BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 421  4957 19-Nov-1992 Hans Rancke-Mad  TNE << >From: Corran J. Webster <cwebst
 421  4958 19-Nov-1992 timothy k istia  Star Vikings: Suggested name change <<
 421  4961 19-Nov-1992 "Steve Higginbo  TCS starport support limits... << Berti
 421  4962 19-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Random Replies << Corran J. Webster <cw
 421  4963 19-Nov-1992 Steven Owens     Paintball, Spacecraft << wildstar@moeng
 421  4964 20-Nov-1992 Does it matter?  Thrust/speed ratios in MegaTraveller <<
 421  4965 20-Nov-1992 Matthew D. Gold  Non-silicon chips... << >Hans Rancke-Ma
 421  4956 18-Nov-1992 helm@geology.uc  building worlds with atmospheres << I'l
 421  4959 19-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Lasers, Spacecraft, and Aircraft << Ste
 421  4960 20-Nov-1992 Hans Rancke-Mad  Terran Mercantile Community << We had a

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

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

Bundle: 421
Archive-Message-Number: 4957
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: TNE
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 20:01:51 MET

>From: Corran J. Webster <cwebster@math.ucla.edu>

Welcome to the list, Corran.

>    The Virus is going to make technological advance extremely difficult in
>affected areas, however, so that recovery may well be not possible - every
>time that a civilisation gets to TL 7 or so, it will almost surely start
>using silicon chips,

What's the bet that someone will develop a non-silicon chip before the
Cymberline predator has been on the scene 10 years?

>    Realising the military potential of this discovery for the Domain of
>Deneb, the development of stutterwarp drive ships are fast-tracked and the
>problems with the electronics surmounted by new (and incidentally Virus-
>proof) technologies. By the time the Domain of Deneb is threatened by the
>Virus a small squadron of fighting ships is ready. This handful of ships
>then defeats a Virus Armada coming through Corridor.

> [Deneb then helps]
>the Aslan Heirate (in exchange for the Ihatei to stop their attacks),

The ihatei isn't even a real threat without the virus. With the Aslans
plagued by the Virus and Deneb controlling virus-free, stutterwarp ships
there's only one way the Aslans are going to get any: As loyal vassals
of Archduke Norris.



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

                        ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir

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

Bundle: 421
Archive-Message-Number: 4958
From: timothy k istian soholt <xoanon@carina.unm.edu>
Subject: Star Vikings: Suggested name change
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 12:42:26 MST

Several weeks ago, when there seemed to be a lot of griping
about what a ridiculous name "Star Vikings" was, and before Mr.
Wiseman joined the TML, I suggested that the name "Scouts"
might be a more palatable alternative. Now that we have an
agent of GDW listening in, I'd like to reintroduce the idea.
The Scouts were the great explorers of the Third Imperium, and
they had a reputation both within the game universe and among
players (at least, most of the ones I've known). It seems logi-
cal that the new breed of explorers (and merchants, admittedly)
would want to cash in on the "mystique" of the IISS. Comments,
criticisms, scathing remarks, anyone?

- -- Tim Soholt (xoanon@carina.unm.edu)

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

Bundle: 421
Archive-Message-Number: 4961
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 18:52:10 -0600
From: "Steve Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: TCS starport support limits...

Bertil:

>  Am I correct in assuming that TCS use a method of limiting the number
>of starships through limiting the tonnage each starport can support?

No, it limits the amount of fuel available in a given starport.

>  Can anybody briefly summarize the procedure? How many tons can each
>type of port normally service? Is it TL and/or world-code dependent?

A:  2,000,000T per week.
B:  1,500,000T per week.
C:  1,000,000T per week.
D:    500,000T per week.
E-:  no fuel available.

Beyond that, the only limitation imposed by TCS is how much money you
have to build starships with....


---Steve


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

Bundle: 421
Archive-Message-Number: 4962
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 22:33:32 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Random Replies

Corran J. Webster <cwebster@math.ucla.edu> writes:
>   Indeed, why does it [stutterwarp] need to be FTL?

It doesn't; if carefully done, a "slow" stutterwarp will work; it can be
limited to sublight speeds, or to FTL speeds that are far below that of
jump drives.  As a first cut, try dividing the speeds generated by Star
Cruiser or 2300AD by 10 and see what happens.

>   Perhaps a UUP (Universal Universe Profile) might be in order!

Hey, good idea!  A simple string of digits which summarize many of the
important points of a universe.  How about something like the following

Tone : Rating of the overall tone and character of the universe; low
numbers mean dark, depressing, morbid; high numbers indicate light,
upbeat, hopeful.
Contrast : Rating of the definition between "good" and "evil"; low
numbers indicate that such a conflict is not a fundamental part of the
universe, with the contrast increasing up to the high numbers, where the
conflict between a well defined good and evil is central to the universe
(Star Wars is a good example of this in science fiction).
Scale : Shows the "size" of events in which the players will typically
be involved; low numbers indicate that the events are likely to be
unimportant on a cosmic scale, and of interest to the participants and
a few others.  High numbers indicate world-shattering, star-spanning
plots with strong consequences for entire worlds and billions of people.
Input : This indicates how much influence the players are likely to have
in the course of these events; low numbers indicate that the rebellion
will go on no matter what the players can do.  High numbers represent a
larger player influence on their universe.

Technology: A group of three digits which represents the low, average,
and high end of the technology available in the universe.

Parameters: A group of digits for plugging into equations in design
dequences; represents the type and effectiveness of specifc technologies
in the game universe.  Likeley candidates include Fusion, Gravitics,
Jump Drive, Stutterwarp, Stargates, and as many others as seem
reasonable.

Examples: (in my humble opinion, using a 2-B scale):

Classic Traveller: 9469-AFG-87600
Rebellion Era:     58A3-AFG-67600
Hard Times Era:    4878-9CE-67600
Star Trek TNG:     A79A-???-A90B1
Star Wars:         BABA-???-88A00

>     Another posibility would be to change that UPP digit to a "Composition"
> digit which gives both the density (planetary composition) and atmosphere
> (atmospheric composition) somehow. [Table Deleted]:

I would rather that the whole current system were scrapped and re-done
from scratch, instead of re-defining the existing codes.  I'm afraid
that I don't like the suggestion presented.  A new system and new codes
would be a nice improvement (however, it would mean a commitment on the
part of GDW to generate several sectors right near the start).
Suggestions for such a new system would include separate codes for
worlds size and density, separate codes for atmosphere type and density.
Generating the starport type after figuring out the planet's population
and technology level would allow a better "fit" between these three
figures, and would be an important improvement.

> Thought for the Day

Very Interesting!  This idea has potential!

>     Although I doubt the Hivers were responsible for the Virus, I have always
> had a nagging suspicion that the Rebellion may have been a Hiver manipulation
> on a massive scale.

The thought had occurred to me, too.  It would be like them to try a
manipulation on this scale (and it would be like an overconfident Hiver
manipulator to not intend to cause this much damage).

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


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

Bundle: 421
Archive-Message-Number: 4963
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 23:00:08 -0600
From: Steven Owens <uso01@mailhost.unidata.com>
Subject: Paintball, Spacecraft


wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar) said:
>
> That sounds interesting; as far as I know, there are very few paintball
> places around here, and no indoor ones.  [...] The scouts are interested
> in paintball, so if you could give me any pointers towards a nearby,
> affordable place (affordable to the average suburban teenager with no
> accumulated equipment), I would be grateful.

Be happy to.  Drop me some e-mail (uso01@unidata.com) giving
me a clearer idea of where "around here" is and I'll give you all the
advice I can.  I may also be able to give you some beginner's
pointers...

I found your discussion of zero-gravity piloting quite
fascinating.  (I'm saving a copy for reference :-) Any thoughts on
zero-gravity dogfighting and combat maneuvering?

Steven J. Owens
uso01@unidata.com

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

Bundle: 421
Archive-Message-Number: 4964
From: Does it matter? <vender@plains.NoDak.edu>
Subject: Thrust/speed ratios in MegaTraveller
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 0:48:09 CST

Someone was complaining earlier (I don't remember who, I had to recycle
  the posting, and I could be confusing it with the archives I've been
  reading, but....) that the thrust/speed chart in the design
  sequence is inaccurate for modern aircraft.  I just realized why.

In the design sequence, it is assumed that a vessel will have to defeat
  1G of gravity in order to begin moving.  Basically, this ignores
  the concepts of aerodynamics.  For vertical take off and landing,
  a craft is capable of doing without a 1+ G of acceleration.
  This is what taxiing was developed to avoid, and means that
  anyone trying to design a grav-bike or other vessel doesn't have
  to use so much power to produce thrust, thus producing cheaper
  and smaller vessels.

To correct this, the easiest (though probably not realistic) method
  would be to stop subtracting 1 from the Gs of acceleration
  produced by the vessel if it is intended for atmospheric use.
  Of course, in less dense atmospheres, or higher gravity worlds,
  the speed or taxiing time would have to be adjusted.  Unfortunately,
  I'm only an amatuer physicist, so someone else will have to work
  out the exact adjustments.

On planets without atmospheres, the standard 1G loss of effective
  thrust would still apply.
Just my few bytes worth,
- --Brad


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

Bundle: 421
Archive-Message-Number: 4965
Subject: Non-silicon chips...
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 8:57:18 CST
From: goldman@orac.cray.com (Matthew D. Goldman)
Reply-To: goldman@orac.cray.com

>Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> says:
>
>>From: Corran J. Webster <cwebster@math.ucla.edu>
>>    The Virus is going to make technological advance extremely difficult in
>>affected areas, however, so that recovery may well be not possible - every
>>time that a civilisation gets to TL 7 or so, it will almost surely start
>>using silicon chips,
>
>What's the bet that someone will develop a non-silicon chip before the
>Cymberline predator has been on the scene 10 years?

Looks like Gallium Arsenide chips will finally be reasonable.

My Dad does research in Gallium Arsenide Superconducters.  He is
one of the better known researchers in the field. My Sister does
research in Gallium Arsenide Semiconductors.  When they are both
in town, the phrase I hear most often is:

     "Gallium Arsenide -- The technology of the future,
                          as it always will be."

Alternatives to Silicon exist TODAY.  The problem is that
silicon is much cheaper and easier to work with than Gallium
Arsenide or the other substitutes (ErRhBa?  Sigh, I tend to
tune out the physics lecture over the holiday tables.)

I'm not sure that replacing silicon will actually fix the problem
with the Virus.  Life is insidious, I suspect that the virus would
simply mutate to eat whatever new technology you dreamed up.

- --
Matthew Goldman              E-mail: goldman@orac.cray.com
Fax: (612) 683-3099                   Work: (612) 683-3061
      "Say George, I don't mean to interrupt, but
       there's a glowing red dot on your forehead."

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

Bundle: 421
Archive-Message-Number: 4956
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:16:46 PST
From: helm@geology.ucdavis.edu
Subject: building worlds with atmospheres

I'll warn you now, this is a bit long, and on the nerdy side.  You
won't insult me any if you want to skip it.

While I have an infrequent idle moment, I wanted to address one of
the topics that Corran Webster brought up.  (hi Corran, welcome to
the TML!)

In order for a planet to have an atmosphere, it must be both large enough
and dense enough to be able to capture and retain the gaseous phase
during its formation.  The earth and Venus are the two planets in our
system with significant atmospheres.  Let's look briefly at some planet
stats:

planetdiameter, kmmass, gdensity, gm/cc

mercury48783.3e265.44
venus121004.87e275.25
earth127565.98e275.52
moon34767.35e253.34
mars67866.44e263.94

(Well, yeah, the moon is technically a satellite, but compositionally,
it's part of the earth/moon "system" and is of the same compositional
geochemical material as the earth's lithosphere...I just couldn't neglect
it.)

The large satellites of Jupiter vary in size from ~3000 to ~5000 km
diameter, and from ~2 to 3.5 g/cc density, by comparison.

