supplied quickly or may require a significant period, depending on how custom
the replacement is.  Requires a retraining period.

Organic:  Price may vary according to the availablity of replacement parts. 
This is essentially a 'donated' organ from an organ bank.  Can be supplied
quickly from an organ bank, and the retraining period can vary significantly.

Regrown:  This the method of forcing/convincing the host body to regrown/
regenerate the replacement organ itself.  Can be costly or cheap, depending on
the TL, mostly drug and environmental therapy.  Very Slow, but sure, very low
chance of rejection.  May require complete rest and care of the host body or
not depending on TL.  Retraining takes place during the regrowth period.  Some
use allowed during the regrowth period.

Cloned:  This is the method of cloning a replacement from a host tissue sample.
A Whole body may need to be cloned for the replacement part or not.  Ethical
considerations.  Cloned parts may be kept in an organ bank, but are rated as
'cloned' only for the donar hosts.

Sorry for the disjointedness, but I just wanted to zip this off...

Jim Baranski

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4021
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1992 12:14 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Re: Sensors anyone?

Cynthia brought up the issue of installing sensors on ships.

Well, I'd guess that there outta be a limit on the number of sensors
installed on a ship, but once you've hit 100 tons, you are going to be
able to pack on just about as much as you want.

Densiometers and neutrino sensors will work through the hull, so they
don't need external mounts.  Some might say that a densiometer might get
some attenuation due to the fact that it if it is inside a hull, it has
to look through the hull metal, and there is the issue of the artificial
grav stuff.
	I would say that a densiometer would be calibrated to ignore the
effects of the hull it was in.  Rather like an aircraft compass has to
be corrected to take the metal in the plane and it's electronics into
account.  Sure, it's not quite as simple, but the computers should take
care of that with no trouble at all.
	I've heard folks say that superdense hulls produce a neutrino
shadow.  I say this is garbage.  A neutrino can pass through the entire
mass of the earth without any trouble.  If superdense was THAT tough,
then you can forget it ever getting scratched by something as puny as a
250Mw laser.

But then we have the EMS band stuff.  Yup, that's gotta have external
mounts.  But look at the size of the stuff in the design tables.  It's
pretty small.  Sounds like the emmitters and recievers are spread out in
small spots over the entire hull.  That would give you a larger area for
your antenna, so you can pick up better signal.  When you've got the
surface area of a 100 ton ship or so to put it on, I think you've got
plenty of area.

A question *I* have been thinking over recently is the utility of
EMS-Jamming.  Virtually all ships that have an active EMS to jam also
have a passive EMS system.

Ok, scenerio.  Craft A makes an active scan of craft B.  Craft B doesn't
particularly like this and turns on the EMS-Jammer.  Craft A then gets
an automatic lock on Craft B by their passive EMS.  So, just how useful
is the Jammer?
Ah!  What about Jamming the active sensors on incoming missiles?  Well
the missiles got home on jam stuff too!  (The TL 8 AIM-54 Pheonix has
home on Jam capablity.)

I was trying to figure out how you might use the jammer to fool both,
but I know very little about Electronic (Counter)^3 Measures.  My first
thought was that perhaps 2 jammers working in concert could make things
rough on the Passive EMS systems.  However it sounds that this is not
really the case.

Anybody got any ideas how to make the EMS-Jammer a useful object?

Scott Kellogg
BTW, there are TWO G's in Kellogg.  Come on, Cynthia, you see it on your
breakfast table every morning!  :-)

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4022
Date:     Wed, 29 Apr 92 13:28:14 EDT
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Re:  Sensors anyone?

Scott Kellogg (2G Kellogg) writes:
> 
> Cynthia brought up the issue of installing sensors on ships.
> 
> Well, I'd guess that there outta be a limit on the number of sensors
> installed on a ship, but once you've hit 100 tons, you are going to be
> able to pack on just about as much as you want.

I tend to agree with Scott on this.  In "reality" there might be some
limit, but the odds seem to be against it being significant at the level
of detail that I run this game at.  In addition, if we are to consider
that sort of limit, perhaps it would be time to rehash the maximum
weapon mount limits?  After all, you can pack more power plant into a
SDB (for example) than would ever be needed to run all of its weapons
allowable under the current rules.  Why not add more turrets?

Rob Dean


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4023
Date:     Wed, 29 Apr 92 13:43:13 EDT
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Re:  (4018) free traders

Cynthia Higginbotham writes:
> (SF Historical note: it was not a
> cyberpunk author who invented organlegging.  It was another, non-cyber-
> punk-type author who came up with the idea of implanting electronics in
> your skull so your brain could talk directly to the computer. Anybody 
> else remember who these mystery authors were?)  

Niven for organlegging?  Don't recall who ought to get the credit on
brain implants...

> Of course, in the Imperium, where
> megacorp interests are carefully protected by Imperial law, you have these
> FIXED shipping rates that kill the small hauler...  He can't discount
> when his costs are cheaper than the big boys, and he can't raise his prices
> when they're higher.  Wait until Hard Times hits my PBEM; Imperial price
> regs will go out the window.

I'd be very interested to hear how you've decided to vary the rates in 
this set up.  Seems like something that ought to be done, to be sure...

>         My assumptions: lucrative routes (like Efate-Louzy, Rhylanor-
> Porozlo) have much of the commodities hauling locked up in semi-
> permanent contracts.

Agreed.  I'd have no qualms about saying that there was no cargo available
on any given day over this sort of run.  (No speculative cargo that is...
there are probably _lots_ of people willing to pay Cr1000 to get their
ton of KCr20+ profit cargo hauled.)

>         I do agree with you that the cost of a building a merchant vessel
> is too high for the picture Traveller paints of the independant mercantile
> community, but I don't feel like going into that whole can of worms again.

Agreed.  Let's leave this closed.  Cheaper ships just makes the navy problem
worse.

Rob Dean


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4024
Date:     Wed, 29 Apr 92 13:53:49 EDT
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Re:  (4015) Free traders, again...

Steve Higginbotham writes:
>  
> Nonsense.  If they get the "more unprofitable" cargos, they'll go
> broke.  And most people seem to agree that the speculative market is
> most of the interstellar shipping there is.  It's also the most
> profitable.

Right.  Now, it looks like spec trade can make money, so the big companies
have all the good spec trade routes tied up.  In game terms we can use this
to generate adventures, since finding a good load can take quite a bit of 
work.  (Left as an exercise for the reader (-: ).

> >Free Traders get their vessels from say a fellow free trader whose
> >retiring, a bankrupt orgainization, etc . 
>  
> Then why are they mostly brand new?  At least you pay new prices for
> them.

Well, a slight quibble: Many are multiples of 10 years old.  It's not that
uncommom to be able to roll 'trader' more than once while mustering out.

> The payments are too large to achieve breakeven.  And I always assume
> that these guys want to be merchants to make money, not to lose it.

Hmmmm....I don't recall this conclusion from before.  I do recall lots of
backup for the notion that wilderness refueling is an emergency only
measure, and that passenger accommodations are a losing proposition
compared to cargo space.

> Interesting.  My calculations show that starship loans run 5.575%
> annual interest.  Hardly back-breaking.  And, last time I looked, big
> corporations usually pay LESS interest than little guys.  Last time I
> tried to get a loan, the Prime Interest Rate was 11%, but the bank
> wanted 17% from me.  If the loans are riskier, you usually charge MORE
> interest, not less.

Agreed.  I've got the number I calculated written down somewhere, and
that sounds about right.  Figuring that that is the rate on a _risky_
loan, I tend to agree with...

> Or dropping MCr6 of the
> down payment into a bank at 3%, and buying a Travellers' Aid Society
> membership with the other MCr1 is a good way to achieve independence.

your estimate of consumer interest rates on savings.

Rob Dean


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4025
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 92 13:45:45 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: weapon limits in MT

Rob Dean:
 
>I tend to agree with Scott on this.  In "reality" there might be some
>limit, but the odds seem to be against it being significant at the
>level of detail that I run this game at.  In addition, if we are to
>consider that sort of limit, perhaps it would be time to rehash the
>maximum weapon mount limits?  After all, you can pack more power
>plant into a SDB (for example) than would ever be needed to run all
>of its weapons allowable under the current rules.  Why not add more
>turrets?
 
I've been wanting to rehash the weapon limits since the game first
appeared, since the existing limits are the one of the main reasons
piracy is unworkable: a merchant ship can be armed as heavily as a
similar-sized pirate for a sacrifice of 1-2% of cargo capacity, so why
NOT?
2300AD imposes limits on weapons based entirely on surface area of the
ship (and if a 100T ship can mount all the sensors it needs, then it can
mount all the lasers it needs too.  Lasers are smaller than
radio-telescopes).  So why not junk the limits on weaponry, and let you
put on as much weaponry as your ship can hold?  So what if a 400T SDB
mounts 30 triple laser turrets?  It'll mean that there is a difference
between warships and merchants, (and not the idiotic "agility/maneuver"
limit).
 
BTW, has anyone besides me noticed that "agility" (by any definition
ever given) is completely meaningless in Traveller (all incarnations)? 
If your ship can pull 6Gs, and is one light second from whoever is
shooting at it (long range), then your ship can shift from it's
predicted position by no more than 118 meters during the detection
cycle?  And most warships are bigger than that (anything over 63,000T
MUST be bigger, and anything under it that isn't a sphere is probably
bigger)
 
And if you are in at 50,000Km, then your ship can shift from it's
predicted position by only 6.5 meters during the detection cycle.
 
SO how meaningful can "agility" be?
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4026
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 92 13:43:50 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: sensors and jammers...

Scott Kellogg:
 
>But then we have the EMS band stuff.  Yup, that's gotta have external
>mounts.  But look at the size of the stuff in the design tables. 
>It's pretty small.  Sounds like the emmitters and recievers are
>spread out in small spots over the entire hull.  That would give you
>a larger area for your antenna, so you can pick up better signal. 
>When you've got the surface area of a 100 ton ship or so to put it
>on, I think you've got plenty of area.
 
So how big is your basic radio-telescope?  I'm sure they have
interstellar range, but not so sure about anything mush smaller.  And
how much area does a 100T ship have?  At least 590.7 square meters, to
be sure, but how much more?  Say no more than 1000 square meters
(assuming it's three meters thick).  1000 square meters lets you build
an antenna equivalent to a 35 meter dish (which is none too big for
EMS-scanning of objects 2 parsecs away).
 
 
>A question *I* have been thinking over recently is the utility of
>EMS-Jamming.  Virtually all ships that have an active EMS to jam also
>have a passive EMS system.
 
>Ok, scenerio.  Craft A makes an active scan of craft B.  Craft B
>doesn't particularly like this and turns on the EMS-Jammer.  Craft A
>then gets an automatic lock on Craft B by their passive EMS.  So,
>just how useful is the Jammer?
 
The jammer is wonderfully useful with the right platform.  My
spy-ships carry jammers in drones - self-propelled, programmable, able
to jam others from somewhere reasonably close by without actually
giving away your position.
 
>Ah!  What about Jamming the active sensors on incoming missiles? 
>Well the missiles got home on jam stuff too!  (The TL 8 AIM-54
>Pheonix has home on Jam capablity.)
 
Yes, home-on-Jam exists, and yes it makes it tough on jammers, but the
real world is like that.
 
>I was trying to figure out how you might use the jammer to fool both,
>but I know very little about Electronic (Counter)^3 Measures.  My
>first thought was that perhaps 2 jammers working in concert could
>make things rough on the Passive EMS systems.  However it sounds that
>this is not really the case.
 
You don't fool PEMS by jamming it, you spoof it.  Use your AEMS to emit
just exactly the kind of signature that, when added to your natural
signature, looks JUST LIKE SOMETHING ELSE.  That's why destroyers have
that widget to make aircraft-carrier noise today.  It helps protect the
carrier, though it is kind of hard on the destroyers.
Incidently, has anyone noticed the active noise-suppression devices
being developed?  The ones that generate an out-of-phase signal to
cancel the noise?  You could do that with EMS too.  Analyse your ships
signature, generate an out-of-phase copy, and project that out your
AEMS, which should make you just about invisible to PEMS.  And if you
were sharp, you could do it t the return signal from the other guy's
AEMS and kill it too.

Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4027
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1992 14:52 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Re: Hardpoints anyone?

}Scott Kellogg (2G Kellogg)

*Snicker!*

Rob Sez:
}perhaps it would be time to rehash the maximum
}weapon mount limits?  After all, you can pack more power plant into a
}SDB (for example) than would ever be needed to run all of its weapons
}allowable under the current rules.  Why not add more turrets?

Why not?  I quite agree.  The turret rules are kinda arbitrary.  The
problem with changing that rule is that it helps out game balance a bit.
I don't see GDW changing their minds on that one any time soon.  So, if
we (the designers on the TML) change that rule because we don't like it,
we are now no longer designing ships that will be acceptable under their
design rules.  :-P

While I would like to design stuff that makes sence, I don't wanna design
stuff that isn't usable.  For if we adopted a modification then ALL our
previous designs would be so much pieces of paper.  They would suffer huge
disadvantages in combat with the newer designs.

I know, I know, it's a lousy argument, but if we dump the hardpoint rule,
we're gonna have a HUGE arms race on our hands as all the TML designers
suddenly find out their ships are under armed!  :-)

Scott

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4028
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 92 14:45:53 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: free traders, yet more...

Rob Dean:

>Right.  Now, it looks like spec trade can make money, so the big 
>companies have all the good spec trade routes tied up.  In game terms 
>we can use this to generate adventures, since finding a good load can 
>take quite a bit of  work.  (Left as an exercise for the reader (-: ).
 
Yes... Quite.:)
 
>> Then why are they mostly brand new?  At least you pay new prices for
>> them.
 
>Well, a slight quibble: Many are multiples of 10 years old.  It's not 
>that uncommom to be able to roll 'trader' more than once while 
>mustering out.
 
You get 7-10+ roles on the mustering out table if you qualify for a 
merchant ship (4-7+ terms, rank 5+).  According to my statistics course,
the chance of getting a ship under the existing conditions is in the 
neighborhood of 72% (4 terms) to 84% (7 terms) to 91% (10 terms, good 
luck!).  Getting that ship to be ten (or more) years old requires two 
(or more) rolls of "trader", which is about 48% (4 terms) to a lot better 
(with more terms). I concede that a large fraction are not "brand new".  
They are, however, bought "brand new" (or possibly you get it by taking 
over the payments from the original owner).  But SOMEONE, somewhere bought
it new.
     
     Last time I looked at economics in the real world (MANY years), to 
break even, you have to make enough to cover overhead (payments, crew 
salaries, etc.) plus enough to match the earnings of your initial 
investment (the down payment) if you had left your initial investment 
where it was (in a bank at 3%).  So a free trader owner needs to gross 
about 230,000 per month, just to break even.  You'll bring in about 
100,000 per month on passengers, so you'd better clear an average of
760 per ton on cargo space.  SO running less than full up every single 
jump can get awfully iffy real fast.  Of course, three tons of radioactives

can bring you enough to make payments for the next four or five years all
by itself.
 
 
>> The payments are too large to achieve breakeven.  And I always assume
>> that these guys want to be merchants to make money, not to lose it.
>
>Hmmmm....I don't recall this conclusion from before.  I do recall lots of
>backup for the notion that wilderness refueling is an emergency only
>measure, and that passenger accommodations are a losing proposition
>compared to cargo space.
 
A slight exageration.  A free trader (or other J1-M1 merchant) can come out
ahead, especially if you use spec trade almost exclusively.  Of course, if 
you make spec trade hard (by making the PCs WORK at finding a cargo), then
you make breakeven harder too.
 
 
>> Or dropping MCr6 of the
>> down payment into a bank at 3%, and buying a Travellers' Aid Society
>> membership with the other MCr1 is a good way to achieve independence.
>
>your estimate of consumer interest rates on savings.
 
Notice, by the way, that at savings interests rates like that, TAS 
membership (which pays 4.8%) is an INCREDIBLY good investment for
your first MCr1.

Later...

BTW, welcome back from your long winter's nap.

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4029
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1992 17:11:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: William Dow Rieder <wr0k+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Merchants and Money

anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor) writes:

>When I was wondering through my collection of archive material (The stuff
>I managed to get before my uni restricted out of campus FTP and Telnet .)
>I saw a for posts from people talking about the high cost of free traders
>and how they are not economically viable . I am not sure about the outcome 
>of these discussions but here are some ideas I was mussing about with .....

>(Lots more stuff)

	First, note that "Free Trader" has two meanings:
1)	A particular ship, the Type A Free Trader
2)	Someone who makes his/her living by running a small merchant vessel

	The Type A only has Jump-1, and so is not particularly well suited for
spec trade, which is where the money is.  Other ships, such as the Far Trader,
are better suited for this.  The Type A is at its best in dense clusters
of Hi-pop,
Hi-tech worlds - i.e. most of the Imperium (until recently), but NOT the
Spinward Marches.

	A party trying to make money hauling freight + passengers will
probably go broke.  A party that has the right skills and a Jump-2+ ship
with decent cargo capacity can make a lot of money on spec trade.
(On one occasion, I cleared more than a million credits on 3 jumps)

	This means that no handwaving is needed to justify the existence
of independent merchants, or the willingness of banks to loan to them.
For particular techniques and numbers, I posted some quite a while back that
should be in the archives.  The main problem with is that the rules give a
totally wrong impression of what the best ships are and how independent
merchants make money.
				Capt. Kagarillian Grant

alias

					W. Dow Rieder

 	When the only tool you have is a hammer, all your problems
start to look like nails...

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4030
From: david richardson <normanb@citi.umich.edu>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 92 18:50:15 -0400
Subject: Out of print items

Other than swaps at conventions, what methods are available
for picking up some out of print Traveller items?  I'm
especially interested in:

    World Builder's Handbook
    The Traveller Adventure
    Striker


Thanks

david richardson		Institutional File System Project
normanb@citi.umich.edu		The University of Michigan

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com Mon May  4 13:51:42 1992
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), 76234.2216@compuserve.com (Striker),
        bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #336: Msgs 4031-4046
Reply-To: traveller-request@wrgate.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
Content-Length: 45073
X-Lines: 1029
Status: O


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Mon May  4 09:57:24 PDT 1992
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #336: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
4031  30-Apr-92 anaylor@mihi.une. Free Traders <Sigh> << Er sorry if I opened a
4032  29-Apr-92 Mark F. Cook      Re: Out of print items << David Richardson <n
4033  30-Apr-92 Pauli             Hardpoints and other mundane things << Steve 
4034  30-Apr-92 Rupert G. Goldie  Artificial Intelligence << Scott wrote: >On A
4035  30-Apr-92 Rupert G. Goldie  Mystery Authors << Cynthia Higginbotham write
4036  30-Apr-92 BARANSKI@VEAMF1.N AI << Mark Cook tells us about AI project up 
4037  30-Apr-92 A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.S hardpoints and arming merchant and naval vess
4038  30-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Sensors and Hardpoints << Cynthia points out 
4039  30-Apr-92 Robert S. Dean    Re: Sensors and Hardpoints << Scott (2G) Kell
4040  30-Apr-92 James T Perkins   Re: (3998) cybernetics << cat@fgssu1.fgs.slb.
4041  30-Apr-92 James T Perkins   Re: (3997) frictionless (magnetic) bearings <
4042  30-Apr-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Fusion Rockets << On fusion rockets: I tried 
4043  30-Apr-92 Steve_Higginbotha more sensors, missiles, combat... << Rob Dean
4044  30-Apr-92 Steve_Higginbotha sensors and things... << Scott: >Well, IMO, I
4045  30-Apr-92 Steve_Higginbotha traveller stuff... << David Richardson: >Othe
4046  30-Apr-92 Robert S. Dean    Revision rises again << I just noticed the fo

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4031
From: anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor)
Subject: Free Traders <Sigh>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 92 13:35:01 EST

Er sorry if I opened a can of worms guys, I wasnt around when the biggie
discussion was on (Sorry I missed it) . 

I agree with by Cynthia's and Steves comments on free traders, ie they cant
live for 12 CR a year on a pension etc . 

BUT The character generation tables (I beleive anyway), are for making up
TRAVELLER CHARACTERS . NPCS, or the average joe blow are another matter
entirerly . I mean look at the character merchant whose gained a free trader
.. Why has he not got lots of money, becuse instead of filing his money in
the bank, he has put it in a starship . The pensions in the character 
generation are not superannuation (Well I dont think they are), they really
are not big enough to support a person on (They never were meant to be) . 

Mr NPC captain doesnt burn around in a starship cause he has retired on
his superannuation (some enormous amount proberly) and is content to live
of it . The reason why traveller characters dont get large amounts like
this is becuase then they have no reason to adventure . 

If you look at the payments side of it . 

Agreed 5.575% (Ithink) is small, but look in the encyclopedia under
starship purchase it says

Standard Terms involve the payment of 1/240th of the cash price each month
for 480 months, roughly 153,000 Cr a month for a type A free trader
(Sorry about the 175,000 yesterday but that was based on a far trader) . 

There is none of this paying of interest only, you must pay the set 1/240
a month (for 480 months) . 

That is still alot of money in anyones terms . 

Yes they are burning around on assets worth 6 to 60 million credits agreed,
but that person has sunk his entire merchant career into getting that
and most of his cash as well . I mean they are not really going to say
"Ive been smegging around for the last 30 years in this tincan, I'll think
I'll sell it tomorrow and live a life of luxery" . 

Sorry about the images of "Battered Free Traders" but I was just showing 
contrast .

You have to remember corporations have more power than indivdiuals, it stands
to reason . The tax rebates I meant were things such as using company
accountants to get tax incentives, that sort of thing . A company can put
preassure on a contractee to give it to them and so forth . Thats why
in effect the megacorps are an empire unto their own within the imperium . 

The frontier places (such as the spinward marches) are ideal for the free 
trader . Companies have their established markets, the frontier is a land
of opputunity . The majority of people playing traveller have their 
campaigns set on the frontier . The frontier is were the most fluctuations
in markets and tech and cultures occur . A free trader can make a mint in 
an atmosphere like that . The original game was set on this frontier, and
based its adventures around the "frontier' image . Consequently why the
small free traders are more prolific there . 

I think that the more stable and older areas of the imperium would have its
markets nearly completely sown up by the corps, but the frontiers are just
too much of a headache for em, consequently the free traders step in . Also
as the companies dominate the trade, the FT's go elsewhere, naturally the
frontier is the place to head for . 

Mind you if you think the traveller character table was for your average
person, well I guess thats a whole lot of gunk  . But I tend to believe that
the whole point of the tables was to create characters with roleplaying and
adventure potential . Consequently thats why the tables give em the chance
to get starships, and dont give heaps of cash . 

Edmund and well .......... Michael 



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

Archive-Message-Number: 4032
From: Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM>
Subject: Re: Out of print items
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 92 22:29:39 PDT

David Richardson <normanb@citi.umich.edu> writes:

> Other than swaps at conventions, what methods are available
> for picking up some out of print Traveller items?  I'm
> especially interested in:
> 
>     World Builder's Handbook
>     The Traveller Adventure
>     Striker

Both The Traveller Adventure and Striker are available from the Weekend
Warrior, a mail-order game supply in southern California.  Mint condition
copies of Striker are currently available for $50.00 (original boxed set)
and $30.00 (rules in a zip-lock bag; no box, no dice).  I think there are
used copies available as well, but I don't have current prices (I'd guess
about half the cost of the mint items).  The Traveller Adventure is
available, in softcover only, for $20.00 mint condition or (I *think*)
$10.00 dollars used.  I haven't seen a listing for the World Builder's
Handbook, but I'll bet they have it.  (Actually, they *DO* list something
called the World Survey Guidebook, which may be the WBH mislabeled.  They
list both the Grand Census and Grand Survey separately, so I'm pretty
sure it's neither of them.)