So, it looks like the upper limit for terrestrial planet-sized bodies
is around 5.5 g/cc density, though it certainly is within the realm
of planetary geochemistry to accrete a larger Fe/Ni core to make a
denser planet.  The upper limit for a planetary body would be the
density of pure iron (in this system) or pure nickel (in some other
system), I would suppose, assuming that you could really accrete a
planet without retaining the other elements (which I believe would
be close to impossible, though most of the science in Traveller is
impossible, so why worry about it?)

Anyway, for planetary bodies smaller than the Earth or Venus, a decent
atmosphere is not viable, because the gravity would be insufficient
to retain low vapor pressure gases.

Incidentally, one of the great puzzles of planetary science is why
Venus does not have a significant proportion of water vapor in its
atmosphere.  It is large enough to retain water vapor, but yet its
atmosphere is mostly CO2.  The science types are still arguing about
it...

Now about Corran's proposed UPP scale, based mostly on planetary
composition, which translated to rocks, solid cores, molten cores,
etc.  I would like to make a small correction to his view of
planetary composition.

When you have planetessimals colliding to make terrestrial style
planets, there are a number of compounds available which can be
classified as siderophilic (mostly iron/nickel), lithophilic (oxides
and silicates), chalcophilic (oxides and sulfides), and atmosphilic
(low  vapor pressure compounds, in the forms of ices).  These
four broad categories are the left-overs from accreting a
sun.  They hang out as planetessimals and get busy colliding
and accreting.  As they accrete, they segregate by density.
The siderophilic (ie iron-loving) elements sink into a core (always
molten at first).  The lithophics form a mantle.  The chalcophilics and
some of the oxides float to the top.  The atmosphilics try their damndest
to outgas.  The heat of collision drives the atmosphilics into a vapor
phase.  If the body is large enough and dense enough, the vapor phases
can't escape, and form an atmosphere.

So essentially, every terrestrial planet has a siderphilic (ie iron-rich)
core topped by a lithophilic (ie silicate-rich) cap.  The lighter oxides
and sulfides may not be present, depending on whether the growing planet
was large enough to capture the lighter, less-abundant planetissimals
as it accreted.  (This is a simplistic model, especially when you consider
that Io, at 3640 km diameter, is sulfide rich!  I suppose the moral of
the story is that coincidence probably plays a large role in the capture
of planetissiamals...)

Now every core is molten to begin with.  What keeps a core molten is
governed by how many radioactive elements sank with the other siderophiles
in forming the core, and how big the planet is.  The radioactive elements
decay and give off heat, keeping things warm in the core.  The planet size
governs how fast the heat of the core is lost.  The bigger the planet,
the slower the heat loss.

The Moon is not just a rock.  It has a solid iron/nickel core (once
molten, now cooled), and an outer layer of lithophilic silicates (which
are identical in isotopic signiture to the earth's silcate mantle!).
Venus still has a partially molten core, like the Earth's.  We know
this for certain now, since the Magellan data has confirmed that
mantle convection occus on Venus (and hot cores drive mantle convection).

I know this post is getting really long, but you hard core science
fiction types may want to take a look at the Magellan data.  It's
been published in two special "green-cover" Journal of Geophysical
Research (JGR) issues dated this year.  Really cool pictures, folks!
The first good pictures ever made of the surface of Venus (done with
radar imaging).  Check it out!  The pictures alone are worth your
while.

Anyway, back to planet cores.  Any really old terrestrial planet,
regardless of size, will lose the heat of its core eventually, and
the core will solidify.  The point: solid vs molten core is a function
of age and size and radioactive content, so I would amend Corran's
scheme and lump the solid and molten core planets together.  I think
I would devide the UPP's to relect whether a planet was large enough
to retain an atmosphere able to sustain life instead.

Corran's observation that gas giants were often "conveniently" close
to terrestrial planets is a very good one.  The way elements segregate
in a forming solar system means that the gas giants will be farther out
and the terrestrial planets will be further in.  Gas giant shouldn't be
close to the terrestrial planet zone, at least as we understand planetary
science today.  This doesn't mean, of course, that a gas giant can't
have satellites that are terrestrial planetary bodies, because they
can and do, as the satellites of Jupiter amply demonstrate.

Overall, I think Corran's idea of UPPs for planets is a good one.  I'd
like to see something like it for Traveller.  And with that parting
comment, I'll quit boring all you good folk with this latest nerd-attack
of mine... ;->  (Gee, Scott, I guess geology is good for something
afterall!)

Catie Helm, goechemistry-nerd
helm@geology.ucdavis.edu


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

Bundle: 421
Archive-Message-Number: 4959
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 17:14:16 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Lasers, Spacecraft, and Aircraft

Steven Owens <uso01@mailhost.unidata.com> writes:
>         I was speaking of a slow, "single-shot" laser, i.e. pulse, wait
> one second, pulse, etc.  A fast-pulsing laser would be functionally
> equivalent to a beam laser in terms of beam continuity, targeting, etc.

Right.  Such a laser probably has a targetting mode where it fires more
rapidly at a *MUCH* lower energy.  This could be built into many types of
"single-shot" pulse lasers at not much additional cost; in others it could
be supplied by a cheap solid-state continous wave or rapid-pulse laser as a
targetting device.

>         Actually, I've played paintball in such surroundings.  Photon
> doesn't do much for me.  I just deleted about a paragraph's worth of
> ranting about how horrible photon is.  This isn't the place.  I've
> played paintball in one of the best indoor fields I've ever seen - it
> used to be a state mental hospital.  Three floors, hallways, rooms,
> windows, stair wells, roofs, etc.  Tons o' fun.  Several games we
> played with LZ-marker smoke flares to provide an interesting
> environment.

That sounds interesting; as far as I know, there are very few paintball
places around here, and no indoor ones.  Photon is, however, a relatively
popular trip for our Explorer Post (I am an assistant advisor for EP250) so
I get to go about as often as we can afford to.  The scouts are interested
in paintball, so if you could give me any pointers towards a nearby,
affordable place (affordable to the average suburban teenager with no
accumulated equipment), I would be grateful.

Photon has quite a number of problems; every once and a while someone talks
about coming up with a competing game that fixes most or all of them.  The
ones that bug me the most are the helmets, the lack of visual effects, and
the frequent delay in the audio feedback.  Although I haven't played in many
different arenas, the size and layout makes quite a difference; I suspect
that the Baltimore Arena is about as small as is practical.  I do know that
I didn't enjoy the only smaller one I have played in.

> >*Embarrassed blush* I am and have been for a long time a pretty good pistol
> >shot, but I made a complete fool of myself in the Naperville Photon Arena.
> >Shooting and being shot at are two very different things, and it takes a
> >long time to develop reflexes (and a lot of money, too).

True, and marksmanship doesn't count for much in Photon; the gun has an
acceptance angle wider than a 12 gauge's shot pattern.  And at least in the
Baltimore Arena, the things have no sights worth mentioning.


Seth the Lesser <slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu> writes:
> On the other hand, keep in mind that the forward acceleration of 1G for a
> Type A doesn't translate to 1G of *lateral* acceleration; thrusters only get
> 40% of normal efficiency parallel to the plates, so that's only 0.4G lateral
> acceleration.  You'd know better than I would, but isn't lateral
> acceleration more closely related to maneuverability and "crankiness" than
> forward acceleration is? 0.4G is an *awful* lot less than the 9G that you
> say an F-15 can pull in a tight turn.

Keep in mind that the thrusters can be overdriven by at least 500% for short
periods of time (short in a space combat time scale; this could be as long
as several minutes).  For our hypothetical 1g trader, this means a 2g
lateral accelleration, and a 5g forward sprint.  For a 6g combat craft, this
means a 12g lateral accelleration, and a 30g (!) sprint; such a craft would
be more limited by the intertial compensator's ability to keep the pilot
from being mashed into goo than anything else.  Presumably the compensator
is a gravitic device, and can be overdriven like the drives can.  I also
assume that overloading the drives and compensator like this consumes large
amounts of power.

In my opinion, this ability is the basis for the agility measure of a
spacecraft.  A craft with no additional power available to overdrive its
thrusters and compensator has no agility; its ability to make rapid, drastic
changes in its position and vector are extremely limited.  When additional
power is available, a ship has agility: in the case of a 6g combat ship, 100
seconds of 30g accelleration means a displacement of 150km (and a velocity
vector change of 3km/s)!

With respect to agility, I don't follow the standard MegaTraveller rules.
Instead I use my own:  Agility is limited to the maneuver drive rating (ie:
a ship with Maneuver=1 has a maximum of Agility=1).  Emergency Agility is
computed based on the assumption that all available power from weapons and
screens is routed to the drives.  For merchants, auxiliaries, and other
underpowered designs, this usually results in an emergency agility no better
than their normal agility.  Emergency agility is also limited to the
maneuver drive rating.  Finally, for ships with a large proportion of cargo,
stores or fuel, agility may be computed for different configurations, as the
mass of the vessel changes.  These are handled on a case-by-case basis.

When maneuvering in space, there is no reason why the spaceship has to keep
its nose pointed along its current velocity vector; this is in sharp
contrast to an aircraft.  The most efficient means of turning is to point
the main drive in the right direction and blast away.

In the description below, the "nose" of the craft is at the front of the
roll axis, which is also the thrust axis of the main drive.  The yaw axis
points up and down (up defined relative to the pilot) at a 90 degree angle
to the roll axis. The pitch axis points port and starboard, (also defined
relative to the pilot) at a 90 degree angle to the roll and yaw axes.

Probably most pilots would start a turn by rolling the craft into the plane
of the turn (so that the yaw axis points to the center of the turn) and
pitching up.  As the ship passes its intended vector heading, the main drive
is run up to the desired thrust.  Pitch-up continues, sometimes up to 180
degrees as the main drive is used to change the ship's velocity vector.

As the velocity vector approaches the desired heading, the pilot pitches the
craft down, towards the new heading, possibly decreasing the main drive
thrust to the desired cruise output.  Delicate adjustments can be made to
the final vector by using pitch and yaw.  Precise piloting would establish
the new vector without overshooting or yaw corrections, and would leave the
ship with its nose pointed along the new velocity vector.

From this position, the main drive could be used to accellerate the ship
along its new course; a simple 180-degree pitch or yaw maneuver will allow
the ship to "swap ends" and decellerate, or another turn can be started.  In
some situations, "barbecue mode" may be desirable.  This is where the ship
is placed in a continous slow roll; this may be done to allow sensors or
weapons to sweep through 360 degrees, or to equalize thermal effects, or to
mimic gravity.  If "barbecue mode" is started, the roll will have to be
stopped before any course changes.

In an atmosphere, a spacecraft's performance will be affected by its hull
streamlining (or lack thereof).  Way back in the early days of Classic
Traveller, Paranoia Press published the Serpent Class Scout/Courier.  One of
the interesting features of this ship was variable-geometry (swing-wing)
wing and tail surfaces.  I have always assumed that an "AF" (airframe) hull
implies aerodynamic lifting and control surfaces of some type; such craft
would all be able to use wing lift to help them turn.  They may be variable
geometry like the Serpent Class, or lifting bodies, or relatively
conventional airframes like the current Space Shuttle.

There is no reason that winged spacecraft and grav vehicles operating inside
an atmosphere could not maneuver using wing lift.  Vehicles without wings,
in particular many spacecraft and grav vehicles would have to use engine
thrust to perform the turns.  Grav vehicles would have their grav plates
oriented so that the primary axis of thrust is down or at an angle down and
aft (so that the vertical component provides the lift to keep the craft
airbourne, and the horizontal component maintains level cruising speed).
Such craft could turn the same way aircraft do, by banking into the turn and
increasing their grav module's output.