FYI, they also carry back issues of Challenge magazine (issues 25-56
at least), back issues of JTAS (1 thru 24, but they're pricey), original
GDW traveller books 0 thru 8, supplements 1 thru 13, adventures 1 thru 13,
and double adventures 1 thru 6.  They also have available all 8 of the
original Alien Modules.

The Weekend Warrior is mail-order only.  the address is:

        Weekend Warrior
        8116 Van Noord Ave.
        North Hollywood, CA  91605
	Phone: (818) 988-1441

Payment may be by cashier's check, money order, or personal check.
If a personal check is used, allow an extra 2-3 weeks for delivery.
All payments *MUST* be made in U.S. funds (for those of you thinking
of ordering from outside the U.S.) and *NO* credit card orders of any
kind are accepted.  You might be well off to call before ordering.
That way you can determine whether or not the items you want are
really in stock (they do run out ocassionally) (and have them held
if they're available), whether the prices have changed, and what
the shipping charge will be.

I have no affiliation with the Weekend Warrior other than being a *VERY*
satisfied repeat customer.  Hope this helps.

Later,
	- Mark C.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4033
Subject: Hardpoints and other mundane things
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 92 15:57:07 +1000
From: Pauli <grue@cs.uq.oz.au>

Steve writes:

>I've been wanting to rehash the weapon limits since the game first
>appeared, since the existing limits are the one of the main reasons
>piracy is unworkable: a merchant ship can be armed as heavily as a
>similar-sized pirate for a sacrifice of 1-2% of cargo capacity, so why
>NOT?

You can also add lots of guns (you know the section in the ref's guide that
follows spinals, bays and turrents :-)  They are cheap and can pack a decent
punch.  Not as good as a real starship weapon, but still pretty good.  This
would also be slightly more realistic.  I feel it is pretty absurd that most
small starships only carry the big weapons and forget about the little things.
How many ships today only carry large guns?  From what I've seen they usually
carry a decent mixture of weaponary.


>BTW, has anyone besides me noticed that "agility" (by any definition
>ever given) is completely meaningless in Traveller (all incarnations)? 
>If your ship can pull 6Gs, and is one light second from whoever is
>shooting at it (long range), then your ship can shift from it's
>predicted position by no more than 118 meters during the detection
>cycle?  And most warships are bigger than that (anything over 63,000T
>MUST be bigger, and anything under it that isn't a sphere is probably
>bigger)

Your figures are a little incorrect but what the hell.  I'll agree that
agility is hopeless as is.



Scott KelloGG writes:
>Rob Sez:
>}perhaps it would be time to rehash the maximum
>}weapon mount limits?  After all, you can pack more power plant into a
>}SDB (for example) than would ever be needed to run all of its weapons
>}allowable under the current rules.  Why not add more turrets?

>While I would like to design stuff that makes sence, I don't wanna design
>stuff that isn't usable.  For if we adopted a modification then ALL our
>previous designs would be so much pieces of paper.  They would suffer huge
>disadvantages in combat with the newer designs.

Do you understand the term cannon fodder?


>I know, I know, it's a lousy argument, but if we dump the hardpoint rule,
>we're gonna have a HUGE arms race on our hands as all the TML designers
>suddenly find out their ships are under armed!  :-)

What is wrong with a little arms races?  They don't cause too many problems do
they.


Realisticly, it is possible to decrease the price of a merchant ship (which
was mentioned somewhere else on TML) without decreasing the cost of military
ships.  What do military ships have that merchants don't?  They carry weapons,
fib style (big) computers, screens, armour and they have agility.
Armour and agility are already pretty expensive (more wouldn't hurt too much).
So increase the cost of big computers and screens a lot.  Maybe increase the
cost of the better sensor suites and make weapons very expensive (what is
the going rate on a cruise missile these days?)  Then add a markup for
being military of 500% and you are set.



        						Pauli

Paul Dale               | Internet/CSnet:            grue@cs.uq.oz.au
Dept of Computer Science| Bitnet:       grue%cs.uq.oz.au@uunet.uu.net
Uni of Queensland       | JANET:           grue%cs.uq.oz.au@uk.ac.ukc
Australia, 4072         | EAN:                          grue@cs.uq.oz
                        | UUCP:           uunet!munnari!cs.uq.oz!grue
f4e6g4Qh4++             | JUNET:                     grue@cs.uq.oz.au


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4034
From: Rupert G. Goldie <rgg@aaii.oz.au>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 92 18:28:53 EST
Subject: Artificial Intelligence

Scott wrote:
>On AI programs:
>}I assert it's more a
>}matter of hardware than software at this point.  We can do anything,
>}given enough code.  :=)

>That's my guess, but then again, I'm strictly a computer-0 type myself.

 Seeing as I work at an AI institute I have to stick my nose in here.
We really have quite a long way to go before we get "real" AI. We still 
haven't figured out the correct formalisms for generic problem solving
and there is still plenty of dispute as to what techniques we should be
using. 

 With better hardware we can, of course, do some good stuff, but we
really need a lot more work done on the AI theory. There are some fairly
impressive descendants of Eliza out there at the moment which can hold
conversations in a limited domain, but they can't be thought of in any
way as intelligent.

 The other area which, until more recently, has not received a lot of
attention is low-level behaviour. Any autonomous artificial being has
to be able to react rapidly to its environment (ie if our robot has 
decided to cross a road, we would like it to notice the oncoming car and
avoid it). At our current level of technology we can build stupid 
cockroaches which can feel walls and sense heat.

>But, also, AI is *supposed* to be TL 17.  So will it REALLY take 9 tech
>levels from now to get a true AI?  I doubt it.  

It may take until TL 17 to get full artificial intelligent life (ie 
can self-replicate, is autonomous, and has an intelligence as rich
as ours), but real AI should come in before then in non-autonomous 
computer form. In recent years I've thought that Traveller understates
the level of computer power at higher tech levels, but then (as Catie Helm 
mentioned) we are playing Traveller, not Cyberpunk aren't we ? 

Rupert
- -- 
Rupert G. Goldie, Research Scientist                rgg@aaii.oz.au
Australian Artificial Intelligence Institute        
Life's a bitch and then you die.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4035
From: Rupert G. Goldie <rgg@aaii.oz.au>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 92 18:36:29 EST
Subject: Mystery Authors

Cynthia Higginbotham writes:
> (SF Historical note: it was not a
> cyberpunk author who invented organlegging.  It was another, non-cyber-
> punk-type author who came up with the idea of implanting electronics in
> your skull so your brain could talk directly to the computer. Anybody 
> else remember who these mystery authors were?)  

 Larry Niven came up with organlegging and I think it was Niven & Pournelle
in Oath of Fealty who came up with direct neural computer connections.

- -Rupert
- -- 
Rupert G. Goldie, Research Scientist                rgg@aaii.oz.au
Australian Artificial Intelligence Institute        
Life's a bitch and then you die.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4036
Date:    Thu, 30 Apr 1992 10:10:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: BARANSKI@VEAMF1.NUSC.NAVY.MIL
Subject: AI

Mark Cook tells us about AI project up to the present...

My ignorant opinion on AI is that AI's could either be taught or programmed, or
both.  The expert systems are a good example of programmed AI, but most expert
systems intentionally focus on a narrow subject, so it's no surprise to me that
they are lost outside of it's specialty.  Programming an general purpose
humanoid AI would be a formidable task, which it sounds like the 'Cyk' project
is attempting.  Also I don't know if it has been attempted to program an AI
with complete, but only 'general purpose learning' programming.  I'm curious to
know if such an algorithm would be very simple or very complex...

However, I think I would consider a programmed expert system AI to be a
simulation of an Intelligence, rather then a true Artificial Intelligence. 
What's the difference?  How do we know if we're not just simulations of
intelligence?  Beats the heck out of me...  Half the time I'm convinced that
humans aren't really intelligent as it is, at least not as intelligent as we
think we are.

The account of the AI being taught to detect tanks is interesting, the AI was
learning something different, then what was trying to be taught to it.  I think
anyone who has children will recognize that this is a pretty common learning
experience to have mistaken conclusions.  I heard of a child once who saw a
picture in the newspaper of a tree fallen on a car after a storm; thereafter he
would have a fit whenever his parents drove down a certain tree lined street...

I imagine that a computer if a computer could be programmed to simulate a child
at age -9 months, it could learn as a human develops.  Such a AI would be very
humanlike, of course.

BTW, everything that I've heard about sleep & dreaming suggests to me that
dreaming is exactly the garbage collection and premise & conclusion checking
that Mark suggests.

Now an AI programmed in a different way might of course be very unhumanlike,
and quite dangerous.  Imagine how an AI with a strong 'instinct' for survival
in one of today's computers in today's society would act.  It might do some
very nasty things to ensure it's survival, and it would have to in a society
when it's survival was not valued.  It would have to ensure that it had
***assured*** power supply, and that it's programming would not be erased or
modified, or possibly copied, and that it had a fault tolerant machine and
plenty of spare parts.  Think about how well that would go over...

Then again, perhaps some of the AI projects suceeded their objective of
creating an AI, but that the AI was, from our viewpoint, unstable, psychotic,
crazy, or suicidal, or was driven insane?  It's likely that most AI created at
least at the beginning of the technology would be 'imperfect'.

Enough for now...

Jim.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4037
Date:    Thu, 30 Apr 1992 10:53:11 -0500 (CDT)
From: A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU (Brandon Cope)
Subject: hardpoints and arming merchant and naval vessels

Whew, that was a long subject field...

There are a couple of ways to deal with this, which can be used jointly:

(1) Consider the 1 hardpoint per 100 tons a *legal* restriction, not a design
one. Military and pirate ships ('What laws?') do not have to obey this
restriction. However, to keep some sanity, perhaps limit the volume of weaponry
to 10% of the ship's volume. This includes turrets, spinal mounts, bays,
whatever.

(2) Merchant ships must use weapons of a lower technology than what is
available for the military. It should be at least 2 TLs lower, perhaps as much
as 4. Pirates will fall in-between the merchant and military ships, since they
will loot weapons off of whatever they can. This should also apply to armor,
and other offensive/defensive items.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4038
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 1992 11:51 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Sensors and Hardpoints

Cynthia points out that it might be more realistic to require that large
sensors require hardpoints for mounting.  Thus limiting the number of sensors
that can be mounted on the hull.

Rob and Steve are ready to throw out the hardpoint restrictions.

(Sigh!)

Well, IMO, I can see there being reasons for both cases.  However, I can
much more easily justify there being hardpoint restrictions for weapons than
I can for sensors.  *Some* of the turret weapons have recoil.  Fusion/Plasma
weapons, and to a lesser extent sandcasters and missile racks.  (In my games
the missile racks use a grav ejector system to throw the missile clear of the
ship before the engine ignites)

Similar arguments don't exist to limit the number of sensor type hardpoints.
The sensors (IMO) are going to be split up into small units spread over the
entire available area of the hull.  Ok, I don't know how big an antenni an
interstellar range EMS scanner is gonna be, but I would think that the hull
of a 100 tonner could handle it.

For the moment lemme stick to A-EMS ok?  IMO, A-EMS is going to have a
series of small emmitters spread out over the hull like a large phased array
radar.  The emmiters and collectors all spread out over the whole surface.
This is consistant with the damage tables in starship combat.  You don't
knock out sensor arrays with surface damage hits.  Why?  Because they're
*all over* the hull.  You hit one emmitter, and there are n minus one others
still working just fine.

Passive sensors work just the same.  Spread out the area and it works better.

Now neutrino sensors are gonna be programmed to ignore the emmissions of the
fusion plant that is built to power it, right?  I do not see why a densiometer
could not similarly be programmed to ignore the grav field of the ship that
it resides in.  Therefore I don't see the necessity for mounting them on
booms.

While I can see the advantage of their being specific mounts (the booms) for
sensors.  I don't see that there is going to be a great increase in surface
area for the booms.  I don't think that it's going to be all that big an
increase.  For instance, a passive EMS substellar could be mounted either on
a 500 ton ship using hardpoints or a 100 ton ship using a boom.  A boom that
expands to that size is gonna have to be *huge*, much larger than 135Kl.
It will also cause problems with fire control for ship's weapons.  You have
a *huge* antenni next to the hull and it will act to restrict the firing arc
of your weapons rather severely I would think.

Now while that big a boom is gonna be a big thing in terms of radar cross
section, it isn't going to add to the Objsize as it is now computed.  Objsize
is related to the ships mass only.  I think the only time it gets brought in
is in densiometer scans, not Radar and A-EMS.

Ok, philosophy time!  The following is my opinion on modifications to
be made to Trav.
*I* think that the technolgy depicted in Trav falls short of where things
would actually be.  The difference bettween TL 15 and TL 8 is not the
equivalent difference bettween TL 8 and TL 1.  Nope!  No way!

There is also the argument that looking at the performance of the technology
and downgrading it is going to devalidate all the work that was done before.
Thus, all the ships that have been designed are now totally useless.  A
scout ship can no longer mount decent sensors *and* weapons?  No way!  Sorry!
I won't agree to that one.  All the ships we have would have to be thrown out
the window.  Furthermore, since GDW isn't likey to adopt a modification like
that, all the designs they come out with in the future will be incompatible.

As a designer I may be prolific, but I'm not THAT prolific.

So, I will tend to disagree with notions that downgrade the performance of
systems in the game.  If a system is more efficient than it might be in real
life, I will be suspicious, but I will still tend to use it.  (fusion rockets)
But, if said system is less efficent than it should be I will change it.
(Nulcear fission)

BTW, Steve, on agility:  check out the archives.  Rob Dean and I came up with
a couple arguments on it that (to us) make sence)  Essentually, our definition
came back from high guard calculations and Rob's thrust based maneuver
calculations.  The upshot of it was that a ship will have an agility equivalent
to the max acceleration of it's engines in G's.  By diverting power from the
engines to weapons you decrease the acceleration you're pulling.

Scott (2G) Kellogg
"Here come the LOBSTERS!" - A. Sayle

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4039
Date:     Thu, 30 Apr 92 13:19:36 EDT
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Re:  Sensors and Hardpoints

Scott (2G) Kellogg writes:
> 
> Cynthia points out that it might be more realistic to require that large
> sensors require hardpoints for mounting.  Thus limiting the number of sensors
> that can be mounted on the hull.
> 
> Rob and Steve are ready to throw out the hardpoint restrictions.
> 
> (Sigh!)

No, you mistake my intent slightly, Scott.  I merely said that if we were
going to go for "realism" we should do both.

> Ok, philosophy time!  The following is my opinion on modifications to
> be made to Trav.
> *I* think that the technolgy depicted in Trav falls short of where things
> would actually be.  The difference bettween TL 15 and TL 8 is not the
> equivalent difference bettween TL 8 and TL 1.  Nope!  No way!

Marc Miller (RIP) stated in a seminar at Origins last year that the tech
levels were never especially intended to be "equally spaced" in any way.
So, don't worry about it.

> Thus, all the ships that have been designed are now totally useless.  A
> scout ship can no longer mount decent sensors *and* weapons?  No way!  Sorry!
> I won't agree to that one.  All the ships we have would have to be thrown out
> the window.  Furthermore, since GDW isn't likey to adopt a modification like
> that, all the designs they come out with in the future will be incompatible.
> As a designer I may be prolific, but I'm not THAT prolific.

Right.  I don't want to do that either, and I'm the only designer who is more
prolific than you are.  Consider my statement to have been something along the
lines of a rhetorical device.

> So, I will tend to disagree with notions that downgrade the performance of
> systems in the game.  If a system is more efficient than it might be in real
> life, I will be suspicious, but I will still tend to use it. (fusion rockets)
> But, if said system is less efficent than it should be I will change it.
> (Nulcear fission)

Well, obviously I agree about nuclear fission.  However, my problem with
fusion rockets as presented in COACC is that they are so good that there
is no reason that anyone would ever use thrusters.  So, along the lines of
'don't invalidate more work than you have to', fusion rockets need to be 
refigured until they are in some sort of trade-off position with respect to
thrusters (and standard grav maneuver drives.)

> 
> BTW, Steve, on agility:  check out the archives.  Rob Dean and I came up with
> a couple arguments on it that (to us) make sense) Essentually, our definition
> came back from high guard calculations and Rob's thrust based maneuver cal-
> culations. The upshot of it was that a ship will have an agility equivalent
> to the max acceleration of it's engines in G's.  By diverting power from the
> engines to weapons you decrease the acceleration you're pulling.

Actually Scott, I suspect that Steve is familiar with that.  What he has just
posted is a question as to whether or not _any_ agility should be figured
"realistically".  Having once done some calculations on how many maneuver Gs
would be required to alter the projected position of a ship by more than
one ship length, I tend to agree with him in principle.  Since ship combat
is in sad shape anyway, this is the sort of area in which I am a little more 
comfortable considering changes.

Just as an arguing position, I would suggest that agility be reduced to a small
factor at long range only, and that _more_ emphasis should be placed on 
computers, sensors, jammers, countermeasures and perhaps relative velocity in
working out combat.  In addition, we really need to start a thread concerning
missiles in combat, especially with respect to how they home and what effects
if any the firing computer should have on their peformance.

Rob Dean


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4040
Subject: Re: (3998) cybernetics 
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 92 10:51:05 PDT
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>


cat@fgssu1.fgs.slb.COM (Rather B. Fishing) writes:
> Robots and Cyborgs...  Now I keep hearing that DGP has dropped MT
> altogether.  Is this really true?  All of us in my traveller group
> would like to know more about the details (we've been lurking on this
> list only since the beginning of March).

Yep.  It's true.  DGP is only supporting its new RPG, "AI".

James

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4041
Subject: Re: (3997) frictionless (magnetic) bearings 
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 92 10:54:12 PDT
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>


cat@fgssu1.fgs.slb.COM (Rather B. Fishing) writes:
> (So you're probably all thinking that that's the last time you
> encourage me to expound on something... Sorry if I got pedantic - I
> suffer from nerd attacks every now and then... I can usually tell when
> I'm in the middle of an excessive nerd attack at my weekly traveller
> game, since Jim the GM and everyone else is giving that long suffering
> look again... Life is so hard for us nerds... I shoulda listened to my
> Mom and gone to music school...)

There are not enough female "techno-weenies" around. Applause. Keep the
faith.

James
Yours in nerdism

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4042
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 1992 15:01 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Fusion Rockets

On fusion rockets:

I tried using George's modification for fuel consumption.  George multiplied
fuel consumption by a factor of 40000.  Thus the 200,000 disp ton tanker I was
using which only had an acceleration of 1G could fire the engines for 41
minutes.  Instead of the 3+ years I had originally planned on.

Ok, that may be correct from a engineering and physical reality point of view,
but it makes them totally useless when compared to grav.  Well, I think that
to make the game fun, your fusion rockets should allow a higher acceleration,
but more fuel needed.  THat sounds like a reasonable compromise.  But George's
fuel consumption outlaws their use completely.  (sigh)

As much as I like to see things realistic, they should be usable too.  (I also
prefer the notion of somthing I can understand (fusion rocket) as opposed to
something I can't (gravitic propulsion).

Scott

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4043
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 92 14:47:52 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: more sensors, missiles, combat...

Rob Dean:
 
>No, you mistake my intent slightly, Scott.  I merely said that if we
>were going to go for "realism" we should do both.
 
I agree.  GO for it, or stop complaining about lack of realism.
 
 
>Marc Miller (RIP) stated in a seminar at Origins last year that the
>tech levels were never especially intended to be "equally spaced" in
>any way.  So, don't worry about it.
 
SO far I never have.
 
 
<about fusion rockets>
 
What he said!
 
 
>Actually Scott, I suspect that Steve is familiar with that.  What he
>has just posted is a question as to whether or not _any_ agility
>should be figured "realistically".  Having once done some
>calculations on how many maneuver Gs would be required to alter the
>projected position of a ship by more than one ship length, I tend to
>agree with him in principle.  Since ship combat is in sad shape
>anyway, this is the sort of area in which I am a little more
>comfortable considering changes.
 
I also agree with this.  We (C and I) have occasionally played around
with the idea of integrating ship combat with the rest of the combat
system, but have come to no real conclusions yet.  
 
 
>Just as an arguing position, I would suggest that agility be reduced
>to a small factor at long range only, and that _more_ emphasis should
>be placed on computers, sensors, jammers, countermeasures and perhaps
>relative velocity in working out combat.  In addition, we really need
>to start a thread concerning missiles in combat, especially with
>respect to how they home and what effects if any the firing computer
>should have on their peformance.
 
A small agility effect at long range I can live with.  How about
this:  If your acceleration (in meters per second squared) is over
your ship's radius (compute as if the ship WERE a sphere, even if not:
a table could be generated in about 5 minutes), then you get an
agility of "1" (used exactly as it is now, but only at one light
second or greater range).  If greater than two times, you get a "2",
and so forth.  That way nothing gets an agility except for small
stuff:  your Tigris is SOL.
As to the velocity effect, remember that at 100,000Km, a velocity of
3000Km/s translates to a crossing speed of 1.7 degrees per second.  A
Phalanx or Goalkeeper can traverse at better than 90 degrees per second
now.   They can also track something crossing faster than that.  So
velocity is not likely to be a proble unless v:w3it is REALLY high, or the
target is REALLY close by.
 
As to the missile discussion, I'm all for it!  It's about time we got
a good thread going again, and missile have needed beating on for a
long time now.
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4044
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 92 14:43:22 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: sensors and things...

Scott:
 
>Well, IMO, I can see there being reasons for both cases.  However, I
>can much more easily justify there being hardpoint restrictions for
>weapons than I can for sensors.  *Some* of the turret weapons have
>recoil.  Fusion/Plasma weapons, and to a lesser extent sandcasters
>and missile racks.  (In my games the missile racks use a grav ejector
>system to throw the missile clear of the ship before the engine
>ignites)
 
In our game, the missiles use grav propulsion (anything else would
give performance so poor that missiles would be useless), so grav
ejectors are pretty meaningless.  And if your grav ejectors produce a
6g kick, then the recoil from a 50Kg missile (661#) would be
comparable to that of a 20mm cannon.  Which is pretty trivial for a
1350Kl hull.  Especially since the ROF of your missile launchers is so
low (80RPM?)
 
>Similar arguments don't exist to limit the number of sensor type
>hardpoints.  The sensors (IMO) are going to be split up into small
>units spread over the entire available area of the hull.  Ok, I don't
>know how big an antenni an interstellar range EMS scanner is gonna
>be, but I would think that the hull of a 100 tonner could handle it.
 
I wouldn't think so.  Especially since all the existing ones (various
radio telescopes around the world) start at 490 square meters, and
work up (way, way, up!).  At 490M^2, you are talking about AT LEAST
half the skin area of a 100T ship.  Probably more, and that only lets
you see in one direction.
 
 
b>For the moment lemme stick to A-EMS ok?  IMO, A-EMS is going to have
>a series of small emmitters spread out over the hull like a large
>phased array radar.  The emmiters and collectors all spread out over
>the whole surface.  This is consistant with the damage tables in
>starship combat.  You don't knock out sensor arrays with surface
>damage hits.  Why?  Because they're *all over* the hull.  You hit one
>emmitter, and there are n minus one others still working just fine.
 
This I assumed also.  But if your array covers only 490 m^2 or so,
then you won't have an EMS array that will detect things at 2
parsecs.  Probably not even at 200 AU.
 
 
>Passive sensors work just the same.  Spread out the area and it works
>better.
 
True.  The same arguments apply.
 
 
>Now neutrino sensors are gonna be programmed to ignore the emmissions
>of the fusion plant that is built to power it, right?  I do not see
>why a densiometer could not similarly be programmed to ignore the
>grav field of the ship that it resides in.  Therefore I don't see the
>necessity for mounting them on booms.
 
I agree about neutrino sensors.  The ARTIFICAL grav generated on your
ship will mask out emissions from distant sources.  Remember that
"artificial grav" fields do NOT generate gravity, but rather something
similar.  And that densitometers (the Impy kind) do NOT work well near
an artificial grav source.
 
 
>While I can see the advantage of their being specific mounts (the
>booms) for sensors.  I don't see that there is going to be a great
>increase in surface area for the booms.  I don't think that it's
>going to be all that big an increase.  For instance, a passive EMS
>substellar could be mounted either on a 500 ton ship using hardpoints
>or a 100 ton ship using a boom.  A boom that expands to that size is
>gonna have to be *huge*, much larger than 135Kl.  It will also cause
>problems with fire control for ship's weapons.  You have a *huge*
>antenni next to the hull and it will act to restrict the firing arc
>of your weapons rather severely I would think.
 
Let's see.  1000 m^2 of solar panel has a volume of 5Kl.  SOunds like
a LOT of extra room to me.  Ignoring the fact that you actually aren't
looking for extra AREA, but extra RADIUS.  So a 50 meter boom would
give you the equivalent of 1960 m^2 worth of antenna.  If you stuck
the boom on the front of a 50m long ship, the apparent antenna size
would be 4 times as big as you would get without the boom.
 
 
>Now while that big a boom is gonna be a big thing in terms of radar
>cross-section, it isn't going to add to the Objsize as it is now
>computed.  Objsize is related to the ships mass only.  I think the
>only time it gets brought in is in densiometer scans, not Radar and
>A-EMS.
 
And here I thought that object size affected ActObjScan and ActObjPin
tasks too.  And if they don't, then SOMETHING should.  And it should
be affected by the booms.
w3 
 
>Ok, philosophy time!  The following is my opinion on modifications to
>be made to Trav.  *I* think that the technolgy depicted in Trav falls
>short of where things would actually be.  The difference bettween TL
>15 and TL 8 is not the equivalent difference bettween TL 8 and TL 1. 
>Nope!  No way!
 
True...
 
 
>There is also the argument that looking at the performance of the
>technology and downgrading it is going to devalidate all the work
>that was done before.  Thus, all the ships that have been designed
>are now totally useless.  A scout ship can no longer mount decent
>sensors *and* weapons?  No way!  Sorry!  I won't agree to that one. 
>All the ships we have would have to be thrown out the window.
>Furthermore, since GDW isn't likey to adopt a modification like
>that, all the designs they come out with in the future will be
>incompatible.
 
(Devalidate???)
Also true...  (though I think the "scout ship" is the most ridiculous
waste of a design ever conceived by th emind of man)
 
 
>As a designer I may be prolific, but I'm not THAT prolific.
 
You're NOT?
 
 
>So, I will tend to disagree with notions that downgrade the
>performance of systems in the game.  If a system is more efficient
>than it might be in real life, I will be suspicious, but I will still
>tend to use it.  (fusion rockets)  But, if said system is less
>efficent than it should be I will change it.  (Nulcear fission)
 
I MOSTLY agree here.  I like to junk ANY rule that falls too far
outside the boundaries of reality, though.  Fusion rockets, for
instance, have an exhaust velocity of several times lightspeed.  They
are also more fuel efficient than thrusters.  SO they gotta be fixed.
Notice that if you change the hardpoint rules, AND add in Cynthia's
sensor rules, you have not NECESSARILY changed the game:  you have
made small ships with big sensor suites less common, or made them more
detectable to AEMS (but who uses AEMS in combat anyway?  SO who
cares?).  My feel for the sensor rules are that a "hardpoint" should
be allowed to be either (1) a sensor boom, or (2) both a turret and a
sensor point.  So scouts don't have good sensors AND guns, but a 600T
ship can have both, and a 200T ship can have both, but be easy to
locate with AEMS.
 
 
>BTW, Steve, on agility:  check out the archives.  Rob Dean and I came
>up with a couple arguments on it that (to us) make sence) 
>Essentually, our definition came back from high guard calculations
>and Rob's thrust based maneuver calculations.  The upshot of it was
>that a ship will have an agility equivalent to the max acceleration
>of it's engines in G's.  By diverting power from the engines to
>weapons you decrease the acceleration you're pulling.
 
I read them.  I do not agree that they are meaningful at less than 2
light seconds range (and ALL MT combat is at less than 2 light seconds
range, since effective detection takes place at considerably less than
1 light second using MT rules.  Has Cynthia ever posted her Skynet
ship designs?  They are intended to deal with the problem of SHORT
detection ranges, mostly by making them VERY long (and VERY
expensive).
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4045
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 92 15:28:58 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: traveller stuff...

David Richardson:
 
>Other than swaps at conventions, what methods are available
>for picking up some out of print Traveller items?  I'm
>especially interested in:
>
>    World Builder's Handbook
>    The Traveller Adventure
>    Striker
 
Well, I have two copies of Striker, if that would help.
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4046
Date:     Thu, 30 Apr 92 20:38:52 EDT
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Revision rises again

I just noticed the following announcement on GEnie.  It seems to me that
we have been through this once before.  As a result, I am _not_ offering
to post anything back and forth to GEnie this time.  Someone else can if 
they want to.

Looks like this project is moving off the back burner again now that
Command Decision II is on the way.

Rob Dean

(Any comments, Tom Harris?)

 ************
Topic 16        Wed Apr 29, 1992
GDW.SUPPORT [Loren W]        at 21:06 EDT
Sub: Traveller Rules Responses              

Responses to following (in case you missed it elsewhere):

We at GDW are preparing a 3rd edition of our Traveller Science Fiction
 ************
 ------------
Category 20,  Topic 16
Message 1         Wed Apr 29, 1992
GDW.SUPPORT [Loren W]        at 21:08 EDT
 
We at GDW are preparing a 3rd edition of our Traveller Science Fiction role-
playing game.

One of the ideas we are toying with is not tying the basic rules to one
campaign setting. Instead, the Traveller rules set will be separated into two
books: one containing rules that players can use for any campaign setting they
wish, and the other continuing the saga of our 15-year-old Imperium setting.

We want to know what you'd like to see in our new rules set, so please post
your responses in the new topic over in category 20.

If you've never played a GDW game, we want to know why. Never heard of us?
Don't like the subject matter of any of our games? If you used to play one or
more of our games, but quit, we'd like to know why.

 Dave Nilsen and Loren Wiseman
   for GDW, Inc.

 ------------
Message  2  <deleted by Rob> regarding similar  announcement  for 
T:2000 (splitting rules and backgrounds)
 ------------
Message  3 <deleted by Rob> regarding agreement on  T:2000  topic 
with split
 ------------
Category 20,  Topic 16
Message 4         Thu Apr 30, 1992
J.MARTIN11 [Julia]           at 01:48 EDT
 
Jay,
   Funny you should mention that.  I was trying to work in T:TNE into my reply
over in T2K but didn't.  So, I'll just say it here....

   I think it's a -fabulous- idea and really the only logical way to do
things.  With T2K, you're defining different time periods on the same planet
and doing so via "background books" is a good way to do it--it saves time and
money for everyone.
   But, when you're doing things on a galactic level, then heck, background
books are the only way to go.  With such books, you can put out information on
specific planets, houses and sections of the galaxy very easily and the GMs
and players can pick and choose what are they want to play in.

   Plus, you can look at which background books sell the most and know what
area of T:TNE the players like the most and concentrate on putting out more
books on that subject.
   Finally, as I recall, isn't T:TNE going to use the T2K core rules? If so,
then this really opens up Traveller like never before especially with the
individual background books essentially defining the universe .  You could use
T2K background books for when the game visits a low-tech world (and the weapon
books for the slug throwers the happy natives use on the players).
   And, what I'm real eager (OK,rabid) about doing: using Dark Conspiracy
stuff in Traveller where the players visit some of DC's nasty minions in space
(which can also retro-define the Dark Minion's part in space in regular DC).

   Yeah, I think it's a -fabulous- idea!  :)

- --- Eric W. H.
 ------------
Category 20,  Topic 16
Message 5         Thu Apr 30, 1992
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 03:03 EDT
 
I thought of one more thing that I could add here...

Would a 2300AD background book be out of the question here? Has it been
discussed? Could Clare and I do some work on it...?    :)

- - Jay
 ------------

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com Mon May  4 13:35:08 1992
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), 76234.2216@compuserve.com (Striker),
        bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #337: Msgs 4047-4062
Reply-To: traveller-request@wrgate.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
Content-Length: 32580
X-Lines: 809
Status: RO


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Mon May  4 09:57:35 PDT 1992
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #337: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
4047  30-Apr-92 jdriver@netlink.c Classic Traveller Booklets << > Both The Trav
4048  01-May-92 Hans Rancke-Madse Re: Free Traders (again) << Steve Higginbotha
4049  01-May-92 Hans Rancke-Madse Re: Sensors and jammers << Scott writes: > I'
4050  01-May-92 zonker@ihlpf.att. Traveller III << Command Decision Second Edit
4051  01-May-92 metlay@phyast.pit Thrusters << I would like to kill the stupid 
4052  01-May-92 TML Administrator I'd like to mug you << I'm interested in seei
4053  01-May-92 goldman@orac.cray Hotel of Death revisited... << Hello everyone
4054  01-May-92 James T Perkins   Re: Hotel of Death revisited... << goldman@or
4055  01-May-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Hardpoint sensors and Densiometers << About t
4056  01-May-92 richard@agora.rai Re: Free (well "cheap") Traders << While it m
4057  01-May-92 "C. Roald"        PBeM Announcement/Second Notice << Folks, I h
4058  01-May-92 Cynthia_Higginbot ramblings << Steve Higginbotham writes: >Also
4059  01-May-92 Cynthia_Higginbot more ramblings... << Rupert writes: >computer
4060  01-May-92 Steve_Higginbotha merchants and pirates and guns, oh my! Not ag
4061  02-May-92 Leonard Erickson  sensor << Steve Higgenbotham seems to be conf
4062  02-May-92 A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.S cheap free traders << There is one way that i

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4047
Subject: Classic Traveller Booklets
From: jdriver@netlink.cts.COM (John Driver)
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 92 21:49:36 PDT

> Both The Traveller Adventure and Striker are available from the Weekend
> Warrior, a mail-order game supply in southern California.  Mint condition
> copies of Striker are currently available for $50.00 (original boxed set)
> and $30.00 (rules in a zip-lock bag; no box, no dice).  I think there are
> used copies available as well, but I don't have current prices (I'd guess
> about half the cost of the mint items).  The Traveller Adventure is
> available, in softcover only, for $20.00 mint condition or (I *think*)
> $10.00 dollars used.  I haven't seen a listing for the World Builder's
 
 
        Are these those little black books?!?  A shop local to me has 
stacks of them for 2.95-5.95 a piece.  Maybe I should buy them.
 
 


- --
John Driver              |  Movie "Out for Justice" *  (1991, Action)
jdriver@netlink.cts.com  |  Steven Seagal, William Forsythe.  A Brooklyn
San Diego, California    |  policeman tries to kill his partner's killer
                         |  and anyone else who needs to be killed.  

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4048
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Free Traders (again)
Date: Fri, 1 May 92 10:32:08 MET DST

Steve Higginbotham:

>Adam Naylor:
>>Free Traders get their vessels from say a fellow free trader whose
>>retiring, a bankrupt orgainization, etc .
>
>Then why are they mostly brand new?  At least you pay new prices for
>them.

>>The payments are large for paying of a vessel agreed, BUT those
>>people want to be merhants they didnt get talked into it . The corp
>>captains could be in it because they want to be independant .
>
>The payments are too large to achieve breakeven.

>You have to be wealthy just to buy a ship (MCr7+ down payment on a
>free trader).

>>The bank repayments are large on a free trader (About 175,000/Month),

I connection with our discussion about warship maintenance I
came up with the idea of making maintenance more expensive the
older the ship was. I'm still working on the calculations (no,
I tell a lie; I've put them away for the nonce, but I'll get
back to them someday. Really!), but so far I'm thinking of
adding 2% per year (with two different types of maintenance:
the yearly one that just keeps the systems running and major
overhauls that reduces the effective age of the ship). That
makes a 50 year old ship twice as expensive to run. I know what
you're thinking: As if it wasn't hard enough for the poor
freetraders to make ends meet already! But wait! There's
method in my madness, because that will make old starships
undesirable to the major corporations and reduce the _price_ of
old ships. Thus we enable comparative paupers to buy their own
starship for perhaps 1/10th of the price of a new one. With
bank backing that could even become managable. And while
maintenance becomes more expensive, bank repayments become
less. What I haven't worked out yet is the precise reduction in
ship price that would be reasonable.

>Interesting.  My calculations show that starship loans run 5.575%
>annual interest.  Hardly back-breaking.

Remember that the Imperium has (had) a very stable economy. No
inflation. That makes small interes rates the norm. I once
calculated that the return on investing in a Subsidized Merchant
(provided sufficient cargo and passengers were guaranteed to be
available) was roughly 3%.

>               Starships are still too expensive.  Remember, most of
>the discussion about the costs of those ships doesn't include mention
>of ownership.  A free trader (type A) owned by Tukera STILL won't make
>any money.

True, but I assume that Mega-corporations can collar the runs
and contracts that guarantee full ships on every trip, leaving
the marginal routes to the freetraders.



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "And now to conclude and to finish my song.
         Let us hope that these hard times, they will not last long.
         I hope soon to have occasion to alter my song;
         and sing: All the good times of the Empire.
              In the Empire are jolly good times."
                                - Traditional

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4049
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: Sensors and jammers
Date: Fri, 1 May 92 10:46:20 MET DST

Scott writes:
>       I've heard folks say that superdense hulls produce a neutrino
> shadow.  I say this is garbage.  A neutrino can pass through the entire
> mass of the earth without any trouble.  If superdense was THAT tough,
> then you can forget it ever getting scratched by something as puny as a
> 250Mw laser.

But by the same token it seems to me that you'd have a hard
time getting a directional fix on a neutrino source. Or perhaps
not, I'm not very well versed in sensors. But I know that I
heartily dislike the ability to pinpoint any starship in a star
system from a game balance pov, so that's my story, and I'm
sticking to it. I impose a DM of -1 to neutrino pinpoints for
every neutrino source within range.


Steve Higginbotham writes:
> You don't fool PEMS by jamming it, you spoof it.  Use your AEMS to emit
> just exactly the kind of signature that, when added to your natural
> signature, looks JUST LIKE SOMETHING ELSE.  That's why destroyers have
> that widget to make aircraft-carrier noise today.  It helps protect the
> carrier, though it is kind of hard on the destroyers.
> Incidently, has anyone noticed the active noise-suppression devices
> being developed?  The ones that generate an out-of-phase signal to
> cancel the noise?  You could do that with EMS too.  Analyse your ships
> signature, generate an out-of-phase copy, and project that out your
> AEMS, which should make you just about invisible to PEMS.  And if you
> were sharp, you could do it to the return signal from the other guy's
> AEMS and kill it too.

Steve, are you talking about _cloaking devices_ here!? (Good
for you if you are. Efficient cloaking devices is what our
pirates need to survive ;-).

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

                        ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4050
From: zonker@ihlpf.att.COM
Date: Fri, 1 May 92 08:29 CDT
Subject: Traveller III

Command Decision Second Edition is shipping this week (Frank brought some
of the first copies finished up to Little Wars last weekend).  There were
110 division OBs included (which Loren was editing).  So Loren is freed up
from that work.  What I see as possibly still blocking work on the
Traveller revision is the Gygax authored Fantasy RPG that is due out this
summer.  Also I found out that Star Vikings will not be miniatures anymore
but a board game (Command Decision will be moving back in time rather than
forward and the second edition includes the Black Powder Cold Steel
18th-19th century playtest rules).  I like the idea of the seperate rules
and situations.
						Non Cuniculus Est,
						    Tom Harris
	

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4051
From: metlay@phyast.pitt.edu (metlay)
Subject: Thrusters
Date: Fri, 1 May 92 12:49:23 EDT


I would like to kill the stupid bastard who came up with thruster plates.
They serve no useful purpose, violate a mess of handy laws of physics that
we don't HAVE to violate to keep Traveller a useful game, and go against
indications in the past, if not outright statements, that M-drives were
supposed to be fusion rockets. I'm going to probably shift my game over
to a fusion-rockets-only system eventually, and will scale back grav to the
TDR format I wrote up a while ago. It's so much less hassle.

- -- 

Mike Metlay
metlay@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu
Atomic City, P.O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4052
Subject: I'd like to mug you
From: TML Administrator <traveller-request@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
Date: Fri, 01 May 92 13:16:25 PDT


I'm interested in seeing what TML/PBEMers look like in person
(especially the ones who are frequent posters like Rob Dean, Scott
Kellogg, the Higginbothams, etc). To achieve this end, I'd like to
collect pictures of TML/PBEM people who are likewise curious.

To start the process, I have placed a GIF of Tek ID badge picture on
sunbane:

	Host:		sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca
	Directory:	pub/traveller/misc
	File:		tmladmin.gif (or) tmladmin.gif.uue
	Format:		4-bit grayscale GIF image appx. 200x270 pixels

If you have a scanned GIF of yourself you'd like to share, please ftp it
to sunbane in the donations (donations? pub/donations? I don't remember)
directory, and let me know it's there by mail so I can move it under the
traveller area.

If you'd like to share a photo but don't have the means to scan it in,
convert to GIF, and ftp it to sunbane, please feel free to send me what
you have, either:

	A letter via the postal service with your photo (I'll be happy
	to scan, etc). Use this address:

		James T. Perkins
		Tektronix, Inc.
		PO Box 4600, MS 92-734
		Beaverton, OR 97076
		United States of America

	Or, your image via email in whatever graphics format, uuencoded
	(I can convert to GIF from most popular image formats).

I'm also offering to make any such GIFs that come up available by email,
for those who do not have ftp ability.

BTW Mike, you're still not off the hook on that picture of the Grant &
Co. players and their spousal units.

James

__   __/         /   /	    Internet Traveller Mailing List, Administrator
    /     /  /  /   /	   James T. Perkins in Beaverton, Oregon, USA
 __/   __/__/__/ _____/   traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4053
From: goldman@orac.cray.COM (Matt Goldman)
Subject: Hotel of Death revisited...
Date: Fri, 1 May 92 15:20:03 CDT

Hello everyone,
	A long time ago, at least it seems to me, I promised to
send via US-mail copies of the maps for "Hotel of Death", a
Traveller adventure that takes place in a very large hotel.  In
the last few months I have been busy translating the writeups
from pen and ink to tbl and nroff files.  The maps I drew up with
one of the CAD programmes at work.  
	Anyway, my question is, is anyone is interested in copies
of the results?  Is there an archive that I could post text, tbl,
nroff, and EPS files?
	To the people I promised paper copies of the output, I'm
really sorry that I didn't follow through.  Work grew very busy.
Real world disturbing gaming world.

Matt

- -- 
Matthew Goldman            E-mail: goldman@ferris.cray.com
Fax: (612) 683-3099                  Work: (612) 683-3061
"We locked our keys in the flying saucer - do you have a 
 coathanger we could borrow?"

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4054
Subject: Re: Hotel of Death revisited... 
Date: Fri, 01 May 92 13:30:04 PDT
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>


goldman@orac.cray.COM (Matt Goldman) writes:
> Anyway, my question is, is anyone is interested in copies
> of the results?

Ye olde TML administrator here is interested.

> Is there an archive that I could post text, tbl, nroff, and EPS files?

Yes, either anonymous ftp them to:

	Host:		sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca [129.100.100.12]
	Directory:	donations or pub/donations (one of those)
	File:		your choice of file names

Or email them to me and I can get them there. I would think one copy in
plain ascii text (and optionally one in postscript) would suffice.

James

__   __/         /   /	    Internet Traveller Mailing List, Administrator
    /     /  /  /   /	   James T. Perkins in Beaverton, Oregon, USA
 __/   __/__/__/ _____/   traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4055
Date: Fri, 1 May 1992 17:37 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Hardpoint sensors and Densiometers

About the size of an 'Interstellar' array:
Is it really a radio telescope?  Seems to me that the 'interstellar' array
isn't able to detect much of anything at any range according to the sensor
rules.  :-P

But that is another can of worms.

While the hull is the limiting size of the antenni, it seems to me that you
could spread out the individual recievers out over the hull such that you
could fit several arrays onto the same size hull.  Thus, once you exceed a
certain hull size you could fit as many interstellar range arrays on there
that you want.  That size might not be 100 tons, once the hull size hits
that limit you can pack on as many sensor arrays as you want.  You could
just move each one of your recievers over a few centimeters on the outside
of the hull and then you could install 2 such arrays.

On Densiometers:
Consider the analogy:  Ships, Subs and Aircraft carry magnetic sensors.
(compasses)  Yet each has their own magnetic field which will distort
readings of those sensors.  Corrections to the compass is made when it is
installed so it still points north.  When the electronics in an aircraft
are turned on you have to add additional corrections to the needle
deflection.

Now, it seems to me that a densiometer ought to be able to correct for
known aberrations due to the artificial grav field of the ship.  I seem
to remember that the densiometers in MegaTrav are supposed to be 'Grav
Shielded' so I don't see this being a problem.  I don't think that it
would require an external mount any more than the compass on an aircraft.

Scott Kellogg

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4056
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Re: Free (well "cheap") Traders
Date: Fri, 1 May 92 5:51:33 EDT

While it might not be a quick way to the penthouse, operating a
free trader can have many rwards other than the financial ones.
Even if I concede that economies of scale work to this extreme.
Chances are pretty good that the reason they *look* so profitable
is because of hidden and overt subsidies.  A megacorp would really
have a hard time keeping up with a good, responsive, free trader in
an open market.

Being the proud owner of my own business, I can now carefullly
choose my cargo mix so that I just *have* to take the annual 
inspection on Efate and visit the spas.  Only when I do it for
the good of the ship, it's a company expense--not something that
comes out of my salary.  Same thing for that newfangled heuristic
library software (and the X-rated interspecies holo chips).  They
are now business expenses, not personal ones.  

Being a business means I can get various goods and services at 
wholesale.  

I get to hobnob with the owners and stockholders of those mega-
corporations on an even social footing (sometimes) even though
I only make .01% of their income.

I get the joy of actually *owning* the ship, it's cargo (sometimes),
and the assets of the business.  I also get the joy of outfoxing 
those self-important Vilani businessmen who only think they know
how to run things.  :=)

Thus a lot of the cost of the "good life" is hidden behind the 
veil of the business.  Being an entrepreneur is an ancient, honorable
tradition.  It is the small business that provides most productive
work, most jobs, and most actual financial activity, in a healthy
market.  