The thruster plates on a spacecraft are probably oriented based on a
compromise between atmospheric operations (flight in a world's atmosphere
and scooping operations on a gas giant) and convenient take-off and landing
operations, and convenient deep space operations.  Ships for which
atmospheric operations are the most important part of their mission
(including world interface and fuel shuttles, fighters which have an
atmospheric mission, or vessels which are expected to frequently scoop for
fuel) will probably have AF hulls, with aerodynamic lifting surfaces and
flight controls, and thruster plates oriented along their line of flight.

Most other types of ships which are intended to land on a world would use
type SL hulls, and have their thruster plates aligned to provide thrust
perpendicular to their decks and landing gear (so that the thrusters provide
the most thrust as "lift" in atmospheric flight).  This also allows ships
to land and taxi comfortably with their decks level.  When maneuvering in
space, flight attitude is mostly irrellevant.

Unstreamlined craft (type USL) are not intended to in an atmosphere at all;
I typically rule that except for planetoids (which may not land on a world
at all), they may operate in an atmosphere as long as their speed is kept
below 120kps.  Thruster plates on these designs are typically oriented for
maximum convenience; if regular landings are anticipated the thrusters will
be providing "lift" for flight, so the landing gear, decks, and access will
be aligned accordingly.


Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se> writes:
> So while a good scout ship (2G) should be able to outclimb almost anything
> TL8 or less (except SAM's:) almost anything including a WWI fighter should
> be able to outturn the scout ship.

Allowing the scoutship's thrusters to be overdriven by 500% for short
periods of time, my agility modification would allow a Maneuver=2, Agility=2
ship to pull up to 10g for short periods of time (however, again using my
modification, the most a typical scoutship of Maneuver=2, Agility=0 ship
could manage is 2g).  Airframe hulls would be able to contribute some wing
(or body) lift to the turn, too.

swhunter@teaching.cs.adelaide.edu.au (Steve Hunter) writes:
>         I may be utterly wrong, be 1G acceleration on modern day
> military aircraft would surely be common (or even exceeded) .. if
> they are structurally capable of 9G turns, and commonly do 4-6G
> turns ..... can anyone tell me for sure?

The engine thrust to weight ratio for modern combat aircraft can slightly
exceed 1:1 (or about 1g of accelleration) for high-performance jets at full
thrust (usually this means with the afterburners lit) with moderate loads
(air-to-air missiles and fuel only).  Planes in this category include the
F-15 Eagle, F-16 Fighting Falcon, all models of the Harrier, the French
Mirage 2000, and the Russian Yak-36mp Forger (and possibly the MiG-21/bis
Fishbed).  Most other aircraft have a much lower thrust to weight ratio;
these aircraft weight many times more than their engine thrust.

The Harrier and the Forger are unique in that they have rotatable nozzles to
direct the engine thrust downwards, so that they can take off and land
vertically; they are sometimes called "jump-jets", V/STOL (Vertical or Short
Take-Off and Landing) or STOVL (Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing)
aircraft.

When an aircraft turns, it uses its wings, not its engine, to alter its
flight path.  The airplane banks into the turn, and the lift from the wings
provides the force which turns the aircraft.  A modern combat jet can
generate lift forces up to nine times the aircraft's weight.  This force
does not come without cost, however; producing this lift also causes drag
which slows the aircraft down, and increases its minimum (stall) speed.  The
following table may help, it shows stall speed in knots (nautical miles per
hour), angle of bank in degrees, and g load for a hypothetical aircraft:

Stall Speed:   120   170   208   240   268   294   317   339   360
Angle of Bank: level  60.0  70.6  75.5  78.5  80.4  81.8  82.8  83.6
G Load:          1     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9

Nine g is about the practical limit for human pilots in g-suits (at least
until someone invents the intertial compensator); therefore manned aircraft
are rarely stressed for higher loads than this (research aircraft are an
exception, I believe that the Bell X-1 was stressed for up to 12g in either
direction).  Missiles and drone aircraft can also exceed the 9g "limit"
quite easily.

A spacecraft maneuvering in outside the atmosphere is a whole different ball
of wax; there is no air, no lift - no aerodynamic forces whatsoever.  Any
forces which act on a ship have to come from the ship's engines.  There are
similarities, because both an aircraft and a spacecraft need to be able to
control their motion in all three dimensions.

Scott Kellogg, please correct me if I made any horrible errors in the above;
I'm not a pilot, just a pilot-wanna-be, simulations programmer, and gamer!

> we may have something more like options on a computer
> console (it would be quite complex to maneuver a large bulk in zero-g)

I don't think so.  There is nothing inherently more difficult about
maneuvering any large mass in zero-g than maneuvering the same large mass
here on Earth.  The required judgement and reflexes will be *DIFFERENT* but
not impossible to learn nor out of the scope of human abilities.

In many ways this sounds like the quest for "inherent stability" which
several early heavier-than-air flight experimenters got hung up on.
Stabilizing a moving vehicle in three dimensions was considered so difficult
as to be beyond human ability; therefore any such aircraft would have to be
inherently stable under any flight condition without human control input.

All of our space-flight experience to date has shown that human judgement
and skill is up to the task of flying spacecraft; I don't see why larger
spacecraft and higher technology should change this.

Finally, direct human control is exciting and involving from a story-telling
point of view.  And since we are, in the end, telling stories and not
predicting the future, this is the final and most important criteria.  In my
opinion it is simply more exciting have a pilot fly the starship with some
type of flight controls.  It is draws the players more into the game and
their characters to say "the ship is overloaded; you wrestle with the
controls and it responds sluggishly" than to say "the computer informs you
that docking will be delayed because the ship is overloaded".

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


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

Bundle: 421
Archive-Message-Number: 4960
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Terran Mercantile Community
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 2:26:55 MET

We had a discussion about the Terran mercantile Community and
the Old Earth Union a while back. One of the problems I had
with the references was that the TMC is described as being "a
means of circumventing Rule of Man regulations", yet the date
for the formation of the TMC is -1690 while the ROM is usually
held to have fallen by -1776, 86 years earlier.

Following is my suggestion for resolving the various dates and
events given for Terra, the Terran Mercantile Community, the
Old Earth Union, the Rule of Man and such. I also have some
other Library Data entries about cultural stuff I got the ideas
for while I worked on this that I'll post if there's any interest.

I'd really like to hear if this is of the slightest interest to
anyone besides myself. I posted some stuff about the Sword Worlds
a couple of weeks ago, and except for one person who just told me
that he liked it I got _NO_ feed-back whatsoever. Pretty
discouraging I can tell you.

- ---------------------------------------------------------------
LIBRARY DATA:

OLD EARTH UNION: Interstellar government from -1110 to 588 com-
prising Terra and the worlds closest to her: Barnard,  Calgary,
Dismal,  Ember,  Fenris,  Forlorn, Hades, Heiphaistos, Inferno,
Junction,  Loki,  Midway, Peraspera, Prometheus, Sirius and Ys.
Fleet  bases  were  also  maintained  at Aggida,  Markhashi and
Meshan  -  all within jump-3 of Terra  - but these systems were
not considered part of the Union proper;  Agidda was a balkani-
zed  world and thus unable to send representatives to the Union
Council and both Markhashi and Meshan had been abandoned during
the  recession that followed the fall of the Rim Province (qv.)
in -1690.
    The  Union was formed in -1110 out of the Terran Mercantile
Community (qv.) as a response to worsening economic conditions.
Although experiencing some problems  -  a short, vicious trade-
war with the newly formed Dingir League from -1106 to -1098 put
a  severe  strain  on  both sides   -   the Union proved strong
enough to defend itself from any serious threat during the rest
of  the  Long Night,  and in 588 it was peacefully incorporated
into the Imperium.


RIM PROVINCE: Administrative division of the Second Empire com-
prising most of the defunct Terran Confederation. It is, depen-
ding on what historian you ask,  either one of the first or one
of  the  last  parts  of the Rule of Man to succumb to the Long
Night. It was one of the first areas to loose contact with Hub;
in  -1854  the  second new governor sent out from Hub failed to
reach the province's capital, Dingir, and Acting Governor Ayara
Twofeathers  inaurgurated the custom of Governor-appointed suc-
cessors,  a  system  that was kept to the end of the provincial
government.
    The lessening flow of commerce between the rim and the core
were already rendering taxes more and more meaningless,  and 16
years later the province ceased to remit taxes to Hub except on
an intermittent basis. For a while Dingir tried to keep up pay-
ments  in  the  form of precious metals and gems,  but when the
third  of the treasure fleets carrying these payments failed to
return, these too were discontinued.
    On the other hand, the government at Dingir kept ruling "in
the  name  of  the  Emperor"  for  another  century and a half,
keeping  the  peace  and enforcing Rule of Man regulations.  It
collapsed  finally in -1690,  when a huge budget deficit forced
the government to decommision two thirds of the already decima-
ted  provincial  fleets  and  turn  over  the  rest  to various
individual planets and the Terran Mercantile Community (qv.).


TERRAN MERCANTILE COMMUNITY:  Loose trade association formed in
- -1862  by  Terra and her closest colonies, that later grew into
a corporation.  Ostensibly a purely commercial organisation, it
was  actually a means of circumventing Rule of Man prohibitions
against member planets having their own navies. The TMC built a
merchant  fleet  that  toed a very fine line between commercial
ships  and naval vessels.  The ships carried enough armament to
protect themselves from pirates and raiders,  but not enough to
classify them as naval vessels. Their merchant fleet made Terra
and her fellow worlds in the TMC a formidable commercial force.
    When  the Rule of Man in the form of the Rim Province (qv.)
collapsed in -1690, The Terran Mercantile Community had a space
fleet to patrol it's systems and to replace the now gone Second
Empire  fleets.  The TMC's merchant fleet cushioned the blow of
the  Long Night  and  made  it possible for Terra to survive in
relative comfort.
    The  TMC took over many of the functions of the Rule of Man
(though  abandoning the extreme edges of the old Rim Province),
but  were  careful at first not to assume the mantle of govern-
ment.  By  avoiding the appearance of ruling it avoided aliena-
ting  the other planets and driving them into forming their own
unions. Relying on the protection of the TMC ships were cheaper
than building their own,  and the TMC itself was careful not to
be percieved as a threat.
    For  several  centuries  the  TMC  managed to maintain this
delicate balance, but the steadily worsening commercial climate
eventually  forced them to retrench.  Like the Rim Province be-
fore  it,  the  TMC found the strain of protecting the furthest
worlds too much of a burden. Other Rule of Man successor states
in Dark Nebula, Alpha Crucis, Magyar and Reaver's Deep routine-
ly raided worlds on the fringe of the TMC sphere,  but although
this was a contributing strain,  it was not the primary factor.
The  Reaver's Era  (see Reaver's Deep)  ended before the end of
the TMC,  and Reaver attacks in any case concentrated on fringe
worlds  that  had  already  been  abandoned by the TMC and lost
interstellar  technology.  The  primary factor was economic de-
pression and a widespread trend toward isolationism,  causing a
shift to planetary self-reliance at the expense of interplanet-
ary trade.
    When  the  worlds  near  Easter  in -1112 formed the Easter
Concord  and  other  worlds  began talking of forming their own
unions,  the TMC decided to cut its losses. In -1110 the corpo-
ration formally transformed into the Old Earth Union,  abandon-
ing all worlds outside the Union to their own devices,  and be-
coming a small, tight group instead of a large, loose one.
    See also: Old Earth Union.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

Notes: The Rim Province is my invention (well, the name anyway.
I'm sure some such sub-division existed).