If you have a character who wants to ride down the rocky road of 
small business encourage him/her/it.  It's still true that 30% to 
50% of all business fail in the first year anyway.
- -- 
Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com
Qui custodii ipsos custodes?

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4057
Date: Fri, 1 May 92 23:25 -0300
From: "C. Roald" <HOBBIT@AC.DAL.CA>
Subject: PBeM Announcement/Second Notice

Folks, I hope I didn't scare anyone away with the first announcement.  
There are still good positions available in the summer pbem, and M&M 
have said there probably won't be more TML PBeM until October.

Don't miss your pbem fix; get in now!

If anyone does not know what I'm talking about, mail me and I'll resend
the teaser/announcement.

  	colin roald
	ref, The Frankenstein Project

- --
It's cool to bump into things?	-- Hobbes

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4058
Date: Fri, 1 May 92 23:09:17 CST
From: Cynthia_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Cynthia Higginbotham)
Subject: ramblings

Steve Higginbotham writes:
 
>Also true...  (though I think the "scout ship" is the most ridiculous
>waste of a design ever conceived by th emind of man)
 
     I disagree. *I* think they are great little runabouts; they make
better
yachts than Yachts do.  (more jump, cheaper, less crew required).  And the
scout service hands them out FREE to its ex-employees...
     Speaking of which, I would like to propose some clarification of the
use
of "issue" ships that some career tracks get.  My personal opinion is that
government-issue couriers (Zhodani, Solomani, others), some yachts, and lab
ships (scientist) should be treated just like detached duty scouts: they
are
provided by and PAID FOR by the issuing organization, which in turn (a)
expects you to use it on their behalf now and then, and (b) owns title to
it,
so you can't sell it or make major refits to it without their permission. 
I
never liked the picture of scientists and nobles grubbing for spec trade
cash
like merchants to pay for their ships...
     For scientists, the issuing organization is their university,
professional organization, corporate R&D division, government lab, or what
have you; the "strings" ((a) above) can be slightly different for each
issuer.  Have fun. 
     Some yachts should be "family heirlooms"; that is, property belonging
to
the noble house in question, given to your particular young scion of the
line
for his private use.  Selling such a ship is unthinkable, and getting it
wrecked will make the PC very unpopular with the rest of the family.  And
sometimes Dear Old Dad the subsector Duke will want it back so he can loan
it
to some bigwigs in from the Sector capital...
     Of course, other yachts were bought by the noble himself, and paying
for
it is his problem.  (Although I wonder where they come up for the money for
a
down payment before play -- noble stipends still aren't anywhere near that
high!)
     Corsairs steal their ships, they don't buy them.  Hey, we're talking
heavily armed criminals here, or government-sponsored terrorists!  Either
way,
they're not the kind of guys who are going to walk down to Regni Yards on
Regina and put in an order for a "corsair"!  Criminals steal their ships,
or
con somebody into thinking they are a legit customer, and then skip out on
the
payments (steal the ship).  Terrorists either (a) are issued their arms &
ships by the sponsoring government, or (b) steal the wherewithal to buy one
from their sponsor, or (c) steal a ship like the criminals.  
     Speaking of "corsairs", the vessel commonly called the "corsair" is
actually a high-performance merchant design, used both as a free trader and
as
a subsidized merchant in various places.   The class had certain design
flaws
that made it easy to hijack, so it became the ship of choice for would-be
pirates to steal, mount weapons on, install more bunking for prize crews,
and
go on a piracy spree.  The name of the game is to capture and sell enough
ships and cargoes to be able to pay off your initial investment and retire
comfortably before your luck runs out and the Navy/local System Defense
catches up with you.   Thus the nickname "corsair" for this particular
class
of ships...
 
Pauli Dale writes:
 
>You can also add lots of guns (you know the section in the ref's guide
that
>follows spinals, bays and turrents :-)  They are cheap and can pack a
decent
>punch.  Not as good as a real starship weapon, but still pretty good. 
This
>would also be slightly more realistic.  I feel it is pretty absurd that
most
>small starships only carry the big weapons and forget about the little
>things.
>How many ships today only carry large guns?  From what I've seen they
usually
>carry a decent mixture of weaponary.
 
     We do. They're great for discouraging boarders and other people who
get
in visual range of your starship... like pirates who want to get close
enough
to cleanly shoot out your fuel tanks without blowing up your expensive-to-
replace drives & powerplant...
     Good for point defense against incoming missiles, too.  Keeps you from
tying up your big anti-shipping guns with PD duty...
 

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

cynthia_higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4059
Date: Fri, 1 May 92 23:11:51 CST
From: Cynthia_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Cynthia Higginbotham)
Subject: more ramblings...

Rupert writes:
 
>computer form. In recent years I've thought that Traveller understates
>the level of computer power at higher tech levels, but then (as Catie Helm

>mentioned) we are playing Traveller, not Cyberpunk aren't we ? 
 
     Well, I would dispute the odd notion that using realistic computers is
playing Cyberpunk -- classic science fiction had good computers and AIs
before
William Gibson was born.  BTW, using the definitions for Robotics/Computer
TLs
listed in Book 8:Robots, I could make a case for the U.S. being on the edge
of
TL 11 in computer tech.
 
> Larry Niven came up with organlegging and I think it was Niven &
Pournelle
>in Oath of Fealty who came up with direct neural computer connections.
 
     Well, everyone that answered got Larry Niven for organlegging, and you
get an honorable mention for Jerry Pournelle (though he came out with
implants
in High Justice long before he and Larry wrote Oath of Fealty), but no one
else seems to have remembered the Sockets used in Sam Delaney's "Nova".  Am
I
the only one here who has read that book?  I read the book in the mid-70's;
I
don't know how much older than that it was.
 
Jim Baranski writes:
 
>humans aren't really intelligent as it is, at least not as intelligent as
we
>think we are.
     Something I've long suspected.  Question for everyone: how much of the
day do you get thru on habitual (pre-programmed) reactions?  Things like:
in
the morning you get a cup of coffee, get the mail, say "good morning" to
everyone you haven't yet greeted this morning, make decisions based on
long-ago established rules-of-thumb (heuristics) or company/school policies
(rules), etc...  How much of what you do is true creative work, or
decisions
that require you to deal with a new situation for which you have no rules? 
I'll bet the split is a lot more toward habitual (you can be replaced with
a
computer) vs. creative (you are intelligent) than most people would like to
think. (and no, I am not a follower of Marvin Minsky.)
 
>Now an AI programmed in a different way might of course be very
unhumanlike,
>and quite dangerous.  Imagine how an AI with a strong 'instinct' for
survival
>in one of today's computers in today's society would act.  It might do
some
>very nasty things to ensure it's survival, and it would have to in a
society
>when it's survival was not valued.  It would have to ensure that it had
>***assured*** power supply, and that it's programming would not be erased
or
>modified, or possibly copied, and that it had a fault tolerant machine and
>plenty of spare parts.  Think about how well that would go over...
 
     A favorite topic of science fiction.  "Colossus", "The Adolescence of
P1", "Neuromancer",  ...
 
>Then again, perhaps some of the AI projects suceeded their objective of
>creating an AI, but that the AI was, from our viewpoint, unstable,
psychotic,
>crazy, or suicidal, or was driven insane?  It's likely that most AI
created
at
>least at the beginning of the technology would be 'imperfect'.
 
     Some novel by Poul Anderson whose name I forget, several of Asimov's
(RIP) robot stories, lots of stories about computers who take their
instructions too literally...re:"Colossus", "Octagon"; or computers that
acquire unusual personalities: "Cybernetic Samurai" for example.  Suicide
seems to be a common theme for AIs who realize that "humanity is better off
without them" or some such BS -- usually a cop-out in bad TV/Movie SF for
writers who don't want to deal with the long-term implications of fully
self-aware AIs running about.  Even Anne McCaffrey has been guilty of it.
 
James writes:
 
>cat@fgssu1.fgs.slb.COM (Rather B. Fishing) writes:
>> (So you're probably all thinking that that's the last time you
>> encourage me to expound on something... Sorry if I got pedantic - I
>> suffer from nerd attacks every now and then... I can usually tell when
>> I'm in the middle of an excessive nerd attack at my weekly traveller
>> game, since Jim the GM and everyone else is giving that long suffering
>> look again... Life is so hard for us nerds... I shoulda listened to my
>> Mom and gone to music school...)
 
>There are not enough female "techno-weenies" around. Applause. Keep the
>faith.
 
     Cat isn't the only one suffering from lecture attacks.  Notice my last
letter and all the preceding text.  Just ask my PBEM players....
 
Scott "2G" Kellogg writes:
 
>(I also
>prefer the notion of somthing I can understand (fusion rocket) as opposed
to
>something I can't (gravitic propulsion).
 
    You keep saying things like that and I'll post *my* universe's
definition
of "How Traveller Gravitics Really Work".  It even accounts for the
volume-limited starship drives and the mass-limited vehicle drives.  Pretty
amazing bit of hand-waving, in my conceited opinion.
 
Steve Higginbotham writes:
 
>A small agility effect at long range I can live with.  How about
>this:  If your acceleration (in meters per second squared) is over
>your ship's radius (compute as if the ship WERE a sphere, even if not:
>a table could be generated in about 5 minutes), then you get an
>agility of "1" (used exactly as it is now, but only at one light
>second or greater range).  If greater than two times, you get a "2",
>and so forth.  That way nothing gets an agility except for small
>stuff:  your Tigris is SOL.
 
    Of course, if you do that, my agil=6, 6G, DefDM=+17 MegaTraveller
version
of the Sylea Heavy Fighter won't be able to kick ass on any ship in the
fleet,
*sniff, sniff, whimper*.
 
 

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

cynthia_higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4060
Date: Fri, 1 May 92 23:14:42 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: merchants and pirates and guns, oh my! Not again...

 
Brandon Cope:
 
>(1) Consider the 1 hardpoint per 100 tons a *legal* restriction, not
>a design one. Military and pirate ships ('What laws?') do not have to
>obey this restriction. However, to keep some sanity, perhaps limit
>the volume of weaponry to 10% of the ship's volume. This includes
>turrets, spinal mounts, bays, whatever.
 
We have tried this.  No conclusions reached.
 
 
>(2) Merchant ships must use weapons of a lower technology than what
>is available for the military. It should be at least 2 TLs lower,
>perhaps as much as 4. Pirates will fall in-between the merchant and
>military ships, since they will loot weapons off of whatever they
>can. This should also apply to armor, and other offensive/defensive
>items.
 
Reasonable for merchants, tough on pirates.  Who are the pirates going
to steal the good stuff from?  And if they can't get the good stuff,
the Navy will walk all over them.  And if they can, then how much
trouble can it be for a merchant to come by it?
(yes, yes, I know: we've had this argument before...)
 
 
>------------------------------
>On fusion rockets:
>
>I tried using George's modification for fuel consumption.  George
>multiplied fuel consumption by a factor of 40000.  Thus the 200,000
>disp ton tanker I was using which only had an acceleration of 1G
>could fire the engines for 41 minutes.  Instead of the 3+ years I had
>originally planned on.
>
>Ok, that may be correct from a engineering and physical reality point
>of view, but it makes them totally useless when compared to grav. 
>Well, I think that to make the game fun, your fusion rockets should
>allow a higher acceleration, but more fuel needed.  THat sounds like
>a reasonable compromise.  But George's fuel consumption outlaws their
>use completely.  (sigh)
>
>As much as I like to see things realistic, they should be usable
>too.  (I also prefer the notion of somthing I can understand (fusion
>rocket) as opposed to something I can't (gravitic propulsion).
 
George's solution was NOT based on "physica reality", but rather on
engineering that we can foresee today.  It loses it a little after
3000 years of knowledge acquisistion.  Try using the (rather close to
physical limits) fuel consumption of 3Kl per hour.

Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4061
Date: 02 May 92 03:22:12 EDT
From: Leonard Erickson <70465.203@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: sensor

Steve Higgenbotham seems to be confusing *resolution* and sensitivity. I
can *detect* visible light source *millions* of parsecs away with a
"sensor array" that's less than 10 *centimeters* across. But I can't
*resolve* it very well (my 3.5" refractor can detect Andromeda and other
galaxyies quite well, but the detail *sucks*... :-)

You need increased detector radius to increase *resolution*. Increasing
radius with booms does *not* increase sensitivity *at all*.



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

Archive-Message-Number: 4062
Date:    Sat, 2 May 1992 12:56:06 -0500 (CDT)
From: A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU (Brandon Cope)
Subject: cheap free traders

There is one way that independant merchants could get their hands on trading
vessels at a low cost legally:
	
	Buy a used ship. The older it is, the cheaper it is. Megacorporations
will probably sell off ships that are 30 years old or older, most likely at
no more than half (new) price. A 40+ year old ship would probably be one fourth
new cost. The Imperium (before the Rebellion) would have probably sold off
small warships and scouts that were obsolete (minus weapons and military
sensors, of course...) for 10-20% cost. Such ships would be at least 30 years
old, and would probably not have a lot of useable cargo space.

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com Thu May  7 00:54:52 1992
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA27586) Thu, 7 May 92 00:52:54 EDT
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA23562@relay.tek.com>; Wed, 6 May 92 21:01:15 -0700
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/8.0)
	id AA28828; Wed, 6 May 92 21:04:14 PDT
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/8.0)
	id AA17449; Wed, 6 May 92 21:00:57 PDT
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/8.0)
	id AA28434; Wed, 6 May 92 21:00:21 PDT
To: tml@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin TML Mail),
        76234.2216@compuserve.com (Striker),
        bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #338: Msgs 4063-4079
Reply-To: traveller-request@wrgate.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Date: Wed, 06 May 92 21:00:19 PDT
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
Content-Length: 44554
Status: O
X-Lines: 989


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Wed May  6 21:00:13 PDT 1992
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #338: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
4063  02-May-92 bryan borich      Alternate Starship Combat System << Alternate
4064  03-May-92 anaylor@mihi.une. Weekend Warrior << 
4065  03-May-92 A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.S more pirates << >>(2) Merchant ships must use
4066  03-May-92 Eric Edward Moore Trade and Commerce << After all this talkingg
4067  03-May-92 Steve_Higginbotha resolutions... << Leonard Erickson: >Steve Hi
4068  04-May-92 s3007048@mackay.m New Psi Rules - Sorry about the wait! << Plea
4069  03-May-92 bmb@bluemoon.rn.C Handgun Skill Boosters << I saw this post rec
4070  04-May-92 ntm1169@dsac.dla. MegaTraveller hint books? << How worthwhile i
4071  04-May-92 gwh@lurnix.COM    About Fusion Rockets << Steve Higginbotham co
4072  04-May-92 Cynthia_Higginbot Yet more rambles << Yet more ramblings... Sco
4073  05-May-92 A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.S weapon add-ons << Some Ideas... Laser targeti
4074  05-May-92 bryan borich      Imperial Lines << Item 7324477 92/05/03 22:09
4075  05-May-92 goldman@orac.cray Heads up battle display << > Date: Sat, 25 Ap
4076  05-May-92 Dan Corrin        Re: merchants and pirates and guns, oh my! No
4077  05-May-92 Dan Corrin        test << test .. 
4078  05-May-92 Dan Corrin        test2 << test 
4079  05-May-92 Steve_Higginbotha fusion rockets... << George: >Steve Higginbot

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4063
Date: 02 May 92 20:15:47 EDT
From: bryan borich <70541.1410@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Alternate Starship Combat System

Alternate Starship Combat Rules                                    HD # 142.02
                                                               Date: 15-Nov-90
Roger Myhre          
Odvar Solbergsvei 136
0973 Oslo 9,  Norway 

INITIAL DISTRIBUTION
      Clay Bush   Ed Edwards          Marc Miller     Joe Fugate

ABSTRACT
      Variant starship combat rules. Fighters have more chance to knock out a
      battleship, but only if they are in large formations. Ships or fighters
      with armor-120 can now be damaged by weapons smaller than factor-T.



      This is a variant to the existing starship combat rules. I'll discuss
each segment of the combat rules separately with tables. These rules provide
fighters more chance to knock out a battleship, but only if they operate in
large formations.
      A fighter with factor-3 pulse lasers firing at a battleship with armor
of factor 100+ can just give up. There ins't any chance this puny craft can
make a dent in the hull. Even large formations don't have a chance.
      The rules work both ways. Nothing prevents one from creating a fighter
with armor-120 except for the cost. The fighter can still have a speed of 6G
and possibly some agility depending on armament. Such an armored fighter will
be nearly indestructible. A weapon of factor T+ is required to get a critical
hit against an armor factor of 120.

      To Hit. The to hit task is not changed - it works good enough as it is.
      Optional: Those who hate to roll each battery may roll once for all
bearing batteries. Subtract the difficulty value to hit from the roll, and
multiply the remainder by 10%. This indicates how many batteries hit.
      Example: The to hit task is Difficult, 11+. The attacker rolls 15.
      (15-11) * 10% = 40% of the batteries hit.
      When applying the 40% to the number of firing batteries, round up.

      Penetration. The penetration task is not changed.
      Optional: When using the optional to hit method discussed above, the
defender may combine the defensive batteries bearing. Find the ration of
offensive vs defensive batteries and consult the following table.

      Off/Def
      4:1 gives DM +3   Add the DMs given here to the attacker's
      3:1 gives DM +2   task roll. Ratios which exceed 4:1 or 1:4
      2:1 gives DM +1   are treated as 4:1 or 1:4 respectively.
      1:1 gives DM  0
      1:2 gives DM -1
      1:3 gives DM -2
      1:4 gives DM -3

      Use the same procedure as in the to hit task to determine how many
weapons penetrated. This precedure can be used against screens, but the ratio
DM from the table above is not included.
2. Damage Point Computation
      The component hit points computed during design evaluation are not used
in the current combat rules. This variant uses them.
      First, we will compute the damage points each type of weapons does.
      Turret mounted weapons do 10*UCP in damage. A bay weapon does 20*UCP in
damage. Spinal mounts do 100*UCP in damage.
      Nuclear and anti-matter do four times the precalculated damage. Example:
a UCP-3 turret firing nuclear missiles does 120 points of damage ((3*10)*4).

      Now we are going to compute how much beating each ship component before
the damage has an effect. The following examples use the Imperial Planet-class
Heavy Cruiser from Rebellion Sourcebook, using the corrected UCP available in
Clay Bush's HD 1703.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPERIAL Planet Heavy Cruiser
CraftID:  PLANET Heavy Cruiser, Type CA,  TL15, MCr31,811(d)
   Hull:  67 500/168 750,  Disp=75,000,  Config=2SL,  Armor=50G
             Unloaded= 752,149 tons.  Loaded= 799,548 tons.
  Power:   5 140/ 10 280, Fusion= 925,200 MW,  Duration= 30/90.
   Loco:   5 063/ 10 125.  Manuever=2.
           6 075/ 12 150.  Jump=5.
          Agility = 0.
  Commo:    RadioComm =  system x3
            LaserComm = system x10
            MaserComm =  system x3
 Sensor:  EMM, EMSjammer= FarOrbit x3,  PassiveEMS = Interstellar x3
          ActiveEMS = FarOrbit x3, NeutrinoDect = 10 kw x3
          Densitometer = LowPen/250m x1, HighPen/1km x2.
                  ActObjScan = Routine,   ActObjPin = Routine
            PasObjScan = Routine,   PasObjPin = Routine
                  PasEngScan = Simple,    PasEngPin = Routine
   OFF:  MesonGun=J0x,  PartAcc= x90,  Missile=x 9 3, Blaser=xx7, Fusion=x04
           Batt   S               2             25 A           25          A
           Dear   S               2             19 8           19          8
   DEF:  DefDM= +8, NucDamper=9,  Back-up OptNucDamper=1,  MesonScrn=9
         Repulsor=x90,  Sandcaster = xx 7
           Batt    A                   30
           Bear    8                   21
Controls: Computer Model/9fib x6, Panels= HoloLink x31,867
          Special: LgHoloDisplay x28
          Basic Env, basic LS, extended LS, grav plates, inertial comp.
   Acomm:   Crew 292 (75 x4), staterooms=292
            (Bridge=16,  Engrng=83,  Gunnery=30,  Flight=30,
            Troops=75,  Command=39,  Steward=10, Medical=10)
            FrozenWatch=164,  LowBerths=164,  EmerLow=233
            Shuttle x3,  Cutter x4,  Air/Raft x4
   Other: Fuel = 636,822 kliters,  Cargo = 2 821 kliters.
          Fuel scoops, Purification Plant (12 hour).
          ObjSize = Large,  EMLevel = Moderate.

      Hull. To find out when the armor factor is reduced, divide the
inoperative value by the armor factor. The Planet has an inoperative hull
value of 67500 and an armor factor of 50. Each 1350 hits received reduce the
armor factor by one.
      There is a snag in that craft with high armor values will drop faster
than craft with low armor value. To negate this we will reduce received with
1% per armor value above 40. Also, damage is increased with one point for each
armor value below 40.
      Each time an interior hit is scored, apply half the hit damage to the
hull. If a shot penetrates armor, it will always give at least one damage
point to the hull.

      Power plant. Divide the inoperative number by ten to determine how many
hits the power plant can take before before losing 10% of its output. With
5140 points, the Planet takes 514 hits before power output is reduced 10%.
      For each 10% lost reduce the ship's agility by one.
      When 50% of the power plant has been lost, the spinal mount is
inoperative. The ship captain chooses either to maneuver or to fire energy
weapons (not both) in a turn.

      Manuever. Divide inoperative number by acceleration in G to determine
how many hits the maneuver plant can take before the maneuver G is reduced by
one. The 5063 hit points divided by 2G gives 2532 hits to reduce the rating by
one G. (The old system reduced acceleration by factors of one, two, or three.
With this system the maneuver plant will last longer.)
      Jump. As maneuver.
      Computer. I had trouble making damage plausible without being too
devastating. Weapons with a UCP of 1-4 give "Computer-1", UCP of 5-9 gives
"Computer-2", and UCP-A gives "Computer-3." On exceptional success reduce the
computer factor by an additional one. Radiation hits have no effect on fib
computers.
      Sensors. As computer hits.
      Weapons. As computer hits. If there is only one battery, reduce the
battery's UCP by the appropriate number.
      Screens. As weapon hits.
      Crew. One crew section is killed for each 100 damage points inflicted on
internal systems. A weapon which inflicts 80 damage points applies 40 to the
hull, and the remaining 40 kills one crew section. 120 points applied to crew
will kill two crew sections.

3. Applying Hits
      Hull. For internal hits, apply 50% of the damage points to the hull. If
the weapon does 100 damage points, apply 50 to the hull.
      Radiation hits. When a weapon which does radiation damage hits, apply
25% of the damage points to the radiation hit table. A factor-9 missile bay
firing nuclear missiles inflicts 720 damage points. If an internal hit is
scored, apply 360 points to the hull, 180 points to the radiation table, and
180 points to the internal explosions table.
      Critical hits. Per the standard rules. When the armor factor is reduced.
Remember to reduce the hull inoperative number in the process.
4. Armor Penetration Procedure

      Under the standard rules there is no hope that a low UCP weapon can
penetrate or do any kind of damage to a well-armored craft. In this variant
there is a slight chance that fighters and SDBs can dent the armor and
possibly scratch inside a battleship.

      To penetrate armor:
      Routine, Off=(weapon UCP/3), Def=((armor-40)/5), Confontration
      Referee: Meson guns do not roll this task. If they oenetrate
configuration, they just pass through the armor and explode inside.
      A natural 12 means automatic penetration of the armor. Drop fractions
when dividing weapon UCP and armor. Armor factors below 40 will give a DM in
the attcaker's favor.