      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

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

End of TML Biweekly
******************
=END=
BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 422  4966 20-Nov-1992 Matthew D. Gold  Reprinting Old Traveller << wildstar@mo
 422  4967 20-Nov-1992 CS171308011@UTS  Silicon chips & Lift << Greetings folx,
 422  4968 20-Nov-1992 BARANSKI@VEAMF1  Geophysics << Hi Catie,
 422  4970 20-Nov-1992 gwh@lurnix.COM   Re: TML nightly: Msgs 4956-4960 V48#8
 422  4971 20-Nov-1992 "Steve Higginbo  stutterwarp again... << Corran J. Webst
 422  4972 20-Nov-1992 Martyn J. Wheel  When nukes are outlawed, will only outl
 422  4973 21-Nov-1992 Hans Rancke-Mad  TNE << Corran J. Webster writes:
 422  4974 21-Nov-1992 Theresa Verity   Original Traveller stuff... <<    I too
 422  4975 21-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Virus, Geology, and Oops! << Hans Ranck
 422  4976 22-Nov-1992 Bertil Jonell    Starport Economics and the Fall of the
 422  4977 22-Nov-1992 "Steve Higginbo  yard capacities and Hard Times << Berti
 422  4978 23-Nov-1992 "Bruce Pihlamae  StutterWarp and other stuff << Derek Wi
 422  4969 20-Nov-1992 Corran J. Webst  World Composition and TNE << Hi again,

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

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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4966
Subject: Reprinting Old Traveller
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 9:07:49 CST
From: goldman@orac.cray.com (Matthew D. Goldman)
Reply-To: goldman@orac.cray.com

wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar) writes:
> I'd like to see all of Classic Traveller collected, re-edited, and
> re-printed.  Heck, I'd even do it myself, if I could get permission
> from all those involved (hint! hint!).  I have some experience
> through my job with book-on-demand publishing; and this sort of
> reprint work seems like a perfect application.  Using book-on-demand,
> I believe that I could manage to pay a reasonable royalty, make a
> small profit, and keep the final cost under control.  The only
> drawback would be that book-on-demand is not compatible with the
> way that most book and game distributors work; such reprints would
> probably be available only as mail-order.  This may be a feature, not
> a bug; it would prevent the reprints from competing directly with TNE.

Well, I'd pick them up!  In the same note, a friend of mine said that
if she ever won the lottery, she'd try to buy the rights to traveller,
so that she could get new copies of her old stuff.


Corran J. Webster <cwebster@math.ucla.edu> writes:
> World/System Generation
>     By far the most useful way of presenting data about worlds (from
> a game point of view) was the 1-page format in Knightfall and the
> various DGP products, although the system maps were wasteful of space.

I like the system maps.  I have a group of players who try to pick
where they are going to end up in the destination system.  It takes
them longer to get to jump, but it makes them happy.

I think that having lots of information can be really fun.  My players
became really conserned about a planet that was listed in the data
sheets, printed on the large sector overview map, but not shown on
the subsector map. (1706 Spinward Marches, Alell fyi)  Since Efate has
an Imperial waystation,  they found trouble.  They like information,
the more they get the happier they are.

Matt

- --
Matthew Goldman              E-mail: goldman@orac.cray.com
Fax: (612) 683-3099                   Work: (612) 683-3061
      "Say George, I don't mean to interrupt, but
       there's a glowing red dot on your forehead."

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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4967
Date:    Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:18:45 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: Silicon chips & Lift

Greetings folx,

A couple points:
Hans points out that the obvious defence to the silicon
predators viruses is have non silicon chips.

Well, guess what?  He's absolutely right.
As a matter of fact, I'd say a computer with silicon chips may
be common now, but supercomputers, (especially ones in the future)
will use silicon as the EXCEPTION not the rule.

Silicon as a semiconductor, is NOT the way to go.  I may not be
up on computer architecture, but don't most supercomputers use
Gallium Arsinide chips now?

Admittedly, Gallium Arsinide has nasty problems, as a semiconductor
(requires liquid nitrogen cooling)  But the next generation of
semiconductors will be Silicon Carbide.  Silicon Carbide chips will
be faster, more radiation hard, and will withstand temperatures
that will fry a silicon chip.

The step after Silicon Carbide will be Diamond semi-conductors.
Diamond is an EXCELLENT semiconductor:  Ideal for computer
applications.  Fast, Radiation hard, TOUGH, and it can function
as a semiconductor under the tip of an acytlene torch.  (A couple
thousand degrees :-)

They estimate diamond semiconductors will be available in less than
ten years.  Probably less than 5.

Believe me, having traveller computers on silicon chips is kinda like
saying the starships are powered by fuel injected V-8 engines.  If
That were the case, then Lucan's supervirus should eat all the
petrochemicals in the galaxy and everybody waits forever at the gas
pumps...  :-)

---
Wildstar talked a bit about starships flying with lift:
Nope.  Won't work.

Why?  Wing loading.

The average scoutship weighs in at 1000 + metric tons.  I don't have my
books with me, but I believe thats around twice the weight of a fully
loaded B-52.  Yet it has about the same wing area of an F-4 Phantom.
Will it fly?  No.  It just can't get enough lift from air alone.  You
have to have some thrust from the engines to keep it up.

Otherwise it's natural stall speed will be somewhere in the hypersonic
region, and it will have the glide angle of a crowbar.  :-)

Other than that, yer right (as far as I know)  :-)

2G Scott

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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4968
Date:    Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:10:59 -0500 (EST)
From: BARANSKI@VEAMF1.NUSC.NAVY.MIL
Subject: Geophysics

Hi Catie,

That was a *very* informative message on planetary development!

A few questions...

Can you run through a similiar scenario for a Gas Giant?  How does a Gas Giant
elvolve without a heavy core?

Does Venus have higher or lower proportions of iron/nickel, silicon oxides, &
sulfur oxides?  My understanding is that Venus does have plenty of sulfur
oxides, but I'm not sure about silicon oxides.  With all this and CO, it seems
that Venus has all the basic building blocks of life, except maybe H???

The difference in Venus I assume, is that the temperature is so hot that O2 is
not stable, it quickly combines with C, Su, or Si.  Since there are no plants
to create O2 it must have anaerobic life if any, like a few of Earths
microorganisms.  If you could cool venus off, and seed some plants, you could
break up to CO, and create O2 and C-?.  does Fe, Ni, Si, or Su combine readily
with C? You really need that H for life, or are there alternatives?  H is such
an adaptable little bugger, you can stick it in anywhere.  If you have the C, H
& O (sounds like a railroad!), you've got it made.

What then happens to the remaining Fe, Ni, Si & Su?  Well, on Earth most of the
Fe/Ni is in the core, and what little is left doesn't bother most people.  We
have plenty of SiO silica lying around, and that's ok.  I don't know about the
Su, though, Sulfa is a pretty antiseptic compound, right?  Su+C+H+O are all
those smelly compounds, right?

Iron is the heaviest common element because Solar Fusion stops at Iron, right?
Where are the other elements O, Si, Su, Ni, C in the Solar Fusion Sequence?
I know that H is at the beginning :-)  I know that super heavy elements come
from novas and super novas, but where are the other micellaneous elements
created?

As the different weights of elements are seperated in a planets crust, with
Fe/Ni on the bottom or core, then the Si, then the Su, and Gases, aren't the
elements also seperated to some extent solar-ly?  Ie heaviest elements toward
the sun, lighter elements out toward the gas giants?  Then how does the star
get all it's H fuel?  Is this why Venus doesn't have enough H?  Or is it
chance?

What would Earth's temperature be in Venus's orbit?

What's wrong with Mars?  Is it because it's core is dead, or because it's too
light, or is it missing some element?

You mentioned that planetary cores get their heat from radioactive elements;  I
had always thought that it was from gravity.

How does the satellites of Gas Giants hang onto their heavy elements, and keep
them from being sucked up by the gas giants?

How are planets/satellites formed, anyway?  I know some chunks get sucked into
orbit, but can a satellite acreete in orbit.  I guess that matter condenses
into given orbits just like planets, but that would give you a ring, more or
less, rather then a discrete body.  Or do certain points attract the matter
like lagrange points?  Or do chunks scoop up the rest of the matter in the
orbit as it goes around?  But then aren't all the stuff in an orbit tavelling
at the same speed by definition?

Is the sun mostly H & He, or does it have a lot of the heavier elements too?
Perhaps a forming sun collects all elements, but then centrifuges off the
heavier ones, which then fall into different orbits and form planets?

Sorry about all the dumb disorganized questions, but I had a lot of them, and
not a lot of time to spit them out...

Jim Baranski

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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4970
Subject: Re: TML nightly: Msgs 4956-4960 V48#8
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:23:12 -0800
From: gwh@lurnix.COM


[I'm sure everyone else will mention this too, but ... 8-) ]
Wildstar mentions that 100 sec of 30G accelleration are 150km
displacement and 3 km/s delta-V.  That's really 30 km/s
and 1500 km.  100 sec of 3G accelleration are a good single stage
burn in a today-existent orbital launch vehicle, getting
you about 1/3 of the way there. 8-)

- -george


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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4971
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 20:06:29 -0600
From: "Steve Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: stutterwarp again...

Corran J. Webster:

>Stutterwarp in the Imperium
>    Why not? But if it is going to be introduced into the Imperium without
>making massive changes to the flavour of the universe it should not out-
>perform the jump drive.

>    Why not have it merely as a superior form of m-drive? This would solve the
>problem that was mentioned of trying to get the 2300AD starship combat system
>without the massive effect on the imperial universe.

There is a problem with this idea:  piracy.  Piracy is an idea well loved
by GDW and most Traveller GMs, and stutterwarp will do bad things to it.
Consider that, even with no FTL, a stutterwarp ship can reach the 100-
diameter limit in about three minutes.  This is going to make it EXTREMELY
difficult for pirates to make a (dis)honest living.  After all, even if their
ships are stutterwarp as well, that still leaves them only three minutes to
detect, close to weapon range, and disable a target before it jumps away.
And assuming the pirate was a miracle worker who could DO this, then he finds
himself only three minutes from the nearest Naval vessel in orbit around the
world his target just left.  So now he has to LOOT the ship within three
minutes, after defeating it in a fight within three minutes.

Sounds tough...


Steve



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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4972
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 23:05:04 -0500
From: Martyn J. Wheeler <sasmjw@unx.sas.com>
Subject: When nukes are outlawed, will only outlaws have nukes?

Thank you, Wildstar, for all the info on using regular shipboard
missiles against ground targets.  I am sure it will come in very
useful...

Wildstar goes on to say:
>I don't know about your campaign, but in mine, any ship which had nuclear
>anti-ship munitions on board is hardly an "average merchant ship".  The best
>designation they could hope for would be "privateer", with "pirate",
>"corsair", and even "terrorist" and "criminal" being strong possibilities.

Yes, I'd agree.  It is the case, however, that the "Anastasia,"
registered at Spirelle as a Merchant Cruiser, does have quite a large
nuclear arsenal on board.  The missiles were in the magazine when they
found the ship, and thanks to some clever fraternising with the Scout
Base the vessel was not inspected in detail when they registered it
under salvage law.  Since then, the ship has been used about
half-and-half for speculative merchant trading and for deep military
reconnaisance; in spirit, though, it is definitely being run as a free
trader.
    (Actually, the ship was the original Kinunir, upgraded to fit MT
design rules.  This makes it 2kt displacement, with some high-tech
stuff in engineering, including some really funky jump drives.  It had
crash-landed on Spirelle some 30 years ago, and the characters ran
into it while vacationing at a posh resort.  Baling out of a stricken
scout/courier at several thousand feet was not their idea of a
vacation, however...)
    They have never used nukes inside the Imperium (very wise!),
although they have launched quite a few in the year and a half they
have been outside its boundaries.  As I recall, being good Imperial
citizens, they used conventional missiles until nukes were used
against them first.  They did use a few salvos against enemy ground
forces when they rescued some stranded marines, but as it was a
parting shot on the way out of orbit the detailed effects were not too
important at the time.  They do have a good Forward Observer in the
crew.
    Mild efforts to obtain replacement missiles have failed so far,
but since they only have two of the four missile turrets operational
(and those are patched heavily after a very brief encounter with a
50kt battleship) they are not really running out yet.  Now that they
are intending to return to the Imperium for at least a visit, they
will have less opportunity to use them anyway.  They are actually far
more concerned with keeping the jump drives together, as the annual
maintenance is long overdue and there are no suitable shipyards in
this backward area.  They do, however, seem to be considering coming
back out here later on...