5. Damage Table

             Damage Table (2D)
Die   Surface          Interior           Radiation    
 1    No Effect        No effect          No effect
 2    Weapon           Power plant        Weapon
 3    Fuel             Sensor             Weapon
 4    Manuever         Computer           Crew
 5    Weapon           Power plant        Computer
 6    Manuever         Crew               Sensor
 7    Weapon           Screen             Crew
 8    Weapon           Crew               Computer
 9    Fuel             Sensor             Weapon
10    Weapon           Jump drive         Weapon
11    Interior         Fuel tank shatter  Sensor
12    Interior         Critical           Crew
13    Critical         Critical           Critical

DMs:-  1    Weapon UCP 1-4
       0    Weapon UCP 5-9
      +1    Weapon UCP  A+
- -      1    if black globe operating
      +1    if nuclear, anti-matter, or spinal mount weapon
Spinal mounts: as per standard rules, spinal mounts get one additional roll
      for each UCP factor above 9. Each roll inflicts UCP*100 damage points.

Black globes: A black globe absorbs a percentage of the damage value according
      to its flicker rate. A globe on 40% flicker absorbs 40% of all damage
      points before they take effect. Overload is by the standard rules.^L6. Exceptional Success
      For each point achieved above the required difficulty, add 10% to the
damage points inflicted by the weapon.
      Attacker rolls 13 (including DMs) for a weapon which inflicts 100 damage
points. Increase the damage points by 20% to 120 before black globe and damage
takes effect.
      [CRB: I think this applies to the to hit task. I disagree with
increasing damage for each point above the difficulty throw needed. A miss
inflicts no damage. Why should most hits inflict extra damage?]

7. Optional Sensor Rules
      Make all sensor tasks one level less difficult if the target is in an
adjacent hex.

      Make active sensor tasks one level more difficult:
      o if the target is within a gas giant, 
      o when attempted through a hex where a nuclear missile has exploded.
      o if target uses jamming.

      Neutrino detection:
      o If target's EMLevel is faint, give a -1 DM to neutrino scans.
      o If target's EMLevel is strong, give a +1 DM to neutrino scans.

      Densitometer detection:
      o If target is small, give a -1 DM to densitometer scans.
      o If target is large, give a +1 DM to densitometer scans.
      o Increase detection task difficulty by one level if detection is
attempted through a planet or moon with size 5+ or through a planetoid belt.

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


                            ADDENDUM, 29 July, 1990

      My second draft on starship combat rules is near complete. There are
some rules I would like to get a second opinion on.

      Damage record. I have made a damage record form: boxes are crossed off
when damage is taken. MegaTraveller starships tend to have large damage
numbers, so I had to make a new system for hit points for each starship
component. Two reasons: I wouldn't get space for 500,000+ boxes on one A4
page, and lower numbers are easier to calculate.

      Time and distance. I plan to scale down the time and distance scale in
starship combat from 20 minutes/25000km to 4 minutes/5000km. For longer combat
turns, more damage must be given for each hit. With the reduced damage my
system does, I feel it is right to reduce the time and distance scale.
      This would make some planet's occupy two hexes. Hexes adjacent to a
planet are atmosphere hexes. If a ship is out of control and heading for
planet, it will burn up in the atmosphere.

      Hit and Penetrate. The most drastic changes will be the hit and
penetration tasks. I feel the task is either too difficult or too easy. So,
here is my change: I will do the tasks rolled on percentile dice (D100). Take
DMs from the tables in the Referee's Manual as usual.

      To Hit:
      Chance to hit: 30% * (1+(OffDM-DefDM/100))
      Example: A craft with factor-9 missile bay and computer model/9 firing
at a target with a DefDM of +7 will get a hit percentage of 33%:
      30% + (1+(8+9-7)/100)% = 33%

      To Penetrate Defense:
      Chance to penetrate: 30% (1+(OffDM-DefDM)/100)
      Example: The same ship as above is attempting to penetrate a factor-9
repulsor.  the defending ship has a model/9 computer. The total chance is 29%.
      30% + (1+(9-9-5)/100

      To Penetrate Armor:
      Chance to Penetrate: 30% *(1+((Weapon UCP-(ArmorValue-40))/100)
      Example: The same ship as above attempts to penetrate an armor factor of
60. The total chance is 27%.
      30% * (1+ ((9-(60-40))/100)

      Exceptional Success: Given when the roll is 1/10th under the required
roll. Example: if the base chance to hit is 33%, a roll of 01-03 indicates
exceptional success. A roll of 01 on the task is always treated as exceptional
success.

      Fleet or Ship Tactics: Add these skill points to the attacker's
offensive DM on the hit task. Follow the standard rules for how many tactical
points can be pulled from the pool.
    Firing arcs: Something that MegaTraveller ships should have is firing
arcs, but this is not possible as the design system is today.

      Movement: I am inclined to make some changes in the movement rules.
      First, I want to make heading changes somewhat more difficult. As in
Interceptor or Leviathan, it costs thrust points to change heading. What I
want to do is require a certain number of hexes travelled at a given velocity
before allowing a one hex side course change. How many hexes to travel may
depend on both maneuver gee and/or agility. Using this rule would make it
appropriate to limit the arc of the spinal mount to forward.
      Second, I want a planet's gravitational pull to interfere with a ship's
heading, depending on a ship's velocity and a planet's size and gravity (like
in Mayday.)
      I'm working hard on these rules, but I must admit that my knowledge in
this area is limited. I have not been able to come up with any easy, user-
friendly rules. If you have any good suggestions, I would like to hear them.

DAMAGE RESULTS

      Fuel Tank. I'm going to change the "fuel tank shattered" to "fuel leak".
A certain amount of fuel will be lost per turn. Subsequent hits will make the
leak more severe.

      Hull Inoperative. There is no effect in the standard rules (or my
variant) for an inoperative hull, when that damage level is reached. My
suggestions are:
      y restrict craft to 1G
      y prohibit atmosphere entry
      y hull is breached
      y stress severely limits heading changes
      y Agility drops to zero
      y may not fire spinal mount
      y Craft may not be recovered. They may be launched.
      y Rapid Launch Facilities are inoperative.
      y Fuel leak.

      I would like to have your reflections on these suggestions. If you have
any better solutions, I would like to hear them. I hope it will turn out to be
a good set of rules which make starship more interesting and realistic.


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4064
From: anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor)
Subject: Weekend Warrior
Date: Sun, 3 May 92 13:40:48 EST



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

Archive-Message-Number: 4065
Date:    Sun, 3 May 1992 13:04:59 -0500 (CDT)
From: A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU (Brandon Cope)
Subject: more pirates


>>(2) Merchant ships must use weapons of a lower technology than what
>>is available for the military. It should be at least 2 TLs lower,
>>perhaps as much as 4. Pirates will fall in-between the merchant and
>>military ships, since they will loot weapons off of whatever they
>>can. This should also apply to armor, and other offensive/defensive
>>items.
 
>Reasonable for merchants, tough on pirates.  Who are the pirates going
>to steal the good stuff from?  And if they can't get the good stuff,
>the Navy will walk all over them.  And if they can, then how much
>trouble can it be for a merchant to come by it?
>(yes, yes, I know: we've had this argument before...)

	Well, the pirates could get weapons from independant planets or 
small empires, in return for not hitting their merchants. The pirates
could get them through the black market. Pirates could also get them from
attacking and capturing warships. 
	Could merchants do the same? Yes. Would they want to? Probably not.
Having military weapons on a civilain ship should be a severe offense. The
lightest punishment would be at least a Cr100,000 fine and confiscation of the
weapons (and the ship would have to stay put until the weapons were stripped,
losing the merchant money). A moderate punishment would be confiscation of the
*ship*. Jail terms are seperate, and could range to the time it takes the 
government to strip the weapons to life in prison (possibly at a work camp).
	I don't think that a pirate ship should be that much of a match for an
equal tonnage warship. Not that they should be pushovers either, but a 400 ton
patrol crusier should be able to defeat a 400 ton corsair, and so on.
	A pirate ship should be a threat to a merchant, but not to a warship.
 


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4066
Date: Sun,  3 May 1992 15:37:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Edward Moore <em21+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Trade and Commerce

After all this talkingg about how freight doesn't pay I started
playing with the trade and commerce rules.  It finally occured to me
that the profit on freight should be close to the profit on cargo.  If
not, then these things are money machines (but not for the owners).  

I looked through my spinward marches data and found two planets that
looked good, Efate and Louzy (sp?) Efate is Hi In Louzy is Hi In Na
Po.  Efate has a type A starport.  Here's the plan: Go to Efate by a
whole lot of cargo (at 1000cr per ton 4000 base -1000 for Hi -1000 for
In -1000 for Type A starport.)  Ship this as freight to Louzy (and
book yourself a high passage) Sell.  Assuming you have broker-4 (why
not, it's not terribly hard using MT advanced merchant character
generation) this sells on average for 14,000cr hey, look, you made
12,000 clean profit per ton.  We'll assume you start with say 30000cr
in initial funds, that's enough to buy and ship 5 tons of cargo and
buy a high passage each way.  Afterwards you will have 70,000cr.  You
make money like gangbusters while the ships captain can't because the
Louzy-Efate run sucks, but you don't have to pay to maintain the ship
on the way back.

If however we raise the price of freight, this will go away.  As long
as freight isn't competetive with trade, people will be able to make
lots of money shipping goods as freight.  If everybody wanted to do
this, the price of freight would go up.

Seems easier to me to fix the trade and commerce rules than to hack
the spaceship rules to make only merchant ships cheaper....

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

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4067
Date: Sun, 3 May 92 16:52:02 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: resolutions...

Leonard Erickson:
                 
>Steve Higgenbotham seems to be confusing *resolution* and sensitivity. 
>I can *detect* visible light source *millions* of parsecs away with a
>"sensor array" that's less than 10 *centimeters* across. But I can't
>*resolve* it very well (my 3.5" refractor can detect Andromeda and 
>other galaxies quite well, but the detail *sucks*... :-)
>
>You need increased detector radius to increase *resolution*. 
>Increasing radius with booms does *not* increase sensitivity *at all*.
 
And here I thought I was talking about resolution all this time.
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4068
Date: Mon, 4 May 92 09:09:05 EST
From: s3007048@mackay.mpce.mq.edu.au
Subject: New Psi Rules - Sorry about the wait!

	Please let me apologise for the wait - I will hopefully be posting the
new Psi rules very soon, as I am going to annoy the guy who I am getting them
off until I get them 8-)  Rest assured, that these rules ARE worth the wait,
and please note that they are currently being written still, hence the delay.
Included will be detailed descriptions of all of the abilities (written by
myself mostly) and really cool rules, and are coherent and playable, whilst
not being too complex.  Sound good?  Well, stay tuned and i'll get them to
you ASAP, and please note that they will be submitted in parts - so we can
get them to you as soon as the chapters are written.  I hope you find these
rules as fun as we did.

Regards,

	Mike.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet:	s3007048@mackay.mpce.mq.edu.au			 ///
		s3007048@hardy.ocs.mq.edu.au		        ///
							    \\\///
			Only Amiga makes it possible	     \XX/
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Michael Glew - School of Math Phys Comp & Elec - Macquarie University
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Archive-Message-Number: 4069
Subject: Handgun Skill Boosters
From: bmb@bluemoon.rn.COM (Bryan Bankhead)
Date: Sun, 03 May 92 14:41:26 EDT

I saw this post recently,
> Date: Sat, 25 Apr 92 20:56:13 EST
> From: anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor)
> Subject: (4001) Computer Enhancements
> 
> In a game today a player requested of me equipment that could enhance
> his handguns skill (ie heads up battle disply or somethin) . 
> 
> What do people out there use ??????

A Telescopic scope may be placed on a handgun just as on a rifle with the 
same skill table as for range.  At TL 8 a laser projection scope may be 
used.  The primary advantage of the laser scope is that it doesn't require 
a phase delay to look through a scope when you make your shot.
 I have never created 'smartgun' rules for using a personal HUD. It would 
be an obvious developement.  I will get right on it...

 This is from
     bmb@bluemoon.rn.com
who doesn't have their own obnoxious signature yet

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4070
From: ntm1169@dsac.dla.mil (Mott Given)
Subject: MegaTraveller hint books?
Date: Mon, 4 May 92 12:27:34 EDT

   How worthwhile is the hint book for the MegaTraveller 2 computer game?
   How long many pages is it?

   Is a MegaTraveller 3 computer game going to be released?  When?  What new
   features will it have?

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4071
Date: Mon, 4 May 92 13:47:09 PDT
From: gwh@lurnix.COM (George William Herbert)
Subject: About Fusion Rockets


Steve Higginbotham commented that my numbers for 
Fuel Usage on a fusion rocket were sensible for
what we can forsee now, but not for what we can
do in 3000 years.  This is not strictly true.

There's only so much energy available when you
take four hydrogen atoms and make helium.
That energy is the top-end, 100% best that you'll
ever get out of a fusion rocket.  The corrected
numbers for TL9 fusion rockets I gave are running
a significant fraction (50ish percent, if I remember
my source material right) of that maximum limit.
Engineering only lets you get closer to that limit,
not to pass it....

[note that the potential Isp of an antimatter rocket
is a whole lot more fun to work with 8-) ]

- -george

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4072
Date: Mon, 4 May 92 18:32:22 CST
From: Cynthia_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Cynthia Higginbotham)
Subject: Yet more rambles

        Yet more ramblings...
 
Scott Kellog writes:
 
>Strange offer fer ya:
>In prepping for the PBEM and all things Trav and Travellerish,
>I've been doin' a little research on wolf behavior in the wild:
>trying to get a better handle on role-playing Vargr by looking
>at the social interaction of their ancestors.  Admittedly, the
 
        Funny thing.  Once I carefully delineated the personality of
an off-the-wall AD&D character who was a wolf who had the power to 
change into a man, and was reasonably intelligent.  I based his behavior
on what I knew of wolves, and you know what?  About half-way thru,
I realized that his personality was almost identical to that described
for the Vargr.  I guess GDW didn't do half-bad after all in creating
the Vargr...
 
Eric Edward Moore writes:
 
>After all this talkingg about how freight doesn't pay I started
>playing with the trade and commerce rules.  It finally occured to me
>that the profit on freight should be close to the profit on cargo.  If
>not, then these things are money machines (but not for the owners).  
<stuff omitted>
 
        That is why Steve once pointed out that the real profit will be
in shipping spec trade freight on someone else's ship, so no one would
build ships without some kind of subsidy, because you make less money
flying the ship and conducting spec trade than you do staying home and
sending it on someone else's ship.  In the Real World, freight prices
would go up until some kind of equity between supply and demand was
established.  In the Imperium, however... (see below).
 
>If however we raise the price of freight, this will go away.  As long
>as freight isn't competetive with trade, people will be able to make
>lots of money shipping goods as freight.  If everybody wanted to do
>this, the price of freight would go up.
 
        Except for one thing: based on the fixed prices in the game, and
other background information on how the Imperium fixes commerce to favor
itself and the megacorps, I assume that the freight & passenger prices
are fixed by Imperial Law.  
 
>Seems easier to me to fix the trade and commerce rules than to hack
>the spaceship rules to make only merchant ships cheaper....
        I like cheaper ships and low fixed commerce prices; other GMs 
might like expensive ships and variable (higher) commerce prices.  With
higher commerce costs and more expensive ships, the effect on your universe
will be to encourage worlds to be self-sufficient and to cut interstellar
traffic to a minimum.  Minimum would tend to be military and paramilitary 
and very high-priced commercial traffic to outposts that can't support 
themselves.  In such a case, commercial traffic will almost certainly be
in the hands of big corporations; very profitable, but not enough to go
around for the would-be free traders, even if they can afford to buy a
ship in the first place.  Not much room for PCs as free traders or 
others driving independent ships around space.  In fact, the picture looks
much like 2300AD, as far as interstellar traffic goes.
        With cheaper ships and variable commerce rates, which I mean to
try out come Hard Times, commerce rates for the established categories
(standard freight, high,middle,low passengers) will probably go up for
ships that are barely making a profit now, and come down for those that
are raking it in hand over fist.  I also plan on new, low-end categories
to appear: steerage -- more expensive than low berth, much less expensive
than middle passage -- but what you get is a bunk and a communal fresher.
I expect steerage to replace low berth, if low berths are no longer
required
by regulation, because low berth is the least profitable use of 0.5 tons
of ship space on the list.  With steerage, you don't need to pay a medic
to decant 'em, and you can cram in a *lot* more bunks than staterooms.
     With cheaper ships and low fixed prices, I think the picture remains 
the same as that assumed by most Traveller scenarios: lots of interstellar 
trade & traffic, lots of opportunities for PC shipowners.   Ships that 
can't make a profit under the fixed prices simply won't be built.  
 
Scott "2G" Kellogg writes:
 
>While the hull is the limiting size of the antenni, it seems to me that
you
>could spread out the individual recievers out over the hull such that you
>could fit several arrays onto the same size hull.  Thus, once you exceed a
>certain hull size you could fit as many interstellar range arrays on there
>that you want.  That size might not be 100 tons, once the hull size hits
>that limit you can pack on as many sensor arrays as you want.  You could
>just move each one of your recievers over a few centimeters on the outside
>of the hull and then you could install 2 such arrays.
 
     Good point.  How about amending my rules to require 1 hardpoint per
range band beyond planetary for the longest ranged sensor array, booms et
al
same as before??  For example, if you had 
     ActEMS=Far Orbit, PassEMS=Substellar, ....
this sensor suite would require 5 hardpoints (or one boom) instead of 6.
 
Scott Kellogg also pointed out once that the folks at Challenge don't
appear
to "prep" their scenarios before publishing them.  Frankly, the MegaTrav
people at both GDW and Digest Group have provided ample evidence that they
have never heard of the term "blind play-testing" or don't know what it is
for if they have heard of it.  Since the publisher has failed to reality-
check (or sanity-check) his published scenarios, it behooves GMs to read
the
stuff with a VERY critical eye.  In the interests of TML GMs who don't have
time to pick apart that Challenge scenario with a fine-tooth comb before,
say, the weekend game, I am volunteering Steve to post some of his reviews
and analyses that he has been verbally relaying to me for the last ten 
years.  Bug him until he posts them.

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

cynthia_higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4073
Date:    Tue, 5 May 1992 8:31:12 -0500 (CDT)
From: A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU (Brandon Cope)
Subject: weapon add-ons

Some Ideas...

Laser targeting sight: +2 to-hit at medium range or less (longer if combined
with a telescopic scope), and halves any snap-shot penalties; Cr250, 0.25 kg

Heads Up Display: +2 to-hit when combined with LTS; is usually projected
onto helmet visor display (Cr 500). 
                                                          
Holographic HUD: +3 to-hit when combined with LTS; Cr 1000

Laser Sensors: detects any lasers fired at wearer on a 3+; reduces the
bonus of laser targeting systems by one-half if in powered armor, -1 otherwise;
if in powered armor, it actually helps the target dodge laser weapons (-1
to-hit); Cr 5000, weight negligable (but must be added to suit of armor)

Smart-link: as LTS, but +4 to-hit; Cr 750, 0.125 kg

Interface Plug: required for use with the smart-link, and can be used to
'jack in' to many other things (vehicles, computers,...). Cr 250 for the
hardware, Cr 5000 for the surgery.



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

Archive-Message-Number: 4074
Date: 05 May 92 09:08:26 EDT
From: bryan borich <70541.1410@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Imperial Lines

Item    7324477                 92/05/03        22:09
From:   M.MIKESH                        Michael R. Mikesh
To:     B.BORICH                        Bryan J. Borich
cc:     LSP.MEYERS                      John C. Meyers
        M.GELINAS                       Mark E. Gelinas
        ED.EDWARDS                      Edward A. Edwards
        K.BRENNAN2                      Kevin J. Brennan
        P.DRYE                          Paul J. Drye
        V.UJCIK                         Vaclav G. Ujcik
        G.VIDELL                        Greg P. Videll
        ROB.PRIOR                       Robert J. Prior
Sub: The Vargr in MegaTrav
Reply:  Item #8653669 from B.BORICH     on 92/05/02 at 07:53

Bryan -
     I'd appreciate it if you could upload the following to TML.
Thanks.
                                                                  MIKE
 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Reply:  Item #3958    from metlay       on 92/04/15 at 14:19 EDT

> An old issue of CHALLENGE has an article set on the politics of the
> Antares and Julian realms, with bits on human/vargr relations. It
> really did a lot to fill out the thin spots in the character I'm
> running in the PBEM....

     Mike, I presume you're talking about "Julian Protectorate" in
Challenge 49.
     You don't know how much it pleases me to hear someone express
appreciation for that.  It was really a labor of love.  Most of that
material was left over from Vilani & Vargr.  James Holden and I worked
closely in writing the Vargr side of that (although my credit was
overlooked...).
     I strongly agree with complaints about some of the slipshod
articles that get into Challenge.  Challenge was still a much
respected source of Traveller material when it transformed from JTAS,
but it declined quickly.
     In talking with others, at least those in HIWG, it seems likely
Challenge seldom gets quality Traveller material because they don't
print quality material.  People who really know their stuff and would
do it right loose their will to try because their work would just sit
along side trash.
     They need much tighter controls.  And if they're not getting what
they need, they should get the staff to fill the holes if nothing
else.
     Anyway, that's pretty much what we're having to do at IMPERIAL
LINES.  I'm getting some good material, but I'm having to do a lot of
the writing to keep the quality high.  I can't do that if we start
increasing the frequency or page count.  So I need submissions.
     For those of you not aware of this, IMPERIAL LINES is GDW's
Traveller newsletter.  We put it together for them; they print and
distribute it.  (I think the first issue is free.  You just have to
send a request.)  Issue #1 is out.  John Meyers just sent issue #2 to
GDW (or is about to).  This was our "Solomani & Aslan" issue, and I
think we really had our act together.
     Issue #3 will be "Vilani & Vargr". I have some left over material
for the Vilani side of Digest's V&V from Terry McInnes, and left over
Vargr material from your's truly.  But that's not enough. I encourage
queries.
     Issue #4 will probably be "Zhodani & Psionics."  I have two
people working on our first deck planned ship, the Noql class Zhodani
Frontier Trader (300 tons).  But that's the only bite I have.
     Issue #5 might be "Droyne and the Ancients."  But a year will
have past by that time. Fan feedback might well take us in a different
direction.
     We don't have any budget, so we can't pay you for your work.  But
if you're still interested, please write me at:

   Mike Mikesh; 3124 75th Avenue, #3; Landover, Maryland 20785-1920

Articles have to be short -- less than 1000 words.  We only have 8
pages to work with per issue at the moment.  Adventure ideas are what
I need most, like Random Nuggets, or 76 Patrons, or Lee's Guide.
Short discussion topics are good.  Use Twilight 2000 rules where you
can.
     Ships and vehicles ... maybe.  There is a ready supply of those.
What I'd like to see are things that don't require unique circum-
stances to be encountered, yet are still interesting.
     I look forward to hearing from you.
                                                           MIKE MIKESH
=END=


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4075
From: goldman@orac.cray.COM (Matt Goldman)
Subject: Heads up battle display
Date: Tue, 5 May 92 11:25:58 CDT

> Date: Sat, 25 Apr 92 20:56:13 EST
> From: anaylor@mihi.une.oz.au (Adam Naylor)
> Subject: (4001) Computer Enhancements
>
> In a game today a player requested of me equipment that could
> enhance his handguns skill (ie heads up battle disply or 
> somethin).
> What do people out there use ??????


E-Tek was the name of the company that sold "Personal Heads Up Battle
Field Display Technology".  It was really cool stuff dependending on
what tech level you bought the equipment at.  Characters tended to get
very nervous when they found out the heavies had E-Tek gear, much more
than if little red dots showed up over vital spots.  (Laser sights)

Tech 9 to 11:
	Bulky stuff, mostly good for attachment to combat armor and
	vac suits.  Cables connect to the weapon sight.  Sights tend
	to be 'mono-purpose', either regular sights, infra-red, or
	light enhancement units.
Tech 12 to 13:
	Less bulky than previously.  Some units are equipped with
	radio rebroadcasters so that a command unit can watch over the
	platoon.  Still requires a helmet to be able to use; however,
	the helmet does not have to be connected to combat armor or a
	vac suit.  'Multi-purpose' sights sights are introduced, with
	a switch to change between regular sights, infra-red, and
	light enhancement mode.
Tech 14:
	Helmet is replaced with 'wrap-around sunglasses' type display
	unit.  The user's body is used for transmitting the
	information between the weapon sight and the display.
	Additional electronics are added to optimize the display
	regardless of the light conditions.
Tech 15+:
	The helmet is completely replaced with contact lenses or
	optical implants depending upon the $$, tech level and whim of
	the referee.  Additional information can be obtained from
	battlefield computers, IFF data, grid location, range and
	distance, etc.

For additional cost and weight sighting capabilities can be obtained
for the next tech level bracket.  For example on a tech 10 planet you
could buy a rather bulky unit that has is switchable between regular
sights, infra-red or light enhancement mode.

Oh, you wanted prices and weights?  I have that somewhere.  It is
more than likely in the same place as my 4.3bsd release tape.

I need a better way to convert everything to online format.

- -- 
Matthew Goldman            E-mail: goldman@ferris.cray.com
Fax: (612) 683-3099                  Work: (612) 683-3061
"We locked our keys in the flying saucer - do you have a 
 coathanger we could borrow?"

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4076
Date: Tue, 5 May 92 14:37:54 EDT
From: Dan Corrin <dan@engrg.uwo.ca>
Subject: Re: merchants and pirates and guns, oh my! Not again...


> From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
>>Brandon Cope:
>>(2) Merchant ships must use weapons of a lower technology than what
>>is available for the military. It should be at least 2 TLs lower,
>>perhaps as much as 4. Pirates will fall in-between the merchant and
>>military ships, since they will loot weapons off of whatever they
>>can. This should also apply to armor, and other offensive/defensive
>>items.
> 
>Reasonable for merchants, tough on pirates.  Who are the pirates going
>to steal the good stuff from?  And if they can't get the good stuff,
>the Navy will walk all over them.  And if they can, then how much
>trouble can it be for a merchant to come by it?
>(yes, yes, I know: we've had this argument before...)

Also not hostorically accurate. Things may change in the future (have
changed in the future??) but the military is a *very* conservative
group at least for the infantry. Troops are not equipped with the
most advanced weaponry available, though civilians tend to be.
Case in point: Your civial war, the Union and Confederate Soldiers
were mostly equipped with breech-loading (I believe) rifles, while the
civilians had repeating rifles available to them.

I know the discussion is concerning starships, but currently civilians
cannot aquire armed aircraft (which is the closest analogy to starships).
In the future I could see merchants/pirates having the latest weapon 
systems on their ships while the militray minds take 1TL to fully test and
try out the new weapons before making large commitments to installing them
on their fleets.


				-Dan

Dan Corrin, Network Manager, Mechanical Engineering, UWO, London, Ontario
InterNet: dan@engrg.uwo.ca.                                (519) 661-3834
TML/CZ/FrameUsers/Consim FTP site: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12)     

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4077
Date: Tue, 5 May 92 15:03:39 EDT
From: Dan Corrin <dan@engrg.uwo.ca>
Subject: test

test 
...

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4078
Date: Tue, 5 May 92 15:04:08 EDT
From: Dan Corrin <dan@engrg.uwo.ca>
Subject: test2

test

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4079
Date: Tue, 5 May 92 14:00:32 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: fusion rockets...

George:
 
>Steve Higginbotham commented that my numbers for
>Fuel Usage on a fusion rocket were sensible for
>what we can forsee now, but not for what we can
>do in 3000 years.  This is not strictly true.
>
>There's only so much energy available when you
>take four hydrogen atoms and make helium.
>That energy is the top-end, 100% best that you'll
>ever get out of a fusion rocket.  The corrected
>numbers for TL9 fusion rockets I gave are running
>a significant fraction (50ish percent, if I remember
>my source material right) of that maximum limit.
>Engineering only lets you get closer to that limit,
>not to pass it....
 
Last time I looked, energy available from fusion of four 
hydrogen atoms to one helium is on the order of 0.7% 
conversion, which gives a theoretical Isp of 3,660,000 
or so.  Which is a WHOLE LOT more than twice what you 
allowed, George...
 
 
>[note that the potential Isp of an antimatter rocket
>is a whole lot more fun to work with 8-) ]
 
It sure is! :)
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

ontFrom jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com Mon May 11 00:36:36 1992
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA06153) Mon, 11 May 92 00:36:14 EDT
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA05918@relay.tek.com>; Sun, 10 May 92 21:01:21 -0700
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/8.0)
	id AA05012; Sun, 10 May 92 21:04:26 PDT
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/8.0)
	id AA18495; Sun, 10 May 92 21:00:58 PDT
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/8.0)
	id AA07511; Sun, 10 May 92 21:00:19 PDT
To: tml@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin TML Mail),
        76234.2216@compuserve.com (Striker),
        bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #339: Msgs 4080-4094
Reply-To: traveller-request@wrgate.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Date: Sun, 10 May 92 21:00:18 PDT
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
Content-Length: 38017
Status: O
X-Lines: 853


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Sun May 10 21:00:13 PDT 1992
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #339: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
4080  06-May-92 "C. Roald"        Spin stabilisation << I'm working on designin
4081  06-May-92 PHB100@PSUVM.PSU. Re: weapon Add-ons << >Some Ideas... And some
4082  06-May-92 Steve_Higginbotha TCS lessons... << Well, the first war in this
4083  06-May-92 cat@fgssu1.fgs.sl dynamic balancing act << Hi, I'm the person w
4084  07-May-92 A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.S more on weapon add-ons << >>Laser targeting s
4085  07-May-92 ptd2@po.CWRU.Edu  maglev bearings << >Could the person who post
4086  07-May-92 A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.S arming merchant ships << Sorry, but I can't s
4087  07-May-92 metlay@phyast.pit Weapon add-ons << A note or two about the rec
4088  07-May-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU EMS Spoofing and Cloaking Devices << Good (in
4089  07-May-92 BARANSKI@VEAMF1.N TCS Tactics << RE: Fighters My strategy for b
4090  07-May-92 Steve_Higginbotha cloaking devices?? << Scott: >A few days back
4091  07-May-92 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AU Re: Cloaking devices?? << >Me: }Steve: >Activ
4092  07-May-92 esharpe@phad.hsc. Personal Laser Sensors << >From: PHB100@PSUVM
4093  07-May-92 William Dow Riede Re: (4082) TCS lessons... << Some comments fr
4094  08-May-92 Pauli             Re: TCS lessons... << William Dow Rieder <wr0

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4080
Date: Wed, 6 May 92 02:11 -0300
From: "C. Roald" <HOBBIT@AC.DAL.CA>
Subject: Spin stabilisation

I'm working on designing a space habitat that will be rotating for 
pseudo-gravity (2300AD, so there's no gravitics to muck things up), and 
I'm wondering how much of a problem dynamical balancing of the rotating 
hab is going to be. Could the person who posted a while back about 
frictionless maglev bearings mail me? You sounded like you knew what you 
were talking about. Or I'll talk to anyone else, if we have other 
engineers in the group.

Thanks,
  c.r.

- --
I don't know what's weirder--that you're fighting a stuffed animal, or
that you seem to be losing.		-- Susie

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4081
From: PHB100@PSUVM.PSU.EDU
Date:    Wed, 6 May 92 08:45 EDT
Subject: Re:  weapon Add-ons

>Some Ideas...

And some questions about your ideas.....8+)
>
>Laser targeting sight: +2 to-hit at medium range or less (longer if combined
>with a telescopic scope), and halves any snap-shot penalties; Cr250, 0.25 kg
>
>Heads Up Display: +2 to-hit when combined with LTS; is usually projected
>onto helmet visor display (Cr 500).

Is this an _additional_ +2?  If not, why should I pay twice as much for
no additional advantage?

>Holographic HUD: +3 to-hit when combined with LTS; Cr 1000

Same question.

>Laser Sensors: detects any lasers fired at wearer on a 3+; reduces the
>bonus of laser targeting systems by one-half if in powered armor, -1
>otherwise;
>if in powered armor, it actually helps the target dodge laser weapons (-1
>to-hit);

Presumably, this reduces the bonus if you hold on target w/o firing...yes?
Otherwise, in a firefight I would fire as soon as I have a good target, which
might be half a second after target aquisition.  Is a half second enough
warning for someone in non-powered armor to move, given the delays of nerve
impulse propagation speed and the need to analyze incoming data, etc?

I can see the bonus reduction for powered armor because you could set an
automatic circuit to jump, (although that could be bad in certain
situations...) when it registers enemy laser sights.  However, if you are
relying on the operator to take action, you have the same problem of delay
while the wearer analyzes the data and decides on which direction to move.

Paul Baughman
- ----------
Captain Sir Michael Talmoth,  UPP:  BA5A8B

"You see me now a veteran,
     Of a thousand psychic wars,
         I've been living on the edge so long,
             Where the winds of Limbo roar.
- -- BOC


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4082
Date: Wed, 6 May 92 12:54:01 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: TCS lessons...

 
     Well, the first war in this TCS PBEM seems to be off to a good
start.  As of now, everyone in the game should have heard about the
fighting, so it is a good time to talk about lessons learned in that
fighting to date.
 
 
     The first, and most obvious, lesson is that fighters, if used, need
to be big, tough, and expensive.  There have been three battles
involving fighters on both sides, and two others involving fighters on
only one side (you know who you are/were).  In every case, the weaker
fighters failed to accomplish ANYTHING against their opposite numbers,
while the good fighters wiped the floor with their opponents.  In all
three cases, the stronger fighters were fighting at long odds, and still
managed to inflict unacceptable casualties on their enemies.  
 
     In the two cases where fighters were only present on one side, the
fighters that were more technologically sophisticated than the heavies
on the other side (good show, New Home!) did quite well.  Where the
fighters were less well designed (that's you, Neubayern), they were
completely ineffective.
 
     And the factor most decisive in determining fighter effectiveness
was, of course, computer number.  New Home's model-7 computers beat up
on Sansterre's model-5's, which in turn beat up on Neubayern's
model-3's.
 
     Players not directly involved  might consider where their fighters
fit onto this chain, and redesign as necessary (yes, all you guys that
"Jane's" said had lousy fighters really did have lousy fighters!).
 
 
     Second lesson:  If you have a whole solar system to attack/defend,
then GDW's standard picture of the Imperium at war goes out the window. 
So far, defense of the gas giant has NEVER been a factor in any
engagement.  In all cases, attackers appeared at 100 diameters from the
main world, and ignored the existance of the gas giants.  In-flight
refueling capabilities have played a major part in all offensive
operations to date.
 
     And, defending gas giants is proving to be almost impossible
anyway.  After forces are deployed to protect the homeworld, and more
are sent out to carry the war to the enemy, it is becoming obvious that
a force deployed at the gas giant would either (1) be totally useless as
the enemy ignored the gas giant, or (2) be totally overwhelmed if the
enemy DID attack the gas giant.  
 
     If you choose to attack, and defend your homeworld, and defend your
gas giant(s), and defend your colony worlds, then you will disperse your
fleet into enough small pieces that even a weak enemy can overwhelm one
set of defenders at a time, and so trash your fleet in detail.
 
 
     Third lesson:  This one hit me totally out of left field (I
expected the first two from previous experience doing this).  It seems
that the presence/absence of meson technology makes a bigger difference
than I thought.  Conventional Wisdom (mine included) has it that a
battle-rider is more than a match for a battleship.  This seems to be
only true for meson armed fleets.
 
     In this game, so far, the ships have been armoured sufficiently to
prevent free critical hits from happening.  So the only damage done to
most ships before one side bugs out due to heavy losses is that the
maneuver drives and weapons are knocked out.  Jump drives and power
plants and computers are not being hit, due to armour sufficient to keep
out the interior explosions, and fib computers.
 
     When that happens, the battleships jump home for repairs.  The
riders left behind are captured and destroyed.  In all five cases, ships
have been disabled, but jumped to safety (even on the losing side).  The
winning side has then proceeded to capture/destroy all the riders left
disabled by the fleeing losers.  So the lost riders are being replaced
at a cost of billions and years, where the lost battleships/cruisers are
being repaired at trivial cost in a few weeks.
 
     This has not yet made a crucial difference, since the war has not
been going on for years yet.  But Sansterre's battleships have already
acquitted themselves well in THREE separate engagements, after having
been disabled in EACH engagement.  The same cannot be said for the
riders deployed by any of the sides so far.  In all cases, rider
casualties to the loser have been extremely high (near 100%), and the
winners have suffered the same fate for the riders as for their
battleships - they are recovered and repaired for use later this year. 
This is all very well if you can make sure you win EVERY fight your
riders are in, but it could get a lot tougher if you win a few, lose a
few.
 
     So it is fairly safe to say that in battles between fleets armed
with particle-beams and missiles (lasers/energy weapons are trivial so
far, just as they are in traditional Imperial doctrine) that the
jump-capable battleships and cruisers have a considerable long-term
advantage over the non-jump-capable riders.
 
TCS players:  read and heed this!  Your fleets may be on the line next.
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4083
Date: Wed, 6 May 92 21:43:22 PDT
From: cat@fgssu1.fgs.slb.COM (Rather B. Fishing)
Subject: dynamic balancing act


Hi, I'm the person who ran on at the mouth about mag bearings.  I'm on
vacation right now, and probably won't be back on a computer until next
monday.  So...in the meantime, can you email me some more details on
what exactly you are thinking of?  In general, if you can take advantage
of gyroscopic effects, balancing becomes not hard at all.  Also, If you
want, you can float a rotating mass inside a mag field, and since it has
no physical restraints (vs mag forces), by filtering our the fundamental
frequency of rotation, it will balance about its center of inertia - which
may not be what you're after.  A rotoating mass balanced about its center
of inertia will hardly vibrate at all, where a rotating mass balanced 
about its geometric center (like those confined by mechanical bearings)
will be centered, but will vibrate more.  So which is more important to
you: a centered hub or a vibration free hub?  I don't think you can get
both and not violate physics as we know it now.

I'm cross-posting this to the TML, by the way.

I look forward to hearing from you!

Catie Helm
cat@piggy.fgs.slb.com or cat@fgssu1.sinet.slb.com


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4084
Date:    Thu, 7 May 1992 0:13:19 -0500 (CDT)
From: A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU (Brandon Cope)
Subject: more on weapon add-ons

>>Laser targeting sight: +2 to-hit at medium range or less (longer if combined
>>with a telescopic scope), and halves any snap-shot penalties; Cr250, 0.25 kg
>>
>>Heads Up Display: +2 to-hit when combined with LTS; is usually projected
>>onto helmet visor display (Cr 500).

>Is this an _additional_ +2?  If not, why should I pay twice as much for
>no additional advantage?

	Yes, it is added to the +2 of the LTS

>>Holographic HUD: +3 to-hit when combined with LTS; Cr 1000

>Same question.

	Same answer

>>Laser Sensors: detects any lasers fired at wearer on a 3+; reduces the
>>bonus of laser targeting systems by one-half if in powered armor, -1
>>otherwise;if in powered armor, it actually helps the target dodge laser 
>>weapons (-1 to-hit);

>Presumably, this reduces the bonus if you hold on target w/o firing...yes?
>Otherwise, in a firefight I would fire as soon as I have a good target, which
>might be half a second after target aquisition.  Is a half second enough
>warning for someone in non-powered armor to move, given the delays of nerve
>impulse propagation speed and the need to analyze incoming data, etc?

	If the attacker is snap-shooting, the laser sensors don't help.
For the person in non-powered armor, the sensors simply give a distinct warning 
beep. If you wish, you might want to make the character roll his dex or
less on 2d6 in order to get the modfier (sorry, MT people, I'm not going
to define a task for this :-) ). Note that a person in non-powered armor
only reduces the LTS bonuses by 1 if the LTS is detected. The person will
probably move whatever direction he can -- low reaction time, unpredictable
enough that the firer can't completely compensate.

>I can see the bonus reduction for powered armor because you could set an
>automatic circuit to jump, (although that could be bad in certain
>situations...) when it registers enemy laser sights.  However, if you are
>relying on the operator to take action, you have the same problem of delay
>while the wearer analyzes the data and decides on which direction to move.

	Powered armor would probably have it set to automatically react,
though it could be overridden by the soldier in the armor. If using the
soldier's reactions, and not the powered armor's, there is only a -1 modifer.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4085
Date: Thu, 7 May 92 01:46:08 -0400
From: ptd2@po.CWRU.Edu (Palmer T. Davis)
Subject: maglev bearings 


>Could the person who posted a while back about 
>frictionless maglev bearings mail me? You sounded like you knew what you 
>were talking about. Or I'll talk to anyone else, if we have other 
>engineers in the group.

Briefly, the magnetic flux through a superconductor has to remain constant,
which leads to what is known as the "Meissner effect".  If you move a 
magnet close to a superconductor, the superconductor will repel the magnet
as if it were a magnetic monopole of the opposite polarity.  There are two 
ways to make a maglev bearing: either take a superconducting shell or donut
and put a magnet in the center, or take a magnetic shell or donut and put
a superconductor in the center.  Take such a widget and put it in a vacuum,
and you have about as close to a frictionless bearing as you can get.

- -- PTD --


- --
Palmer T. Davis      ____
<ptd2@po.cwru.edu>   \/\/    cthread.  cthread_fork().  Fork, thread, fork!

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4086
Date:    Thu, 7 May 1992 9:16:04 -0500 (CDT)
From: A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU (Brandon Cope)
Subject: arming merchant ships

Sorry, but I can't see a goverment letting its merchant ships be better armed
than its military vessels, even if it is a *very* loosely run government.
Granted, back in the days of olden piratery, merchant ships *were* heavily
armed, but their weaponry wasn't really advanced over the warships of the time.
Also, this seems to run contrary to most of the 'classic' science fiction:

	GM: the super star destroyer is closing on your ore frighter, 
		demanding that you deccelerate and prepare for boarding
	Player: I turn my ship around and fire my anti-matter spinal mount
		ray.
	GM: the warship is destroyed; you may proceed

Sounds wrong? Thats what'll happen if merchants are armed better than warships.
The only way I can see most merchant craft being well-armed is if there is
such rampant piracy that the Navy can't handle it. You could, perhaps, get
the government to grant you papers to carry weapons, armor, and sensors
as good as the military, but then your ship would be classed as an auxillary
naval vessel, and could be pressed into service whenever the Navy needed it...

Hmm, not that different from the Scout ship recieved as a mustering-out
benefit...

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4087
From: metlay@phyast.pitt.edu (metlay)
Subject: Weapon add-ons
Date: Thu, 7 May 92 10:20:11 EDT


A note or two about the recent suggestions for weapon add-ons....

First off, I would argue that for gaming purposes as well as practicality
reasons, there should be stacking limits as to how many cumulative pluses
you can add to a gun, and furthermore that these pluses are capped by the
user's innate skill. Putting a laser sight AND HUD AND smartgun link AND
telescopic sight AND everything else on a gun eventually gets ridiculous.

Furthermore, Refs must be careful as to how much TL advancement they want
to allow in the development of these systems, before game balance goes 
straight out the window. In a recent game I ran, one character had an
integral smartgun link wired to a cybernetic enhancement of his own brain;
this allowed him (among other things) to sweep an auto-gauss-gun across
a crowd of people on full auto, scanning ahead of the barrel's trajectory
and momentarily interrupting the flow of hot lead as he passed over 
friendlies. Because the target acquisition, identification, calculation
of trajectory and fire interrupts were carried out in terms of machine
cycles (milliseconds at most), the overall effect was a two-second burst
from the gun, after which twenty perps dropped dead in the arms of six 
VERY confused PCs.

If one installs a robot brain in the gun itself (not an unreasonable
extension of the idea) then things get even tougher to manage. I
wasn't sure whether to be amused or upset when a visitor to our game
talked at great length about wanting to introduce such a system,
whereupon he described "Smith" and "Wesson" from BUCK GODOT, ZAP GUN
FOR HIRE (not what I'd call Traveller-grade hard SF).

On the defensive side, a person in or out of armor about to be shot at
with a gun is not the same as a fighter plane about to be shot at with
a missile. Defensive alerts are idiotic--they add sensory distraction
without the hope of added defense. The point of armor is to stop
damage from getting through to the user, not to let him dodge bullets
and lasers (shades of STAR WARS!). Even if you could design an armor
suit that could sense and dodge for you, it'd probably hamstring the
user in the process unless he plans to just lie there limply and let
the suit do the moving for him....

The advantages of these high-tech doodads are limited overall by the
person carrying the gun, and should be handled accordingly. I have no
trouble with a small aiming laser on ANY weapon above TL8; for $100
you can buy a real HeNe laser pointer the size of a pencil at any
Sharper Image store.  Mounting a telescopic sight or IR sight, or at
higher TLs a camera and HUD uplink, is also OK, but not in all cases:
a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and the best HUD system
is not going to let you snap-shoot any faster or hit a target beyond
the reasonable rated range of your gun. I subscribe to the KISS
principle: Keep It Simple Stupid. Laser pointers let you instantly
determine aim, and improve snapfire and aimed fire. HUD links help
aimed fire designate targets, but I dare someone to try to snap fire
AND use such a targeting system without becoming nauseous. (Think
about it: you're fast-drawing your gun and trying to get a sensible
picture from the camera mounted on the barrel, which is moving at an
enormous angular velocity? By the time you could focus you'd be dead.)
This is especially important when people try to mount all of this
stuff on pistols. Common sense should rule all such things, and
weenies who insist on the latest cybertoys should be politely directed
to the Cyberpunk game going on in the next county.

- --

Mike Metlay
metlay@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu
Atomic City, P.O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4088
Date: Thu, 7 May 1992 09:41 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: EMS Spoofing and Cloaking Devices

Good (insert time of day) Folks,

A few days back, Steve and Hans mentioned the idea of using the Active EMS
or EMS Jammers as a cloaking device.  Well, sorry to get back to it so late,
but I just thought you might wanna know that this is (of course) impossible.

The hope would be that you could emmit an electro magnetic wave pattern
identical to the ships normal pattern but out of phase with it in such a
manner as to create a destructive interferance pattern.  Well, that is
I'm afraid, just not possible.

There is an analogous short story by Arthur C. Clarke called "Silence, Please."
Which appears in "Tales From the White Hart" (Excellent stuff).  The idea
there is not EM radiation, but sound waves.  (Much easier to deal with.)
So, let's look at the problems with that.