(Sometime I might consider uploading the log of my campaign, which has
just completed 2 game years -- the last session covered the New Years
Eve party as they welcomed in 1119 (long live Strephon!).  Some of you
might be interested.)

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

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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4973
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: TNE
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 16:04:42 MET

Corran J. Webster writes:
>Now for the virus story:
>Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>writes:
>>[In reply to Corran:]
>>>   The Virus is going to make technological advance extremely difficult
>>>in affected areas, however, so that recovery may well be not possible -
>>>every time that a civilisation gets to TL 7 or so, it will almost
>>>surely start using silicon chips,
>>
>>What's the bet that someone will develop a non-silicon chip before
>>the Cymberline predator has been on the scene 10 years?
>
>Yes, but you seem to have missed the point: is such a substitute going
>to be accessible to a TL7 or 8 world?

Are we talking likelihood or concevability here? I'd certainly accept
it if GDW decreed that no medium-TL substitute for silicon chips is
possible, but it'll be an acceptance based on "what's good for the game"
not on what I consider likely. Remember that there's a huge difference
between "discovery on Earth TL" and true TL. Some time ago I was
watching an interwiev with a research scientist at RISO, the Danish
atomic research center. I _think_ he was talking about bucky-balls,
but I may misremember. In any case it was some brand-new interesting
discovery. And I remember that at one point he said that they were making
these thingamajigs using machines that could haver been build in the
thirties if the knowledge had been there.

The concept that given the need human scientists couldn't come up with
an adequate TL 7 substitute for silicon chips seems to me about as
likely as the flat galaxy bit.

>Indeed I think I mentioned that
>I would be surprised if your average TL15 ship's computer used silicon
>chips. The point still remains: unless the virus is not much of a
>threat, there is not going to be any easy way for a world to develop
>to TL9 and get interstellar travel (or if they do, it won't be long
>before the virus finds them and eats all their electronics).

I disagree. But one could easily imagine that any substitute would be
bulkier and more expensive, so interstellar travel could very well
become uneconomic.

>>>[Deneb then helps]
>>>the Aslan Heirate (in exchange for the Ihatei to stop their
>attacks),
>>
>>The ihatei isn't even a real threat without the virus. With the Aslans
>>plagued by the Virus and Deneb controlling virus-free, stutterwarp ships
>>there's only one way the Aslans are going to get any: As loyal vassals
>>of Archduke Norris.
>
>True, you have a valid point here.
>
>Then again, there is probably no way that Deneb could even contemplate
>conquest of the Aslan Hierate (especially if they have had major
>problems with virus incursions), just like they could not contemplate
>annexing the Zhodani.

No, but they could sure clean up the Aslans' act on their side of the
Great Rift.

>Admittedly, in the long run the Heirate is defenseless against Deneb,
>but I s'pose that once it is known that stutterwarp is possible, the
>Aslan & Zhodani may well develop it fairly rapidly.

That's true enough.



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

                        ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir

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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4974
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 09:29:35 -0500
From: Theresa Verity <uwfgamer%uwf.bitnet@utcs.utoronto.ca>
Subject:      Original Traveller stuff...

   I too would love to see some of the original Traveller stuff come
out again (maybe GDW could re-calibrate some of the adventures to the
new system and storyline)..  I've been collecting old Traveller stuff
for about a year now (I came into Traveller around 1985 when a high
school history teacher ran his own hybrid version, and got seriously
into it when MegaTrav hit the shelves), and have found some books I
had never heard of...
   I'm asking for some assistance in finding the books I do not have
and would like to know of any others printed by: Paranoia Press,
GDW and Digest Group Pubs...
   Here's what I have so far:
Book 1 (x3), Book 2 (x2), Book 3, Book 4 (x3), Book 5 (x2), Book 7,
Book 8, Supplement 1, Supplement 2 (x2), Supplement 3, Supplement 7,
Double Adv 1, Double Adv 2, Double Adv 4, Double Adv 6, Adventure 2,
Adventure 3, Adventure 5, Adventure 9, Adventure 13, the Traveller
books all in a hardbound edition, Traveller Rules Bookslet, Traveller
Charts and Tables, The Traveller Adventure Vol 2, Traveller Alien
Module 3 (Vargr) and Traveller Alien Module 5 (Droyne)...  Plus some
old Judge's Guild stuff and a Paranoia Press publication...

  I'm wanting to definitely find these: other Traveller Adventure
tomes (Vol 1 and any others other than Vol 2); Volume 1 has a blue
boarder and should be around 150 pages.  Other Traveller Alien Mods.
Plus, I'd like to find for MegaTraveller: the Worldbook (mine was
sold out from under me by a local store)...

  Other books are desired, but the above listed are the ones I REALLY
want to have...

   Theresa Verity
   GDW Demo Team member

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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4975
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 11:01:13 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Virus, Geology, and Oops!

Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> writes:
> What's the bet that someone will develop a non-silicon chip before the
> Cymberline predator has been on the scene 10 years?

Definitely.  Presumably the Imperium continued to use silicon because the
available alternatives were more expensive and more difficult to use.
Therefore, a "virus-proof" computer would probably be larger, more
expensive, and be produced in fewer numbers, than computers were during the
days of the Imperium.


helm@geology.ucdavis.edu (Catie Helm) writes:
> Overall, I think Corran's idea of UPPs for planets is a good one.  I'd
> like to see something like it for Traveller.

If changes like this are made, I'd like to see the whole UPP and world
generation rules re-designed, instead of trying to "retro-fit" it into the
current codes.

What do you think of codes for World Type (indicates core type and general
density range), World Size (as in the current system), Atmosphere Type (type
of gas mix) and Atmosphere Density (pressure).  Some attempts at coding are
listed below (I'm way outta my field here, so go ahead and flame me):

World Type:
0 = Rubble (small rock, iron, or ice chunks)
1 = Ice Asteroids (asteroids with high ice, low rock and metal content)
2 = Rock Asteroids
3 = Metal (Iron) Asteroids
4 = Low-Density Planet (under about 3 g/cc; typical of moons)
5 = Average-Density Planet (3-5 g/cc)
6 = High-Density Planet (over 5 g/cc)

World Size (maybe finally convert this to thousands of kilometers rather
than thousands of miles?)

Atmosphere Type (by primary gas in mix):
0 = No Atmosphere
1 = Carbon Dioxide
2 = Carbon Dioxide w/ "Taint"
3 = Oxygen-Nitrogen
4 = Oxygen-Nitrogen w/ "Taint"
5 = Exotic
6 = Exotic w/ "Taint"
7 = Corrosive
8 = Insidous

In the above "Taint" indicates the presence of something which requres
caution beyond the normal for that atmosphere type; an irritant, mild
pathogen, or some other such problem.  A world comfortable tempratures and a
1atm Carbon Dioxide atmosphere should require only an oxygen mask.  Such a
world with a "Taint" might require a face mask or an environment suit to
protect visitors.


Recently, I wrote:
> ... in the case of a 6g combat ship, 100 seconds of 30g accelleration
> means a displacement of 150km (and a velocity vector change of 3km/s)!

Somehow, I managed to drop a factor of 10 there (see what I get for writing
when I should be sleeping).  That should be 1,500km and 30km/sec.  I hate it
when I do that!

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


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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4976
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Starport Economics and the Fall of the Imperium
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 12:28:40 +0100 (MET)

  Using TCS (my thanks to Wildstar and Steve and Cynthia) and some basic
assumptions about salaries, profits and costs, I have done some thinking
about starport/shipyard economics that suddenly yielded one surprising
mechanism.

  Assuming a static total tonnage in the Imperium, the shipyards must divide
their space into doing the yearly overhaul and building ships to replace those
who go away (through age or destruction).

  The yearly overhauls do not require that large a contingent of labour, so it
can accept a normal 25% vacancy, the breakeven is at 45% vacancy. Construction
(and repair) on the other hand is very sensitive to slumps and the breakeven
occurs at around 20% to 25% vacancy, and to give the same percentage of profit
it need a practically 0% of vacancy. This is easily accomplished through
building small crafts for sale when a vacancy appears. Construction, while
riskier, will however give much larger profits per ton of shipyard capacity
than overhauls.

  Repairs have the same demands in labour as construction and gives a profit
in between of construction and overhauls. I assume that repairs take place on
the 25% of overhaul space that normally is available.

  Now, imagine the rebellion: Not only will the naval fleets require repairs
in large numbers, but the targetting of commercial shipping and general
raiding will drive the demand for repairs through the roof.
  Since repairs are more profitous than overhauls, these repairs will steal
space from overhauls. All shipyards will hire like crazy to keep up. And ships
will have to go without overhaul. The places they can get overhaul on are
limited to same or higher TL and type A starport (repairs can be done on other
places) so they can't go somewhere else.
  When large numbers of ships go without overhaul, they will start breaking
down partially or catastrophically which further raises the demand for
repairs and lowers the availability of overhaul.

  The repairs will lessen the profitability of interstellar trade enough to
drive most operators out of business, and many ships are lost though the
catastrophic malfunctions.
  One might think that it would stabilize somehwere, since when the number of
ships goes down, the demand for repairs go down and the availability of
overhaul go up. But since repairs require more labour than overhaul huge
numbers will be laid off, at the same time as the economic winds down due to
lack of shipping.

  It is possible that this is enough to break the economy totally.

- -bertil-
- --
"Ack! Phht!" - Bill the Prez

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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4977
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 15:39:24 -0600
From: "Steve Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: yard capacities and Hard Times

Bertil:

>  Assuming a static total tonnage in the Imperium, the shipyards must
>divide their space into doing the yearly overhaul and building ships to
>replace those who go away (through age or destruction).

>  The yearly overhauls do not require that large a contingent of
>labour, so it can accept a normal 25% vacancy, the breakeven is at 45%
>vacancy. Construction (and repair) on the other hand is very sensitive
>to slumps and the breakeven occurs at around 20% to 25% vacancy, and to
>give the same percentage of profit it need a practically 0% of vacancy.
>This is easily accomplished through building small crafts for sale when
>a vacancy appears. Construction, while riskier, will however give much
>larger profits per ton of shipyard capacity than overhauls.

I'm not sure where you get your vacancy guestimates here, but:

Trin, Rhylanor, Mora, and Glisten can between them, maintain just over
1,000,000,000T of shipping, either merchant or miitary.  When the
economy shifts to wartime levels, that will jump to 1,200,000,000T of
shipping.  Given TCS rules on repairs, maintenance, whatnot, those yards
could maintain 400,000,000T PLUS of shipping, and repair every one of
them once EVERY year.  Given that their military strength starts at no
more than 250,000,000 (which is a reasonable estimate given TCS rules),
then those four worlds, by themselves, could support 150,000,000T of
merchantmen, and keep up with repairs on EVERY ship in their fleets.
Every year.  These four worlds, BTW, amount to about 25% of the Imperial
yard space in the Spinward Marches.  So the Marches should reasonably be
able to support 600,000,000T of merchant ships, even during normal
wartime.  Without bothering to expand capacity beyond normal levels.

And the Spinward Marches is a backwater.  The Solomani Rim can support
ten times that level of shipping.  Until things have reached the point
that most ships have a useful lifespan of less than two years, the yard
space available shouldn't have any meaningful effect on the available
forces.

BTW, in my TCS game, after seven battles, involving perhaps 5000 ships
total, only two yards in the Islands are full.  And neither of them was
involved in the battles.  The ships damaged in combat seldom filled the
yards up for more than a week or two, and only one power felt the need
to discontinue his ship-building program while he repaired battle
damage.  And in his case, it wasn't that he had so many ships damaged,
he had his yards blown away.  And a year later, his yards are still only
operating at half capacity, and are still big enough that he has yard
space available to build ships for his allies...