In order to create such an interferance pattern, one would have to know, the
exact position of the listener (to within a wavelength of the sound in
question) as well as how they were moving to take doppler shift into account.
Now you might be able to do that for ONE observer, but if the observer moved,
even slightly, the effect would be lost.

I believe in some airliner designs they were talking about using speakers in
the cabin to make zones of destuctive interferance around passengers heads to
drown out the sound of the aircrafts engines (Unducted fans.)  The system was
going to block out just the sound of the engines.  However the silence zones
were only localized to the region of the passengers head.  There were speakers
placed in the chairs headrest.  But it was not possible to get the entire
fusilage of the plane to be such a zone.

Now, to attempt this with light, you might be able to fool one observer, BUT
you would have to know their EXACT position.  To within a wavelength of light,
ie down to nanometer acurracy.  You would have to know their EXACT speed
relative to you to account for doppler shift.  Now, with the ranges of space
combat being what they are, there is NO way you could know this.  And if you
did, you might as well fire your weapons, cause your sensor accuracy would 
have to be enough to count every cell in the pilot's body.

Furthermore, even if you did manage to fool their passive EMS like this, you
would still run afoul of their densiometers and neutrino sensors.  And there
is no way to spoof a neutrino sensor.  If you built a decoy drone to spoof it
you would have to install a similar size power plant in order to get it
to fool anyone.  (Several million credits for a decoy drone?)  Nope.

Yes, we have no cloaking devices.
We have no cloaking devices today.  :-)

Scott
Anyone ever dream you were single handledly defending the planet from hordes
of alien icosohedrons and sinister tumbleweeds, armed only with a packet of
Lime Kool-Aide?  Maybe it's just me...

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4089
Date:    Thu, 7 May 1992 11:15:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: BARANSKI@VEAMF1.NUSC.NAVY.MIL
Subject: TCS Tactics

RE: Fighters

My strategy for building fighters was to maximize bang/buck.  The smallest
missle fighters could have the highest G, cheapest, and could be grouped into
the highest factor ?9? squadron batteries the cheapest.

With low TL, energy weapons are much more expensive because of powerplant
costs.  And with Nuclear Dampers being allowed only at the lowest level,
nuclear warhead can pack quite a punch.

RE: Battleriders

How do Meson weapons make a difference?

I think a lot of Battlerider losses may have to do more with tactics.  In any
battle the losing side will take high losses, especially if there are not
provisions for rescuing survivors.  Admittedly, having fewer Jump Drives makes
fewer ships being able to flee on their own, but theoretically the battleriders
should be going onto battle outnumbering the other side because of
cost effectivness.  It helps to know when to pull out, too.

It's no surprise that computers make a big difference, once you are past a
minimal ship, there's no point in not putting the biggest computer in it.  If
it won't fit, make the ship bigger.  Since a computer adds both to defense and
offense, it make a big difference.

Is there any point in making a ship bigger then necessary to carry the biggest
spinal mount & biggest computer & 6G & highest armor, etc?

It makes no sense to me that Traveller does not allow multiple systems use, ie
multiple Maneuver drive, Power Plant, etc.

Jim.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4090
Date: Thu, 7 May 92 12:14:58 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: cloaking devices??

Scott:
>A few days back, Steve and Hans mentioned the idea of using the
>Active EMS or EMS Jammers as a cloaking device.  Well, sorry to get
>back to it so late, but I just thought you might wanna know that this
>is (of course) impossible.
 
Hmmm... then why is GM talking about using it on cars in 1994?
 
 
>The hope would be that you could emmit an electro magnetic wave
>pattern identical to the ships normal pattern but out of phase with
>it in such a manner as to create a destructive interferance pattern. 
>Well, that is I'm afraid, just not possible.
 
I also seem to recall seeing a news article on test operations in use
today.  It didn't work real well with anything but low frequency
stuff, but it did work.
 
 
>There is an analogous short story by Arthur C. Clarke called
>"Silence, Please."  Which appears in "Tales From the White Hart"
>(Excellent stuff).  The idea there is not EM radiation, but sound
>waves.  (Much easier to deal with.) So, let's look at the problems
with that.
 
Yes, I've read it.  Written in the late 40s-early 50s, right?  Before
computers?
 
 
>In order to create such an interferance pattern, one would have to
>know, the exact position of the listener (to within a wavelength of
>the sound in question) as well as how they were moving to take
>doppler shift into account.  Now you might be able to do that for ONE
>observer, but if the observer moved, even slightly, the effect would
>be lost.
 
No.  If it out of phase here, it will still be so there, assuming that
the signal is an exact copy of the incoming.  And if you match the
wavelength incident where you are, the doppler shift will shift it
right along with the original signal you are trying to mask.
 
 
>I believe in some airliner designs they were talking about using
>speakers in the cabin to make zones of destuctive interferance around
>passengers heads to drown out the sound of the aircrafts engines
>(Unducted fans.)  The system was going to block out just the sound of
>the engines.  However the silence zones were only localized to the
>region of the passengers head.  There were speakers placed in the
>chairs headrest.  But it was not possible to get the entire fusilage
>of the plane to be such a zone.
 
I hadn't heard of that one.  Sounds like a start in the right
direction, and I don't believe that 3000 years additional research
won't be able to come up with a better result.
 
 
>Now, to attempt this with light, you might be able to fool one
>observer, BUT you would have to know their EXACT position.  To within
>a wavelength of light, ie down to nanometer acurracy.  You would have
>to know their EXACT speed relative to you to account for doppler
>shift.  Now, with the ranges of space combat being what they are,
>there is NO way you could know this.  And if you did, you might as
>well fire your weapons, cause your sensor accuracy would have to be
>enough to count every cell in the pilot's body.
 
Nonsense.  Are you suggesting that I have to know your exact position
for you to SEE me?  If you can see me, then I can flash a light in
your eyes.  And if the light were just so, then you wouldn't see me
any more.  If you assume (and you have so far) that the sensor arrays
are all over the hull, then you could get a pretty good copy by
generating a counter-signal at each point on the array to match
incident EM at that point.  It won't be perfect, by any means (unless
technology improves in 3500 years - a long shot, some people think),
but it will be better than letting them see you without even trying to
hide.
 
 
>Furthermore, even if you did manage to fool their passive EMS like
>this, you would still run afoul of their densiometers and neutrino
>sensors.  And there is no way to spoof a neutrino sensor.  If you
>built a decoy drone to spoof it you would have to install a similar
>size power plant in order to get it to fool anyone.  (Several million
credits for a decoy drone?)  Nope.
 
I never said we could spoof their densitometers and neutrino sensors. 
But Rob Dean pointed out recently (from TD #3?) that the operational
parameters for a densitometer were envisioned such that detection
range would be less than 5000Km.  And you can monkey with neutrino
sensors by EMMasking your ship, but not your drone, or by using a
reaction that produces more neutrinos in the drone...
 
 
>Yes, we have no cloaking devices.
>We have no cloaking devices today.  :-)
 
But will we in 3500+ years?  THAT is the question!
 
And I never suggested a cloaking device.  Hans inferred that.  I was
suggesting something to make you ship HARDER to detect, not
impossible.
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4091
Date: Thu, 7 May 1992 14:59 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Re: Cloaking devices??

>Me:
}Steve:

>Active EMS or EMS Jammers as a cloaking device.  Well, sorry to get
>back to it so late, but I just thought you might wanna know that this
>is (of course) impossible.
 
}Hmmm... then why is GM talking about using it on cars in 1994? 

GM has Active EMS?  Wow!  TL 10 sensors in TL 6 cars!

}I also seem to recall seeing a news article on test operations in use
}today.  It didn't work real well with anything but low frequency
}stuff, but it did work.

This is all sound stuff.  By producing a destructive interferance pattern
in a confined box, (the muffler) it greatly reduces noise.

>There is an analogous short story by Arthur C. Clarke called
>"Silence, Please."  Which appears in "Tales From the White Hart"

}Yes, I've read it.  Written in the late 40s-early 50s, right?  Before
}computers?

Correct, but computers won't solve the problem as presented there.

>In order to create such an interferance pattern, one would have to
>know, the exact position of the listener (to within a wavelength of
>the sound in question) as well as how they were moving to take
>doppler shift into account.  Now you might be able to do that for ONE
>observer, but if the observer moved, even slightly, the effect would
>be lost.

}No.  If it out of phase here, it will still be so there, assuming that
}the signal is an exact copy of the incoming.  And if you match the
}wavelength incident where you are, the doppler shift will shift it
}right along with the original signal you are trying to mask.

Ok, Light comes in and is reflected off the hull.  In order to be able to
destructively interfere with that reflection, you will have to know not only
the freqency of that light, but its polarization as well.  If you can't get
the polarization correct you won't be able to interfere with it at all.
Sunlight is randomly polarized.  There is no way to get it to match something
that is totally random.  But let's say for the moment that you do know the
polarization and the freqency.

You then pick up and measure each and every freqency of light coming in and
send it back out out of phase.  Now, observer A is travelling alongside the
ship at the same speed.  Observer B is approaching at some speed.  The ship
emmits light and disappears from view of observer A.  Observer B, however
sees the light that is reflected at it's normal freqency and the light that
is emmitted by the ship with it's freqency doppler shifted.  Thus, Observer A
can't see the ship, but Observer B can.

}I don't believe that 3000 years additional research
}won't be able to come up with a better result.

It can with nice long wavelengths and an unpolarized vibration like sound,
but not with light.

>Now, to attempt this with light, you might be able to fool one
>observer, BUT you would have to know their EXACT position.  To within
>a wavelength of light, ie down to nanometer acurracy.

}Nonsense.  Are you suggesting that I have to know your exact position
}for you to SEE me?  If you can see me, then I can flash a light in
}your eyes.  And if the light were just so, then you wouldn't see me
}any more.  If you assume (and you have so far) that the sensor arrays
}are all over the hull, then you could get a pretty good copy by
}generating a counter-signal at each point on the array to match
}incident EM at that point.  It won't be perfect, by any means (unless
}technology improves in 3500 years - a long shot, some people think),
}but it will be better than letting them see you without even trying to
}hide.

You still have the problem of polarization.


}And you can monkey with neutrino
}sensors by EMMasking your ship, but not your drone, or by using a
}reaction that produces more neutrinos in the drone...

EM (electro magentic) masking takes care of EM radiation.  Not nuclear
radiation.  It will do absolutely nothing to neutrino emmissions.  And
as far as I know, neutrinos are only emmitted in certain nuclear reactions.
(fusion, and fission I believe)  Those would certainly be the easiest way
to get a source of neutrinos.  And fusion/fission plants are expensive.


}And I never suggested a cloaking device.  Hans inferred that.  I was
}suggesting something to make you ship HARDER to detect, not
}impossible.

Well, using the above technology might allow you to reduce your signature
somewhat, at least in terms of the amount of light your ship emmits.  You'd
have to make certain all the freqencies and polarizations of your ship were
matched by your cloaking emmitters.  But it *might* be able to reduce your
emmitted signature.  It won't work against incident light, but maybe.
But then again, this sounds exactly like what the EMMasking is supposed to be
able to do.

Maybe what you've been describing is the EMMask not EMS-Jam.  We never have
had *any* explanation as to how EM Masking is supposed to work.

Scott Kellogg

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4092
From: esharpe@phad.hsc.usc.edu
Date: Thu, 7 May 92 08:41:25 PST
Subject: Personal Laser Sensors

>From: PHB100@PSUVM.PSU.EDU
>Subject: (4081) Re:  weapon Add-ons
>
>>Laser Sensors: detects any lasers fired at wearer on a 3+; reduces the
>>bonus of laser targeting systems by one-half if in powered armor, -1
>>otherwise;
>>if in powered armor, it actually helps the target dodge laser weapons (-1
>>to-hit);
>
>Presumably, this reduces the bonus if you hold on target w/o firing...yes?
>Otherwise, in a firefight I would fire as soon as I have a good target, which
>might be half a second after target aquisition.  Is a half second enough
>warning for someone in non-powered armor to move, given the delays of nerve
>impulse propagation speed and the need to analyze incoming data, etc?
>
>I can see the bonus reduction for powered armor because you could set an
>automatic circuit to jump, (although that could be bad in certain
>situations...) when it registers enemy laser sights.  However, if you are
>relying on the operator to take action, you have the same problem of delay
>while the wearer analyzes the data and decides on which direction to move.
>
If I remember right, Laser Sensors in Striker where used to activate Anti-
Laser Smoke to cover the vehicle.  Also detection of incoming laser 
targetig on a 3+ was only for High Tech Level setups, lower tech levels had 
higher rolls to make for detection.

Question:  Is a personal laser sensor a special suit that a person wears?  
I can understand laser sensors built into battle dress, or even combat 
armor.  Laser Sensors would need to cover a majority of the person's body 
for them to be effective, otherwise people would begin to target non-
sensor covered areas of the body.
*****************************************************************
* esharpe@phad.hsc.usc.edu                                      *
*****************************************************************
* You keep using that word.                                     * 
* I do not think it means what you think it means.              *   
*****************************************************************

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4093
Date: Thu,  7 May 1992 20:09:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: William Dow Rieder <wr0k+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: (4082) TCS lessons...

Some comments from my own experience with TCS...
Meson Guns and the best computers are everything.  The extra
hits spinal meson guns get for size are not reduced by armor, so
they decide the battle.  The best computers you have TL to make
should be in EVERY boat -- right down to the fighters.  For the smaller
units, put in 1 main, and 2 smaller backup computers to lower the cost.
Once a fighter gets hit it is usually toast anyway, so there is no real need
for backup on them.
	I would be interested in seeing the results of the TCS battles, if
someone wouldn't mind emailing me, or posting if others are interested.

					W. Dow Rieder

 	When the only tool you have is a hammer, all your problems
start to look like nails...

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4094
Subject: Re: TCS lessons...
Date: Fri, 08 May 92 15:18:13 +1000
From: Pauli <grue@cs.uq.oz.au>

William Dow Rieder <wr0k+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>	I would be interested in seeing the results of the TCS battles, if
>someone wouldn't mind emailing me, or posting if others are interested.

I'd be interested too, it might make for some fun reading.  Would it be
possible to post the 'old' info from the game (i.e. the stuff everybody
has seen alraedy?) including the battles.




						Pauli


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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com Thu May 14 00:43:59 1992
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA15724) Thu, 14 May 92 00:43:36 EDT
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA17968@relay.tek.com>; Wed, 13 May 92 21:01:28 -0700
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/8.0)
	id AA03890; Wed, 13 May 92 21:04:36 PDT
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/8.0)
	id AA04440; Wed, 13 May 92 21:00:58 PDT
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/8.0)
	id AA07107; Wed, 13 May 92 21:00:19 PDT
To: tml@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin TML Mail),
        76234.2216@compuserve.com (Striker),
        bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #340: Msgs 4095-4108
Reply-To: traveller-request@wrgate.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Date: Wed, 13 May 92 21:00:18 PDT
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@wrgate.wr.tek.com>
Content-Length: 37641
Status: RO
X-Lines: 889


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Wed May 13 21:00:13 PDT 1992
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #340: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
4095  08-May-92 bryan borich      Alternate Starship Combat System << Alternate
4096  08-May-92 Steve_Higginbotha Re: neutrino emmissions << * This message for
4097  08-May-92 Steve_Higginbotha neutrino emmissions << Scott Kellogg: > at le
4098  08-May-92 Eric Edward Moore Re: (4091) Re: Cloaking devices?? << The prob
4099  08-May-92 Mark F. Cook      Quick 2300AD Aliens question << I was perusin
4100  08-May-92 William Henry Tim Re: Cloaking devices?? << How about some devi
4101  08-May-92 A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.S re: Weapon add-ons << The limit wouldn't be o
4102  08-May-92 Steve_Higginbotha neutrinos... << Scott: >Subject: Re: more neu
4103  09-May-92 "C. Roald"        Re: Quick 2300AD Aliens question << >I was pe
4104  09-May-92 Steve_Higginbotha pentapods (P-pods) << Mark Cook: >I was perus
4105  09-May-92 Steve_Higginbotha battle records << Pauli: >William Dow Rieder 
4106  10-May-92 Cynthia_Higginbot Stealth and Cybertech << William Henry Timmin
4107  10-May-92 Steve_Higginbotha neutrinos and trade and commerce... << * This
4108  11-May-92 ptd2@po.CWRU.Edu  Re: (4100) Cloaking devices?? << > >From: Wil

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4095
Date: 08 May 92 05:32:49 EDT
From: bryan borich <70541.1410@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Alternate Starship Combat System

Alternate Starship Combat Rules                                    HD # 142.02
                                                               Date: 15-Nov-90
Roger Myhre          
Odvar Solbergsvei 136
0973 Oslo 9,  Norway 

ABSTRACT
     Variant starship combat rules. Fighters have more chance to knock out a
     battleship, but only if they are in large formations. Ships or fighters
     with armor-120 can now be damaged by weapons smaller than factor-T.



      This is a variant to the existing starship combat rules. I'll discuss
each segment of the combat rules separately with tables. These rules provide
fighters more chance to knock out a battleship, but only if they operate in
large formations.
      A fighter with factor-3 pulse lasers firing at a battleship with armor
of factor 100+ can just give up. There ins't any chance this puny craft can
make a dent in the hull. Even large formations don't have a chance.
      The rules work both ways. Nothing prevents one from creating a fighter
with armor-120 except for the cost. The fighter can still have a speed of 6G
and possibly some agility depending on armament. Such an armored fighter will
be nearly indestructible. A weapon of factor T+ is required to get a critical
hit against an armor factor of 120.

      To Hit. The to hit task is not changed - it works good enough as it is.
      Optional: Those who hate to roll each battery may roll once for all
bearing batteries. Subtract the difficulty value to hit from the roll, and
multiply the remainder by 10%. This indicates how many batteries hit.
      Example: The to hit task is Difficult, 11+. The attacker rolls 15.
      (15-11) * 10% = 40% of the batteries hit.
      When applying the 40% to the number of firing batteries, round up.

      Penetration. The penetration task is not changed.
      Optional: When using the optional to hit method discussed above, the
defender may combine the defensive batteries bearing. Find the ration of
offensive vs defensive batteries and consult the following table.

      Off/Def
      4:1 gives DM +3   Add the DMs given here to the attacker's
      3:1 gives DM +2   task roll. Ratios which exceed 4:1 or 1:4
      2:1 gives DM +1   are treated as 4:1 or 1:4 respectively.
      1:1 gives DM  0
      1:2 gives DM -1
      1:3 gives DM -2
      1:4 gives DM -3

      Use the same procedure as in the to hit task to determine how many
weapons penetrated. This precedure can be used against screens, but the ratio
DM from the table above is not included.
2. Damage Point Computation
      The component hit points computed during design evaluation are not used
in the current combat rules. This variant uses them.
      First, we will compute the damage points each type of weapons does.
      Turret mounted weapons do 10*UCP in damage. A bay weapon does 20*UCP in
damage. Spinal mounts do 100*UCP in damage.
      Nuclear and anti-matter do four times the precalculated damage. Example:
a UCP-3 turret firing nuclear missiles does 120 points of damage ((3*10)*4).

      Now we are going to compute how much beating each ship component before
the damage has an effect. The following examples use the Imperial Planet-class
Heavy Cruiser from Rebellion Sourcebook, using the corrected UCP available in
Clay Bush's HD 1703.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPERIAL Planet Heavy Cruiser
CraftID:  PLANET Heavy Cruiser, Type CA,  TL15, MCr31,811(d)
   Hull:  67 500/168 750,  Disp=75,000,  Config=2SL,  Armor=50G
             Unloaded= 752,149 tons.  Loaded= 799,548 tons.
  Power:   5 140/ 10 280, Fusion= 925,200 MW,  Duration= 30/90.
   Loco:   5 063/ 10 125.  Manuever=2.
           6 075/ 12 150.  Jump=5.
          Agility = 0.
  Commo:    RadioComm =  system x3
            LaserComm = system x10
            MaserComm =  system x3
 Sensor:  EMM, EMSjammer= FarOrbit x3,  PassiveEMS = Interstellar x3
          ActiveEMS = FarOrbit x3, NeutrinoDect = 10 kw x3
          Densitometer = LowPen/250m x1, HighPen/1km x2.
                  ActObjScan = Routine,   ActObjPin = Routine
            PasObjScan = Routine,   PasObjPin = Routine
                  PasEngScan = Simple,    PasEngPin = Routine
   OFF:  MesonGun=J0x,  PartAcc= x90,  Missile=x 9 3, Blaser=xx7, Fusion=x04
           Batt   S               2             25 A           25          A
           Dear   S               2             19 8           19          8
   DEF:  DefDM= +8, NucDamper=9,  Back-up OptNucDamper=1,  MesonScrn=9
         Repulsor=x90,  Sandcaster = xx 7
           Batt    A                   30
           Bear    8                   21
Controls: Computer Model/9fib x6, Panels= HoloLink x31,867
          Special: LgHoloDisplay x28
          Basic Env, basic LS, extended LS, grav plates, inertial comp.
   Acomm:   Crew 292 (75 x4), staterooms=292
            (Bridge=16,  Engrng=83,  Gunnery=30,  Flight=30,
            Troops=75,  Command=39,  Steward=10, Medical=10)
            FrozenWatch=164,  LowBerths=164,  EmerLow=233
            Shuttle x3,  Cutter x4,  Air/Raft x4
   Other: Fuel = 636,822 kliters,  Cargo = 2 821 kliters.
          Fuel scoops, Purification Plant (12 hour).
          ObjSize = Large,  EMLevel = Moderate.

      Hull. To find out when the armor factor is reduced, divide the
inoperative value by the armor factor. The Planet has an inoperative hull
value of 67500 and an armor factor of 50. Each 1350 hits received reduce the
armor factor by one.
      There is a snag in that craft with high armor values will drop faster
than craft with low armor value. To negate this we will reduce received with
1% per armor value above 40. Also, damage is increased with one point for each
armor value below 40.
      Each time an interior hit is scored, apply half the hit damage to the
hull. If a shot penetrates armor, it will always give at least one damage
point to the hull.

      Power plant. Divide the inoperative number by ten to determine how many
hits the power plant can take before before losing 10% of its output. With
5140 points, the Planet takes 514 hits before power output is reduced 10%.
      For each 10% lost reduce the ship's agility by one.
      When 50% of the power plant has been lost, the spinal mount is
inoperative. The ship captain chooses either to maneuver or to fire energy
weapons (not both) in a turn.

      Manuever. Divide inoperative number by acceleration in G to determine
how many hits the maneuver plant can take before the maneuver G is reduced by
one. The 5063 hit points divided by 2G gives 2532 hits to reduce the rating by
one G. (The old system reduced acceleration by factors of one, two, or three.
With this system the maneuver plant will last longer.)
      Jump. As maneuver.
      Computer. I had trouble making damage plausible without being too
devastating. Weapons with a UCP of 1-4 give "Computer-1", UCP of 5-9 gives
"Computer-2", and UCP-A gives "Computer-3." On exceptional success reduce the
computer factor by an additional one. Radiation hits have no effect on fib
computers.
      Sensors. As computer hits.
      Weapons. As computer hits. If there is only one battery, reduce the
battery's UCP by the appropriate number.
      Screens. As weapon hits.
      Crew. One crew section is killed for each 100 damage points inflicted on
internal systems. A weapon which inflicts 80 damage points applies 40 to the
hull, and the remaining 40 kills one crew section. 120 points applied to crew
will kill two crew sections.