 ---Steve


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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4978
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 11:08:20 +1100
From: "Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au>
Subject: StutterWarp and other stuff

Derek Wildstar writes:
>Corran J. Webster <cwebster@math.ucla.edu> writes:
>>   Indeed, why does it [stutterwarp] need to be FTL?
>
>It doesn't; if carefully done, a "slow" stutterwarp will work; it can be
>limited to sublight speeds, or to FTL speeds that are far below that of
>jump drives.  As a first cut, try dividing the speeds generated by Star
>Cruiser or 2300AD by 10 and see what happens.

You can attack this from both ends.
  - Fudge StutterWarp to be less powerful, AND/OR
  - Change the TRAVELLER JUMP scale from 1 hex=1 parsec to 1 hex=10 parsecs.
    (I don't think that such a change would cause too much trouble and
     it could open up the rest of the universe for 3D exploration)


Brad writes:
>In the design sequence, it is assumed that a vessel will have to defeat
>  1G of gravity in order to begin moving.  Basically, this ignores
>  the concepts of aerodynamics.  For vertical take off and landing,
>  a craft is capable of doing without a 1+ G of acceleration.
>  This is what taxiing was developed to avoid, and means that
>  anyone trying to design a grav-bike or other vessel doesn't have
>  to use so much power to produce thrust, thus producing cheaper
>  and smaller vessels.

I believe that this was addressed in GURPS SPACE but I don't have the
book with me.  They gave a streamlined ship (ie lifting surfaces) some %
bonus on G rating so a less than 1G rated drive could lift from a 1G
planet.

Actually, GURPS SPACE sounds a lot like what GDW are trying to write.
A generic TRAVELLER rule set that can be used in any space game/universe.


Steve writes:
>>    Why not have it merely as a superior form of m-drive? This would solve the
>>problem that was mentioned of trying to get the 2300AD starship combat system
>>without the massive effect on the imperial universe.
>
>There is a problem with this idea:  piracy.  Piracy is an idea well loved
>by GDW and most Traveller GMs, and stutterwarp will do bad things to it.
>Consider that, even with no FTL, a stutterwarp ship can reach the 100-
>diameter limit in about three minutes.  This is going to make it EXTREMELY
>difficult for pirates to make a (dis)honest living.  After all, even if their
>ships are stutterwarp as well, that still leaves them only three minutes to
>detect, close to weapon range, and disable a target before it jumps away.
>And assuming the pirate was a miracle worker who could DO this, then he finds
>himself only three minutes from the nearest Naval vessel in orbit around the
>world his target just left.  So now he has to LOOT the ship within three
>minutes, after defeating it in a fight within three minutes.

The simplest solution to this would be to slow down StutterWarp in-system
and change the 100 diameter rule to 1,000.  You could really complicate
this by having StutterWarp not work at all within a certain range of a
planet and force use of standard TRAVELLER in-system drives.

Come to think of it, you will need them anyway because (someone said earlier)
StutterWarp doesn't alter your basic real-space speed and vector so you will
need some way to match velocity and vector with any planet you want to visit.
Would someone with the StutterWarp rules care to check how they currently do
this.

The more I try to convince myself that StutterWarp can fit into TRAVELLER
the more I find myself shaking my head and wondering why we should bother
fudging both systems to make them fit together.

Put simply, StutterWarp is designed for 3D flits from system to system and
it has a 2D in-system battle format that everyone seems to like; while JUMP
Drive is a 2D inter-system transport mode with limitted in-system combat
mechanics which people would like to see improved.

Perhaps something completely new is needed which combines the good points of
both systems in one (?) Drive which won't significantly conflict with how we
have been role playing these items.

JUMP Drive seems fine the way it is but the in-system stuff should be tuned
to work like StutterWarp Combat does but not with StutterWarp Drives.  Simply
introduce an in-system combat system that uses the TRAVELLER in-system Drives
with the same basic mechanics as the StutterWarp system while maintaining
appropriate scales.  Personally, I don't like having to use energy beams
on _all_ combat.  I prefer to have a nice meaty missile hit rather than some
arcade style mind-in-the-missile shoot-em-up with lasers or det-missiles.

Also, from what I've heard about the ship design system for 2300AD they've
already designed themselves into a corner with their 0-9 screens and
armour already being at maximum for some Kafer ships; where do you go from
there.

That's enough from me, catch you later.

Bruce...       pihlab@hhcs.gov.au


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

Bundle: 422
Archive-Message-Number: 4969
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 09:42:15 -0800
From: Corran J. Webster <cwebster@math.ucla.edu>
Subject: World Composition and TNE

Hi again,

Well, I seem to have got some response to my posting...

Catie Helm(helm@geology.ucdavis.edu) writes:
> Now about Corran's proposed UPP scale, based mostly on planetary
> composition, which translated to rocks, solid cores, molten cores,
> etc.

I actually stole these classifications from the World Builders'
Handbook by DGP, in a vague attempt to fit in with some previously
published information. The World Builders' Handbook basically uses
these to split planets up into density categories:
Icy body = 0.18 to 0.48 earths
Rocky Body = 0.50 to 0.80 earths
Molten Core = 0.82 to 1.12 earths
Heavy Core = 1.10 to 2.25 earths

OK, let's try discarding the idea of whether or not the core is molten
or not, and just stick with categories such as "Icy body", and three
grades of Rocky bodies: "Light", "Medium" and "Heavy". I'm pretty sure
it doesn't matter to the average player whether or not the core is
currently molten. Actually I'll take that back - molten cores and so
forth would probably affect the existence of magnetic fields,
radiation belts, volcanic action (expert opinions welcome :-), so it
probably would affect things. In fact I suppose a "molten core" icy
body could be an icy body with liquid underneath a crust of ice (I
think Europa is thought to be like this?). Nevertheless gravity and
atmosphere are far more fundamental...

One thing I'm unsure about is where a moon like Io fits into the
scheme of things: it's certainly not icy, does it have a rocky core?
what's it's density? Should the "icy body" category contain strange
bodies like Io?

OK, so now we can work out the approximate atmospheric pressure:
assume that icy bodies have a density of 1/3 of that of earth (an
over-estimate?), light rocky bodies have a density of 2/3, medium
rocky bodies have a density of 1  and heavy rocky bodies have a
density of 4/3. Then the formula is:

density*size/8

(which incidentally is also the surface gravity). In terms of the
original traveller atmosphere densities (vacuum: 0 atm, trace: 0 -
0.09 atm, v. thin: 0.10 - 0.42, thin: 0.43 - 0.70, std 0.71 - 1.49,
dense: 1.50 - 2.49) we have:

                                size
            0/S 1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   A
d   "icy"   vac tr  tr  vt  vt  vt  vt  vt  vt  vt  th
e   light   vac tr  vt  vt  vt  th  th  th  th  st  st
n   medium  vac vt  vt  vt  th  th  st  st  st  st  st
s   heavy   vac vt  vt  th  th  st  st  st  st  de  de

Consequences:
Much fewer worlds with _no_ atmosphere, much more with very thin
atmospheres, fewer worlds with dense atmospheres, and probably fewer
with standard atmospheres. It also gets rid of my original gripe about
small worlds with normal atmospheres.

Problem:
I notice that the Moon (size 2, density light) and mercury (size 3,
density medium) should have very thin atmosphere (Moon: atm pressure
approx 0.16). This seems too high (according to the rules you could
breathe on the moon with the aid of a compressor)... I suspect it is a
problem with the pressure = gravity approximation.

Perhaps larger world sizes should be allowed?

Solution:
Modifiers: If the world is in the inner or habital zones and has a
size of 0,S,1,2,3, then decrease the atm type by one (eg. th -> vt ->
tr -> vac), which solves the problem of Mercury and the Moon.

Any other suggestions, folks?

Right, so then there's only atmospheric composition left, and that can
be summarised into the following categories:
OK to breathe:Standard 02/N2 type mix
Bad news to breathe:Tainted 02/N2 type mix
Really bad news to breathe:Exotic
Wear your protective gear:Irritant, Corrosive, Insidious

Finally there are the weird ones: D (dense, high), E (ellipsoid), F
(thin, low). These are really atmospheric pressure considerations, (in
fact ellipsoid is really a planetary _shape_ consideration). So there
are 2 choices here:

If you want good compatability with the previous traveller system,
then consider the following:

Composition  Density  Atmosphere
     0       Icy      Exotic, Irritant or Corrosive
     1       Icy      Standard
     2       Icy      Tainted
     3       Light    Exotic, Irritant or Corrosive
     4       Light    Tainted
     5       Light    Standard
     6       Medium   Standard
     7       Medium   Tainted
     8       Heavy    Standard
     9       Heavy    Tainted
     A       Medium   Exotic, Irritant or Corrosive
     B       Heavy    Exotic, Irritant or Corrosive
     C       Heavy    Insidious
     D       Heavy    Dense, High
     E       Medium   Ellipsoid*
     F       Light    Thin, Low

* or maybe Insidious if you don't mind incompatibility.

If you need to know whether a given atmosphere is exotic, irritant or
corrosive, then roll 1D: 1-3 Exotic, 4 Irritant, 5-6 Corrosive.

The only real difference here is that 3 goes from very thin to
exotic/corrosive, so concievably a large world could be having its
effective atmosphere type changed from 3 to A or B under the old
system, however the atmosphere density will only change from 3 to 4 or
5.

All in all, I think it should work OK.

Now for the virus story:
Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> writes:
>>    The Virus is going to make technological advance extremely
difficult in
>>affected areas, however, so that recovery may well be not possible -
every
>>time that a civilisation gets to TL 7 or so, it will almost surely
start
>>using silicon chips,
>
>What's the bet that someone will develop a non-silicon chip before
the
>Cymberline predator has been on the scene 10 years?

Yes, but you seem to have missed the point: is such a substitute going
to be accessible to a TL7 or 8 world? Indeed I think I mentioned that
I would be surprised if your average TL15 ship's computer used silicon
chips. The point still remains: unless the virus is not much of a
threat, there is not going to be any easy way for a world to develop
to TL9 and get interstellar travel (or if they do, it won't be long
before the virus finds them and eats all their electronics).

>
>>    Realising the military potential of this discovery for the
Domain of
>>Deneb, the development of stutterwarp drive ships are fast-tracked
and the
>>problems with the electronics surmounted by new (and incidentally
Virus-
>>proof) technologies. By the time the Domain of Deneb is threatened
by the
>>Virus a small squadron of fighting ships is ready. This handful of
ships
>>then defeats a Virus Armada coming through Corridor.
>
>> [Deneb then helps]
>>the Aslan Heirate (in exchange for the Ihatei to stop their
attacks),
>
>The ihatei isn't even a real threat without the virus. With the
Aslans
>plagued by the Virus and Deneb controlling virus-free, stutterwarp
ships
>there's only one way the Aslans are going to get any: As loyal
vassals
>of Archduke Norris.

True, you have a valid point here.

Then again, there is probably no way that Deneb could even contemplate
conquest of the Aslan Heirate (especially if they have had major
problems with virus incursions), just like they could not contemplate
annexing the Zhodani. In addition, the Domain seems to be
non-expansionist. I can see that a hard-pressed Deneb might reach some
sort of agreement with the Aslan (after all, the Domain is really only
fighting the ihatei, not the Heirate itself).

Admittedly, in the long run the Heirate is defenseless against Deneb,
but I s'pose that once it is known that stutterwarp is possible, the
Aslan & Zhodani may well develop it fairly rapidly.

- -or-

Maybe the Hivers help out the Aslan.

Or sell the stutterwarp to them after Deneb has defeated the virus...

Any other suggestions?