3. Applying Hits
      Hull. For internal hits, apply 50% of the damage points to the hull. If
the weapon does 100 damage points, apply 50 to the hull.
      Radiation hits. When a weapon which does radiation damage hits, apply
25% of the damage points to the radiation hit table. A factor-9 missile bay
firing nuclear missiles inflicts 720 damage points. If an internal hit is
scored, apply 360 points to the hull, 180 points to the radiation table, and
180 points to the internal explosions table.
      Critical hits. Per the standard rules. When the armor factor is reduced.
Remember to reduce the hull inoperative number in the process.
4. Armor Penetration Procedure

      Under the standard rules there is no hope that a low UCP weapon can
penetrate or do any kind of damage to a well-armored craft. In this variant
there is a slight chance that fighters and SDBs can dent the armor and
possibly scratch inside a battleship.

      To penetrate armor:
      Routine, Off=(weapon UCP/3), Def=((armor-40)/5), Confontration
      Referee: Meson guns do not roll this task. If they oenetrate
configuration, they just pass through the armor and explode inside.
      A natural 12 means automatic penetration of the armor. Drop fractions
when dividing weapon UCP and armor. Armor factors below 40 will give a DM in
the attcaker's favor.

5. Damage Table

             Damage Table (2D)
Die   Surface          Interior           Radiation    
 1    No Effect        No effect          No effect
 2    Weapon           Power plant        Weapon
 3    Fuel             Sensor             Weapon
 4    Manuever         Computer           Crew
 5    Weapon           Power plant        Computer
 6    Manuever         Crew               Sensor
 7    Weapon           Screen             Crew
 8    Weapon           Crew               Computer
 9    Fuel             Sensor             Weapon
10    Weapon           Jump drive         Weapon
11    Interior         Fuel tank shatter  Sensor
12    Interior         Critical           Crew
13    Critical         Critical           Critical

DMs:-  1    Weapon UCP 1-4
       0    Weapon UCP 5-9
      +1    Weapon UCP  A+
- -      1    if black globe operating
      +1    if nuclear, anti-matter, or spinal mount weapon
Spinal mounts: as per standard rules, spinal mounts get one additional roll
      for each UCP factor above 9. Each roll inflicts UCP*100 damage points.

Black globes: A black globe absorbs a percentage of the damage value according
      to its flicker rate. A globe on 40% flicker absorbs 40% of all damage
      points before they take effect. Overload is by the standard rules.^L6. Exceptional Success
      For each point achieved above the required difficulty, add 10% to the
damage points inflicted by the weapon.
      Attacker rolls 13 (including DMs) for a weapon which inflicts 100 damage
points. Increase the damage points by 20% to 120 before black globe and damage
takes effect.
      [CRB: I think this applies to the to hit task. I disagree with
increasing damage for each point above the difficulty throw needed. A miss
inflicts no damage. Why should most hits inflict extra damage?]

7. Optional Sensor Rules
      Make all sensor tasks one level less difficult if the target is in an
adjacent hex.

      Make active sensor tasks one level more difficult:
      o if the target is within a gas giant, 
      o when attempted through a hex where a nuclear missile has exploded.
      o if target uses jamming.

      Neutrino detection:
      o If target's EMLevel is faint, give a -1 DM to neutrino scans.
      o If target's EMLevel is strong, give a +1 DM to neutrino scans.

      Densitometer detection:
      o If target is small, give a -1 DM to densitometer scans.
      o If target is large, give a +1 DM to densitometer scans.
      o Increase detection task difficulty by one level if detection is
attempted through a planet or moon with size 5+ or through a planetoid belt.

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


                            ADDENDUM, 29 July, 1990

      My second draft on starship combat rules is near complete. There are
some rules I would like to get a second opinion on.

      Damage record. I have made a damage record form: boxes are crossed off
when damage is taken. MegaTraveller starships tend to have large damage
numbers, so I had to make a new system for hit points for each starship
component. Two reasons: I wouldn't get space for 500,000+ boxes on one A4
page, and lower numbers are easier to calculate.

      Time and distance. I plan to scale down the time and distance scale in
starship combat from 20 minutes/25000km to 4 minutes/5000km. For longer combat
turns, more damage must be given for each hit. With the reduced damage my
system does, I feel it is right to reduce the time and distance scale.
      This would make some planet's occupy two hexes. Hexes adjacent to a
planet are atmosphere hexes. If a ship is out of control and heading for
planet, it will burn up in the atmosphere.

      Hit and Penetrate. The most drastic changes will be the hit and
penetration tasks. I feel the task is either too difficult or too easy. So,
here is my change: I will do the tasks rolled on percentile dice (D100). Take
DMs from the tables in the Referee's Manual as usual.

      To Hit:
      Chance to hit: 30% * (1+(OffDM-DefDM/100))
      Example: A craft with factor-9 missile bay and computer model/9 firing
at a target with a DefDM of +7 will get a hit percentage of 33%:
      30% + (1+(8+9-7)/100)% = 33%

      To Penetrate Defense:
      Chance to penetrate: 30% (1+(OffDM-DefDM)/100)
      Example: The same ship as above is attempting to penetrate a factor-9
repulsor.  the defending ship has a model/9 computer. The total chance is 29%.
      30% + (1+(9-9-5)/100

      To Penetrate Armor:
      Chance to Penetrate: 30% *(1+((Weapon UCP-(ArmorValue-40))/100)
      Example: The same ship as above attempts to penetrate an armor factor of
60. The total chance is 27%.
      30% * (1+ ((9-(60-40))/100)

      Exceptional Success: Given when the roll is 1/10th under the required
roll. Example: if the base chance to hit is 33%, a roll of 01-03 indicates
exceptional success. A roll of 01 on the task is always treated as exceptional
success.

      Fleet or Ship Tactics: Add these skill points to the attacker's
offensive DM on the hit task. Follow the standard rules for how many tactical
points can be pulled from the pool.
    Firing arcs: Something that MegaTraveller ships should have is firing
arcs, but this is not possible as the design system is today.

      Movement: I am inclined to make some changes in the movement rules.
      First, I want to make heading changes somewhat more difficult. As in
Interceptor or Leviathan, it costs thrust points to change heading. What I
want to do is require a certain number of hexes travelled at a given velocity
before allowing a one hex side course change. How many hexes to travel may
depend on both maneuver gee and/or agility. Using this rule would make it
appropriate to limit the arc of the spinal mount to forward.
      Second, I want a planet's gravitational pull to interfere with a ship's
heading, depending on a ship's velocity and a planet's size and gravity (like
in Mayday.)
      I'm working hard on these rules, but I must admit that my knowledge in
this area is limited. I have not been able to come up with any easy, user-
friendly rules. If you have any good suggestions, I would like to hear them.

DAMAGE RESULTS

      Fuel Tank. I'm going to change the "fuel tank shattered" to "fuel leak".
A certain amount of fuel will be lost per turn. Subsequent hits will make the
leak more severe.

      Hull Inoperative. There is no effect in the standard rules (or my
variant) for an inoperative hull, when that damage level is reached. My
suggestions are:
      y restrict craft to 1G
      y prohibit atmosphere entry
      y hull is breached
      y stress severely limits heading changes
      y Agility drops to zero
      y may not fire spinal mount
      y Craft may not be recovered. They may be launched.
      y Rapid Launch Facilities are inoperative.
      y Fuel leak.

      I would like to have your reflections on these suggestions. If you have
any better solutions, I would like to hear them. I hope it will turn out to be
a good set of rules which make starship more interesting and realistic.


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4096
Date: Fri, 8 May 92 09:49:03 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: Re: neutrino emmissions

 * This message forwarded from private area of Steve Higginbotham
 * Original message dated Thu  7 May 92 21:58, from
rex!DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU!KELLOGG

 From rex!DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU!KELLOGG Thu, 7 May 92 21:42:58 CST
Date: Thu, 7 May 1992 21:35 CST
Message-Id: <01GJQTLTZIDG00083J@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU>
From: rex!DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU!KELLOGG
Subject: Re: neutrino emmissions

Ok, maybe we don't have the whole picture, (neutrinos won't fall under the
Grand Unified Field Theory though)

But we do have to try to make Trav stick to what physics we DO know without
having to resort to too many black boxes that mysteriously do things. 
Well,
at least *I* do.

And in my book, a particle that can travel through the entire mass of the
sun
and the earth without so much as a blink is going to laugh at any sort of
shielding available at TL 15.

Scott


- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4097
Date: Fri, 8 May 92 09:54:55 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: neutrino emmissions

Scott Kellogg:
 
> at least *I* do.
 
Conceded.  I do too.  I also assume that what we know is the BEGINNING of
the
level of knowledge of Traveller (or any other future game), not the end of
it.
 
 
> And in my book, a particle that can travel through the entire mass
> of the sun
> and the earth without so much as a blink is going to laugh at any
> sort of
> shielding available at TL 15.
 
So, how do they detect them?  At TL15, they have a neutrino sensor that can
(presumably) detect a 10KW neutrino source at a range of a light second or
more.  Neutrinos are producd as a result of the interaction of VERY high
energy photons converting to positrons and electrons and then to lower
energy
photons and neutrinos (at least so the Navy Nuclear Power program said). 
This
happens to a small extent in fission and fusion, but neither fission nor
fusion produces enough neutrinos to make a MODERN (mutli ten-thousand
gallon)
neutrino detector show anything.  SO how is it done?  Obviously, if the
neutrino sensors in MT work, the technology of the period must have
SOMETHING
that can stop a neutrino with reasonable (50%? 10%? 90%?) certainty.  If
you
assume that neutrinos are unstoppable, then MT's neutrino sensors are
unworkable, and the problem of avoiding detection by them is moot.
 
As you may have noticed, I prefer working on the assumption that existing
elements of the game IMPLY the level of knowledge of the game universe.  I
only throw things out when they are IMPOSSIBLE.  And I don't define
impossible
by OUR level of knowledge today.  I don't like the "We can't do it, so it
can
never be done" attitude.
     Though why we are arguing about this I will never know, since I
consider
the subject silly, and you obviously do too.  Alas...
 
Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4098
Date: Fri,  8 May 1992 11:48:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Edward Moore <em21+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: (4091) Re: Cloaking devices??

The problem is you're dealing with quantum effects here, so there's no
way to tell when, and with what phase a photon is going to come in.
That means that you have to detect the photon and in less than 1/f
send out something to mask it (well actually less time than that).
microwaves begin in the gigahertz region, this gives you 10e-9 seconds
to send out the out-of phase photon.  Visible light is much harder.

It strikes me this is a bit difficult.

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

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4099
From: Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM>
Subject: Quick 2300AD Aliens question
Date: Fri, 8 May 92 10:59:56 PDT

I was perusing the 2300AD Director's Guide, when something caught my
attention.  In the description of the Pentapod race (pg. 260, it lists
their home world as being in orbit around DM+43 1953, a small red star.

I can't find that damn star *ANYWHERE* on the near star map included
with the game.  Should I be assuming that it's *beyond* what's known
in the game as 'Near Space'?  Does this also mean that humanity is not
actually aware of the location of the Pentapods true home world (nothing
in the rules state this, but I get the impression that it *is* what GDW
intended).

What's the scoop, gang?

Later,
				"Nobody ever went broke underestimating
				 the taste of the American public."
						- Samuel Goldwyn
        Mark F. Cook

USMail: User Interface Technical Support
        Hewlett-Packard - Interface Technology Operation
        1000 NE Circle Blvd.  Corvallis, OR 97330

INTERNET: markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.com
          markc%hpcvss.cv.hp.com@relay.hp.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4100
Date: Fri,  8 May 1992 15:19:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: William Henry Timmins <wt0b+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Cloaking devices??

How about some device that simply ABSORBS light? Sure, someone could see
you occlude stars (MAYBE), but wouldn't that work against radar and
other sources? (Although a net of detectors could still work)

Potentially, some sort of field to screen gravitational effect and
neutrino emission MAY be possible. Given 3000+ years, I think that there
is a SLIGHT chance of the technology being developed.

A friend and I have been discussing ideas for eliminating gravitational
potential... weird stuff.

- -Me


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

Archive-Message-Number: 4101
Date:    Fri, 8 May 1992 17:05:03 -0500 (CDT)
From: A_COPEAB@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU (Brandon Cope)
Subject: re: Weapon add-ons

The limit wouldn't be on the bonuses of the gizmos on the gun, but how much you
could stick on. A pistol (large) might be able to handle a two pieces of
hardware (telescopic sight, smart-link, laser sight). A small pistol would be
limited to one. A rifle could mount all three. The telescopic sight and
smart-link shouldn't be cumlative, though you *could* make a smart-link with
magnification (at least double cost and weight). I won't go into
light-intensification or thermal sights (yet).

For a potent sighting system, see the battlefield sight on the gauss rifle
(Book 4: Mercenary). It probably doesn't weight over 1kg, but would account for
half the cost of the weapon.

For the laser sensors, I really only had in mind sealed armor (battle dress, 
combat armor). The sensors would probably not be very effective on 'normal'
armor (cloth, ablat). If the idea of a beep bothers you, what about a female 
voice saying 'laser'?

I do like the idea of the sensors automatically setting off anti-laser
aerosols. A suit of combat armor or battle dress probably couldn't fit more
than a half-dozen cans/uses on the suit without being rediculous, but you
would end up negating *all* the laser bonuses.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4102
Date: Fri, 8 May 92 22:55:09 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: neutrinos...

Scott:
 
>Subject: Re: more neutrinos
>
>Ok, I'm starting to get an idea on how they might work.
>
>I've been reading a Cosmology book "The First 3 Minutes"  Talks a bit
>about neutrinos.  The only thing they interact with is gravity and
>the weak force in an atomic nucleus.
 
Good book.
 
 
>(Killing one bird with 2 stones that we've already thrown)
 
>A grav field could be projected to focus or gather a larger number of
>neutrinos than would normally pass through it.  While some sort of
>Nuc Damper type field could be set up inside the box.  I'm gonna have
>to look back at how the Nuc Damper supposedly works, but I believe it
>does something with the strong and weak forces of the nucleus.
 
Nuc dampers do the strong force only, but a strongly focused gravity
field (the kind used to make "superdense") should be able to do it.
Good idea!
 
>Ok, it's an add hoc idea, but it doesn't have add any MORE black
>boxes to the game!  :-)
 
That's the name of the exercise: explain what they did in some
sensible way.  There's no point in saying it isn't possible (unless
you plan to start playing a different game), but there is much karmic
benefit to figuring out how it could be done (and politely assuming
that GDW thought of it, instead of being the idiots we all know they
are) :)
 
Later, later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4103
Date: Sat, 9 May 92 01:59 -0300
From: "C. Roald" <HOBBIT@AC.DAL.CA>
Subject: Re: Quick 2300AD Aliens question

>I was perusing the 2300AD Director's Guide, when something caught my
>attention.  In the description of the Pentapod race (pg. 260, it lists
>their home world as being in orbit around DM+43 1953, a small red star.
> 
>I can't find that damn star *ANYWHERE* on the near star map included
>with the game.  Should I be assuming that it's *beyond* what's known
>in the game as 'Near Space'?

The Near Star List gives its coordinates as X -28.4, Y 19.8, Z 32.1. 
It's on the map on the back cover, about an inch and a half above Xi 
Ursae Majoris.  That does imply that the Pentapods have pretty extensive 
star-faring culture. A visit would be very interesting.

      c.r.

- --
Free to roam the heavens in Man's noble quest to investigate the 
weirdness of the universe!	-- Spaceman Spiff

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4104
Date: Sat, 9 May 92 09:13:20 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: pentapods (P-pods)

Mark Cook:
 
>I was perusing the 2300AD Director's Guide, when something caught my
>attention.  In the description of the Pentapod race (pg. 260, it lists
>their home world as being in orbit around DM+43 1953, a small red star.
>I can't find that damn star *ANYWHERE* on the near star map included
>with the game.  Should I be assuming that it's *beyond* what's known
>in the game as 'Near Space'?  Does this also mean that humanity is not
>actually aware of the location of the Pentapods true home world (nothing
>in the rules state this, but I get the impression that it *is* what GDW
>intended).
>
>What's the scoop, gang?
 
well, it certainly was beyond the scope of a map last time I looked 
it up in the catalog.  Typo?
And I am moderately certain, based on other descriptions in CHallenges
and other places that humans have never gone to the P-pod homeworld, 
or even very far into P-pod space.  I gather that after the P-pods were
encountered, human exploration in that direction stopped cold, and hasn't
moved since.
 
Later,

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4105
Date: Sat, 9 May 92 09:12:16 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: battle records

Pauli:
 
>William Dow Rieder <wr0k+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>
>>    I would be interested in seeing the results of the TCS battles, if
>>someone wouldn't mind emailing me, or posting if others are interested.
>
>I'd be interested too, it might make for some fun reading.  Would it be
>possible to post the 'old' info from the game (i.e. the stuff everybody
>has seen alraedy?) including the battles.
 
There really isn't much EVERYONE has seen.  Lots of message traffic 
(mostly secret), and movement orders (likewise).  After the first 
year passes, I will post a summary, for those who are interested.  And
anyone (except players) who want an unedited version of the message 
traffic to/from a particular (or all) system(s) is welcome to it.
 
I will send along a description of the Battles AFTER an armistice is 
signed (no need to give out free intell to one of the participants).

Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4106
Date: Sun, 10 May 92 12:57:48 CST
From: Cynthia_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Cynthia Higginbotham)
Subject: Stealth and Cybertech

William Henry Timmins writes:
 
>How about some device that simply ABSORBS light? Sure, someone could see
 
     Flat black paint??
 
>you occlude stars (MAYBE), but wouldn't that work against radar and
>other sources? (Although a net of detectors could still work)
 
     We do that NOW with STEALTH technology.  Take a close look at the two
different (but both effective) approaches used by the F-117A and YF-22 & 
YF-23 Advanced Tactical Fighters.  As usual, Traveller falls behind reality
in ignoring Stealth, which reduces PASSIVE signature, not active.
 
Mike Metlay writes:
 
>Furthermore, Refs must be careful as to how much TL advancement they want
>to allow in the development of these systems, before game balance goes 
>straight out the window. 
     
     What's TL advancement got to do with game balance?  Just remember, 
Rule #1: the bad guys have it too.
 
>In a recent game I ran, one character had an
>integral smartgun link wired to a cybernetic enhancement of his own brain;
>this allowed him (among other things) to sweep an auto-gauss-gun across
>a crowd of people on full auto, scanning ahead of the barrel's trajectory
>and momentarily interrupting the flow of hot lead as he passed over 
>friendlies. Because the target acquisition, identification, calculation
>of trajectory and fire interrupts were carried out in terms of machine
>cycles (milliseconds at most), the overall effect was a two-second burst
>from the gun, after which twenty perps dropped dead in the arms of six 
>VERY confused PCs.
 
     ...and in WWI, the same kind of selectivity with regard to a machine
gun burst and an intervening object (the prop) was implemented using an
interrupter gear.  TL 5 technology.  I rather like the idea presented 
above; gives me some notions I hadn't thought of of what truly advanced
weapon technology might be able to do.
 
>whereupon he described "Smith" and "Wesson" from BUCK GODOT, ZAP GUN
>FOR HIRE (not what I'd call Traveller-grade hard SF).
 
     Hey! I liked Buck Godot!
 
>The advantages of these high-tech doodads are limited overall by the
>person carrying the gun, and should be handled accordingly. I have no
     
     Yep.  An idiot with the power of a god is still an idiot, to badly
paraphrase a certain Amber character.  I find a high Tactics skill is far
more important than any amount of technology; a clever player with a
body pistol is more dangerous than an idiot with an FGMP (to his 
enemies, I mean).
 
>This is especially important when people try to mount all of this
>stuff on pistols. Common sense should rule all such things, and
>weenies who insist on the latest cybertoys should be politely directed
>to the Cyberpunk game going on in the next county.
 
     But Mike, the weenies don't want to be in the Cyberpunk game where 
all their enemies are just as heavily armed... that would be dangerous.
See Rule #1 above.
     Seriously, I do *NOT* understand this prejudice against realistic
cybertechnology -- yes, *realistic*.  The cyber/computer technology 
depicted in "cyberpunk" and other near-future science fiction is the most
likely and realistic technology I've seen yet in Traveller -- so you
dislike that and prefer jump drives/gravitics instead?  Or computers 
obsolete by 1990's standards?  I are confused...
     Caveat: I don't necessarily believe that the *social* milieu depicted
by some cyberpunk stories is realistic -- then I look at places like
Los Angeles and the former Eastern Block and think again.
 
 
Brandon Cope writes:
 
>The limit wouldn't be on the bonuses of the gizmos on the gun, but how
much
>you could stick on. A pistol (large) might be able to handle a two pieces
of
>hardware (telescopic sight, smart-link, laser sight). A small pistol would
be
>limited to one. A rifle could mount all three. The telescopic sight and
>smart-link shouldn't be cumlative, though you *could* make a smart-link
with
>magnification (at least double cost and weight). I won't go into
>light-intensification or thermal sights (yet).
 
     Uh, there seems to be some confusion as to what a smart-link is.  A
smart-link is the wire and circuitry that allows the electronics in your
gun (ie, the sights and trigger) to interface either with your brain thru
a neural jack, or your battlesuit combat computer if you are playing it
that way.  Which is to say, if your weapon is high enough TL to have 
electronics rather than merely mechanical sights and trigger, it can 
have smart-link capability built in with no extra size or weight penalty.
Of course the telescopic sight/laser-sight and smart-link are cumulative; 
the smart-link is useless without some kind of sight to provide targetting
data... I *would* go into LI/IR sights -- a natural for a smart-link.
 

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

cynthia_higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4107
Date: Sun, 10 May 92 17:09:24 CST
From: Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Steve Higginbotham)
Subject: neutrinos and trade and commerce...

 * This message forwarded from private area of Steve Higginbotham
 * Original message dated Sun 10 May 92 17:08, from Steve Higginbotham

> According to the First 3 minutes,
> Neutrinos can literally pass through LIGHTYEARS of lead.  Without
> being disturbed.  WHOA!

True.  Which is why we've only seen a handful in passing for all our
efforts to find them.


> As to weither or not GDW really put much thought into neutrino sensors...

> They probably put less thought to it than they did to the Trade and
Commerce
> rules you find so objectionable!  :-)

GDW probably doesn't employ anyone who knows what a neutrino is.  They
probably think it is another word for neutron.  

But let's be nice.  Let's PRETEND we believe GDW is filled with bright
technophilic young men (and women, mustn't forget them).  Instead of
admitting that they seem to be survivors from the early sixties, who
haven't yet caught up on the latest technological developments.  

Later...

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Steve_Higginbotham@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US

I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
                                    --W. von Braun

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

Archive-Message-Number: 4108
Date: Mon, 11 May 92 00:38:45 -0400
From: ptd2@po.CWRU.Edu (Palmer T. Davis)
Subject: Re: (4100) Cloaking devices??


>
>From: William Henry Timmins <wt0b+@andrew.cmu.edu>
>
>How about some device that simply ABSORBS light? Sure, someone could see
>you occlude stars (MAYBE), but wouldn't that work against radar and
>other sources? (Although a net of detectors could still work)
>

Such a device already exists in the game.  It's called a black globe.


- --
Palmer T. Davis      ___
<ptd2@po.cwru.edu>   \X/   cthread.  cthread_fork().  Fork, thread, fork!

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