It's late. I'd better stop this. 8-)

See ya 'round
Corran Webster
cwebster@math.ucla.edu


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

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

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 423  4979 22-Nov-1992 LTG3878@ZEUS.TA  Piracay, Stutterwarp, & TNE.  A respons
 423  4980 22-Nov-1992 "Steve Higginbo  Stutterwarp and traveller.... << Bruce
 423  4981 22-Nov-1992 GT0171@SIUCVMB.  California Dreaming... <<    Hi there!
 423  4982 23-Nov-1992 Adrian Hurt      Thrust, and non-silicon chips << "Does
 423  4983 23-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Port Generator (2nd Edition) << Submitt
 423  4984 24-Nov-1992 George William   Re: 100 diameter limits << Steve Higgin
 423  4985 25-Nov-1992 "Bruce Pihlamae  40 years on << >40 years later the firs
 423  4986 24-Nov-1992 Seth the Lesser  100-diameter limit, re-re-revisited <<

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

Bundle: 423
Archive-Message-Number: 4979
Date:    Sun, 22 Nov 1992 19:10:23 -0600 (CST)
From: LTG3878@ZEUS.TAMU.EDU
Subject: Piracay, Stutterwarp, & TNE.  A response to Steve Higgenbotham

In his most recent posting, Steve Higgenbotham makes the complaint that
Stutterwarp, if introduced into Traveller:  The New Era, would eliminate
piracy.  Obviously, if the 100 diameter limit is kept in the game, this is
true.  A ship can travel to 100 dimeters of even the largest primary star
in a few minutes using a Stutterwarp drive.  This will hinder piracy, as
the response time of any system patrol craft will be so fast as to leave too
little time for plunder.  My solution:  away with the 100 diameter limit.

The 100 diameter rule is an aspect of TravPhysics only, a creation for game
purposes, to make the travel time to jump point about 3 days for the most
common (1G) craft.  The TravPhysics argument is that only at this range is
gravity weak enough to allow a safe jump.  But, why 100 diameters, as opposed
to say 1000 diameters, or 10,000 diameters?  In Traveller/MT, it takes far too
long to travel this far on even 6G.  But in TNE, even an emasculated Stutterwarp
can travel to 1000 diameters in less than three days.  I suggest that the
diameter limit be explicitly set so that a ship equipped with the most common
type of Stutterwarp drive takes about three days to travel that distance.

This would allow us to have our Stutterwarp and Piracy too.  So, maybe the
diameter limit has increased by a couple of orders of magnitude.  Like it
really matters.  This can even be worked into the MT/2300AD background, like
so:

There was an article in the Journal of the Traveller's Aid Society several
years ago, in which Marc Miller suggested that nothing was known about Jump
Drive physics in our era because a society could not begin to do the proper
research until it had set up permanent bases beyond 100 diameters from its
primary star.  In the case of the Terrans, this meant not until they had
developed bases in the Asteroid Belt.

In Traveller:  The New Era, this becomes:  Nothing was known about Jump
Drive physics in our era because a society could not begin to do the proper
research until it had set up permanent bases beyond N diameters from its
primary star.  In the case of the Terrans, this meant not until they had
developed deep space bases beyond the orbit of Pluto.  (I assume hear that
N will be quite large, placing any ships attempting to jump in deep space).

The best thing about this retcon, is that it leaves things largely unchanged.
Travel time from port to jump-point will be unchanged.  Travel time from
port to gas-giant will be much shorter, but travel time from gas-giant to
jump-point should be approximately the same, perhaps a bit longer.  Travel
between planets in a system will be much shorter, but the most common form
of travel in Classic Trav is interplanetary, the time for which should
remain unchanged.

And finally, it will make piracy a realistic option.  Pirates will be able
to lurk in deep space, waiting for the unsuspecting merchant ship, and then
pow!

Lewis Taylor Goss

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

Bundle: 423
Archive-Message-Number: 4980
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 22:26:33 -0600
From: "Steve Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: Stutterwarp and traveller....

Bruce Pihlamae:

>The simplest solution to this would be to slow down StutterWarp
>in-system and change the 100 diameter rule to 1,000.  You could really
>complicate this by having StutterWarp not work at all within a certain
>range of a planet and force use of standard TRAVELLER in-system drives.

The simplest solution is just to raise your hand, and decree that
stutterwarp has always been the way things work.  But it wouldn't be the
Imperium we've been playing in all these years if you did.  Anymore than
changing the jump limit to 1000-diameters would be.

And stutterwarp already won't function within some specific distance
(the point where local gravity is greater than 0.1G).

Consider also that if you switch to 1000-diameters, then all I have to
do is NOT USE SW.  If I accelerate through normal space, then I'm
probably moving a couple thousand Km/s relative to a SW-driven pirate,
so after he disables me, he has to spend a couple of days matching
course before he can loot me.  By then, I've made repairs and pushed the
jump button.


Lewis Taylor Goss:

>The 100 diameter rule is an aspect of TravPhysics only, a creation for
>game purposes, to make the travel time to jump point about 3 days for
>the most common (1G) craft.  The TravPhysics argument is that only at
>this range is gravity weak enough to allow a safe jump.  But, why 100
>diameters, as opposed to say 1000 diameters, or 10,000 diameters?  In
>Traveller/MT, it takes far too long to travel this far on even 6G.  But
>in TNE, even an emasculated Stutterwarp can travel to 1000 diameters in
>less than three days.  I suggest that the diameter limit be explicitly
>set so that a ship equipped with the most common type of Stutterwarp
>drive takes about three days to travel that distance.

Where did you get the impression it takes 3 days to reach the jump limit
in Trav?  At 1G in our solar system, it can be done in less than 4.5
hours.  If you push the limit to 1000-diameters, then a 6G ship can do
it in 2.5 days.  A 1G ship could make 1000-diameters in a little over 6
days.


>This would allow us to have our Stutterwarp and Piracy too.  So, maybe
>the diameter limit has increased by a couple of orders of magnitude.

No.  Then you'd have to change sensor ranges so you can detect those
ships at long enough ranges that you can find them.  Then change weapon
ranges so you can get a few hits on them.  Then when you realize that
the navy has the same stuff, change them all again so the Navy can't
detect the pirates, but the pirates can detect the merchants.

And if you are making random changes to Trav physics, why not just
switch to SW completely, discarding the last ten years worth of work
completely?


>Like it really matters.  This can even be worked into the MT/2300AD
>background, like so:

>There was an article in the Journal of the Traveller's Aid Society
>several years ago, in which Marc Miller suggested that nothing was
>known about Jump Drive physics in our era because a society could not
>begin to do the proper research until it had set up permanent bases
>beyond 100 diameters from its primary star.  In the case of the
>Terrans, this meant not until they had developed bases in the Asteroid
>Belt.

Yes, I read the article.  Fascinating.  But wrong.  100-diameters from
Sol is only 139,190,000Km.  Which is closer to the sun than Earth is.
So all you'd really need is a lab about 1,300,000Km from Earth.


>In Traveller:  The New Era, this becomes:  Nothing was known about Jump
>Drive physics in our era because a society could not begin to do the
>proper research until it had set up permanent bases beyond N diameters
>from its primary star.  In the case of the Terrans, this meant not
>until they had developed deep space bases beyond the orbit of Pluto.
>(I assume hear that N will be quite large, placing any ships attempting
>to jump in deep space).

Again, why bother?  If you want to throw out all that has gone before,
you can just wave your hand and say whatever you want.  But is it
Traveller if you do?  The rules are going to be different, so if you
change the background assumptions, you're playing a completely different
game.  Possibly a lot of fun, but not Traveller.


>The best thing about this retcon, is that it leaves things largely
>unchanged.  Travel time from port to jump-point will be unchanged.
>Travel time from port to gas-giant will be much shorter, but travel
>time from gas-giant to jump-point should be approximately the same,
>perhaps a bit longer.  Travel between planets in a system will be much
>shorter, but the most common form of travel in Classic Trav is
>interplanetary, the time for which should remain unchanged.

Not really.  Have you ever tried to predict the position of a SW ship an
hour in advance?  If not, try it sometime.  Then try to predict the
position of a normal M-drive ship an hour in advance.  Notice the
difference between the two.  Changing the physics so that the timing is
the same WILL NOT leave a virtually identical universe, with a few
buzzwords changed.


>And finally, it will make piracy a realistic option.  Pirates will be
>able to lurk in deep space, waiting for the unsuspecting merchant ship,
>and then pow!

See above for comments on changes required to make piracy work in deep
space.  Remember that sensors only detect ships within about 500,000Km.
So when you are travelling through 1,000,000,000Km+ to the jump point, a
pirate has about one chance in 5,000,000 of ever spotting you.  This is
not profitable.  If you change the sensor ranges so the pirates can spot
you, the Navy can spot him.  And SW means that if the Navy is going in
the opposite direction from you, then he immediately turns around and
matches course.  Unlike the old M-drives, where he takes five or six
days to match velocity even if he is only 1000Km away when he starts his
course change.  That alone is enough to do bad things to the picture.

A lot of you may have gotten the impression that I want to keep piracy
in the picture.  I don't really care.  In all the Trav I have played,
the only pirates that ever made a difference were cruising around in
Imperial Navy warships, or foreign equivalents.  I've gone YEARS without
even a hint of piracy, and not cared at all.

What I am concerned with is doing damage to the world-picture in Trav.
Once you start changing the technology arbitrarily, you'll find yourself
having to predict the side-effects of all your changes before you
release the game.  If not, the game will be as much a disaster as MT
was, and if so, then it will take YEARS of playtesting.  Which I DON'T
want, because I happen to have a perverse liking for the T2K2 system,
and have been looking forward to a Trav conversion for some time.  I'm
not looking forward to the possibility that GDW may make vast, arbitrary
changes to hang onto a picture that NEVER fit Traveller (lines of
battle, for instance).  Nor am I looking forward to them changing the
basic world-picture enough that it ISN'T Traveller.  I can play GURPS
space if I want to play some random SF game.  I WANT to play Traveller.
In the Imperium, or its ruins (Cynthia and I have started to work out
the necessary assumptions to bring the Imperium crashing down in only
thirty or forty more years, game time).  Not something that calls itself
Traveller that has nothing in common with what has gone before but the
name....

---Steve

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

Bundle: 423
Archive-Message-Number: 4981
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 22:53:02 CST
From: GT0171@SIUCVMB.SIU.EDU
Subject: California Dreaming...

   Hi there! I was wondering if there were any of you from the Roseville Califo
rnia area listning to this.  I am moving there in Jan of '93 and was wondering
if there was a gaming group I could weasel my way into.  I have loads of gaming
 experiance and Will play almost anything once.  (1st ed Shadowrun is out! play
ed it once and that was enough.)  If interested, please contact me, Keith Phemi
ster at GT0171@SIUCVMB Thanks in advance.
EvilPheemy  (a name given, but really undeserved. :))

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

Bundle: 423
Archive-Message-Number: 4982
From: Adrian Hurt <adrian@cee.heriot-watt.ac.uk>
Subject: Thrust, and non-silicon chips
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 9:38:42 WET

"Does it matter?" <vender@plains.NoDak.edu> writes:
>
> In the design sequence, it is assumed that a vessel will have to defeat
>   1G of gravity in order to begin moving.  Basically, this ignores
>   the concepts of aerodynamics.
> ...
> To correct this, the easiest (though probably not realistic) method
>   would be to stop subtracting 1 from the Gs of acceleration
>   produced by the vessel if it is intended for atmospheric use.
>   Of course, in less dense atmospheres, or higher gravity worlds,
>   the speed or taxiing time would have to be adjusted.
> ...
> On planets without atmospheres, the standard 1G loss of effective
>   thrust would still apply.

If we're going to start making corrections for different atmosphere types,
shouldn't we also correct for different planet sizes?  I assume that 1G loss
is used up fighting gravity and keeping the vehicle off the ground - except
that it will need more or less than 1G for that purpose, on worlds larger or
smaller than Earth respectively.

CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU writes:
>
> A couple points:
> Hans points out that the obvious defence to the silicon
> predators viruses is have non silicon chips.
>
> Well, guess what?  He's absolutely right.
> As a matter of fact, I'd say a computer with silicon chips may
> be common now, but supercomputers, (especially ones in the future)
> will use silicon as the EXCEPTION not the rule.

Alright, so the virus eats whatever is the common type of chip.  Using
silicon chips is the way to beat the virus, although this does limit the
TL of your computers.  And this, I believe, was the whole point in the
first place.

> Believe me, having traveller computers on silicon chips is kinda like
> saying the starships are powered by fuel injected V-8 engines.  If
> That were the case, then Lucan's supervirus should eat all the
> petrochemicals in the galaxy and everybody waits forever at the gas
> pumps...  :-)

Or in my scenario, the supervirus eats all the deuterium, and everyone
has to use fuel-injected V-8 engines. :->

>...
> The average scoutship weighs in at 1000 + metric tons.  I don't have my
> books with me, but I believe thats around twice the weight of a fully
> loaded B-52.  Yet it has about the same wing area of an F-4 Phantom.
> Will it fly?  No.  It just can't get enough lift from air alone.

I can just imagine an SF RPG in 1918, where someone proposes an aircraft
that will fly more than twice the speed of sound, stay up using wings,
and have a wing area of 179 square feet.  And someone else says that even
if it didn't fall apart from trying to go faster than sound, which is of
course impossible, this aircraft has less than 80% of the wing area of a
Sopwith Camel, yet weighs almost 10 times as much empty as the Camel weighs
fully loaded.  No way will it fly.

40 years later the first person says "Told you!" as a Lockheed F-104 flies
past. :-)

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

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

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

Bundle: 423
Archive-Message-Number: 4983
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 22:54:28 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Port Generator (2nd Edition)


Submitted for your approval: one trade and traffic generator, heavily revised
from the original suggestion posted a couple of weeks ago.  Let me know
what you think.

Starport Traffic and Facilities Generator

These rules generate a pair of numbers which measure the amount of
interstellar traffic in a system, and the quality and extent of the starport
facilities.  2d6 die rolls modified by a number of factors are used to create
the traffic level and the facilities code.

The DMs wewre created based on the assumption that better starports should in
general have more traffic, but not always.  Other factors, in particular the
trade classifications, are quite important.  DMs were created based on the
MegaTraveller trade tables; worlds with more potential Cargo Price Modifiers
will have higher DMs.  In addition, since most traders have low jump
performance, having more nearby worlds to trade with would also help to
increase the trade level.  Implicit in this decision is an assumption about
the range of most merchant ships.  Jump-1 was assumed to be the most common,
and almost all of the rest being Jump-2.  Therefore, the trade effects of
nearby worlds are limited to those within one or two parsecs.  If local
conditions are different, the rules may have to be modified slightly.

Facilities generally follow the traffic volume; however, since significant
imported technology is required at low local technology levels, these
facilities are tyically smaller and less well-equipped.   Worlds with
important military facilities probably have military contractors that are
not adverse to doing work for the civillian sector.  Finally, worlds that are
cut off from interstellar trade by travel zone classification or the wars of
the Rebellion will have smaller and more primitive facilities.


Suggested Use

Use the Traffic or Facilities code just like attributes in task rolls
(divide by 5 and drop fractions).  Finding a shipyard willing and able to
repair battle damage might be Routine(Facilities), while finding  passage on
a ship going to the proper destination might be Difficult(Traffic), if it is
an unpopular destination.  Traders and tramp starships looking for cargo and
passengers should apply the attribute DM (code value / 5, drop fractions) as
a DM to the Passenger, Freight Available Lots, and Cargo Available Lots
Tables.  The codes can also be used to generate tasks; the explanatory
tables (below) show suggested difficulty levels based on the traffic and
facilities codes.


Generation Procedure

Traffic Code: Roll 2d6-2 and apply the following (cumulative) DMs:

  Starport: A=+2, B=+0, C=-1, D=-2, E=-3, X=-4
  Trade Class: Ni=-2, Po=-2, Ba=-1, Fl=-1, Lo=-1, Ic=-1, Na=+0, Va=+0,
               Wa=+1, De=+1, Hi=+2, Ri=+2, As=+3, Ag=+3, In=+4
               Hard Times: Failing or Doomed, +1 (Doom Trade)
  Travel Zone:
    Classic: Green=+0, Amber=-2, Red/Interdicted/Blocaded=-4
    Hard Times: Frontier=+0, Outlands=-1, Wilds=-2
                Worlds in a faction's Safe use the Classic DMs
  Trade Partners:
    Per world within Jump-1: If Starport Class A or B: +2
                             If Starport Class C, D, or E: +1
    If no Class A starports (including self) within Jump-2: -2
    If a sector, subsector, local, or polity capital: +1
    If on Xboat or designated trade route: +1
  Polity:
    Classic: Independent worlds: Non-Aligned=-2, Client-State=-1
             Member of an extra-Imperial polity=+0
    Hard Times: Member of a polity: +1 (cumulative with capital DM)
                World is within a faction's Safe: +1
  Prosperity: A referee-assigned DM based on local conditions, regional
    trade factors, or campaign storyline needs.  The range from -4 to +4
    is suggested, but the referee should always feel free to modify any
    die roll that is not to his or her liking.

  If the final result is negative, and the world's starport class is A,
  B, or C, assign a code of 0; if the starport class is D, E, or X, assign
  a code of X.


Facilities Code: Roll 2d6-6 and apply the following (cumulative) DMs:

  Traffic: apply the full traffic code as a DM (treat X as -2)
  Bases: Depot=+4, WayStation=+3, Naval/Scout=+2, Military=+1
  Local Technology: Pre-Industrial (TL 0-3): -6
                    Industrial (TL 4-5): -4
                    Pre-Stellar (TL 6-8): -2
                    Early Stellar (TL 9-A): -1
                    Average Stellar (TL B-D): +0
                    High Stellar (TL E-G): +1
                    Extreme Stellar (TL H+): +2
  Travel Zone:
    Classic: Green=+0, Amber=-1, Red/Interdicted/Blocaded=-2
    Hard Times: WarZone=+1, IntensiveWar=-2, BlackWar=-3
                Worlds in a faction's Safe use the Classic DMs
  Prosperity: A referee-assigned DM based on local conditions, regional
    trade factors, or campaign storyline needs.  The range from -4 to +4
    is suggested, but the referee should always feel free to modify any
    die roll that is not to his or her liking.

  If the final result is negative, and the starport class or traffic code
  is X, assign a facilities code of X.  Otherwise, assign a code of 0.


Explanation of Codes

Traffic Code (indicates quantity of trade)                    Task Difficulty

  X ------- No Traffic (except as referee-generated event)    Impossible
  0, 1, 2 - Backwater, Very Low traffic volume                Formidible
  3, 4, 5 - Low traffic volume                                Dificult
  6, 7, 8 - Average traffic volume (Imperial average is 7.5)  Routine
  9, A, B - High traffic volume                               Routine
  C, D, E - Very High traffic volume                          Simple
  F ------- Extreme traffic volume                            Simple

Facilities Code (indicates size and quality of facilities)    Task Difficulty

  X ------- None (abandonded, converted or destroyed)         Impossible
  0, 1, 2 - Inadequate                                        Formidable
  3, 4, 5 - Cramped but Adequate                              Difficult
  6, 7, 8 - Average (Imperial average is 8.0)                 Routine
  9, A, B - Above Average                                     Routine
  C, D, E - Excellent                                         Simple
  F ------- Outstanding                                       Simple


Designer's Notes

The explanation of codes deliberately avoids specific numbers; this is so
that individual referees can use this system regardless of the level of
interstellar trade they want portray.  I have been a part of different
campaigns where the average level of trade varied from a couple of free
traders a week to ten- or hundred- thousand ton bulk transports arriving
every few minutes.

The +1 for "designated trade route" can be applied to Hard Times as well as
to xboat and other trade routes in a stable interstellar state.  It could
even be applied to any well known and well-travelled mains, like the Vilani
Main and the Spinward Main.  It should definitely be applied to trade "runs"
like those described in the Diaspora sector supplement.  However, the
trading partners rule already provides a DM for worlds that are on mains.  If
a world is on a main it gets at least a +2 (one for each neibor world) and
more if either of them have an A or B starport.  Only mains that serve as a
conduit for long distance trade should get the additional "designated trade
route" DM.

A referee assigned prosperity factor was used instead of a random one, so
that the referee could decide where and when to apply it.  If a world with a
depressed local economy is needed, simply (and arbitrarily; it's OK to be
arbitrary, the dice certainly are) apply the -4 DM.  Use this DM to paint
entire sectors as a heavily industrialized core, or to pick out individual
subsectors, clusters or even single worlds for deep depression or
spectacular productivity.

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


Hard Times

Several special modifiers apply to Hard Times.  When generating the traffic
volume, the Hard Times Doom Trade modifier applies in addition to any other
trade classification DMs.  However, the Hard Times Travel Zone and Polity DMs
apply instead of the listed Classic Traveller DMs.  Similarly, when
generating Hard Times facilities codes, use the Hard Times modifiers instead
of the Classic Traveller DMs for Trade Zone.

When generating traffic and facilities for Hard Times, use the final Hard
Times UWP values to generate the final traffic and facilities values.
Re-generating these codes will allow traffic patterns to shift in response
to all of the changes brought on by Hard Times.

For war zone (including intensive war zone and black war zone) subsectors,
Apply the reductions in Stage 1: Destruction of Interstellar Transport.
These reductions are the direct effect of the destruction of starships and
facilities in the battles of the Rebellion.

Outside of the war zones, the reduction of traffic and facilities comes
later, as these areas are cut off from trade and are abandoned by the
factions. The traffic level is reduced in Stage 2: Collapse of Financial
Markets.  Optionally (and this is completely unofficial), delay the reduction
of the starport type for non-war-zone worlds until this step as well.
Reduce the facilities code in Stage 3: Recession of Planetary Economies, at
the same time as the UWP tech level is reduced.


Interpretation Examples

C-5A = Class C starport: Average facility, capable of reasonable repairs.
       Traffic level 5: Low traffic volume.  Facilities Code A: Above
       average.  Although the port gets less traffic than most worlds in the
       Imperium, its facilities are quite extensive.  Local yards and skilled
       technicians can perform almost any work expected of a Class C port,
       with unhurried skill that matches the spacious and uncrowded starport.

A-EF = Class A starport: Shipyard capable of constructing starships. Traffic
       level E: Very High traffic volume.  Facilities code F: Outstanding.
       Although one of the busiest starports in the subsector, this world's
       volume of traffic is exceeded only by its efficient and complete
       starport facilities.

B-30 = Class B starport: shipyard capable of constructing non-starships and
       most repairs.  Traffic level 3: Low traffic volume.  Facilities code
       0: Inadequate.  Not much traffic passes through here, and part of the
       reason is the port facilities.  Although it bills itself as a class
       B starport, the shipyard looks deserted, many of the docking bays
       have collapsed, and what few skilled workers are left are crippled
       by lack of tools, parts, and snowed under with a backlog of work.

E-10 = Class E starport: frontier-quality installation.  Traffic level 1:
       Low traffic volume.  Facilities code 0: Inadequate.  Although it
       seems hard to believe, here is an example of a substandard Class E
       port.  It's a bomb crater, with a portable landing beacon installed.
       The beacon was courtesy of the last trader through here, about 5
       weeks ago, sold in exchange for a home-cooked dinner.


Expanded Codes for the playtest sectors

The following interpretations include specific numbers, and are intended as
a suggestion only.

Traffic Level (in terms of aggregate tons of shipping per year)

  X - Less than 1 thousand tons/year (less than 1 free trader per month)
  0 - At least 1 thousand tons/year (1 free trader per month)
  1 - At least 10 thousand tons/year (1 subsidized merchant every other week)
  2 - At least 50 thousand tons/year (2 subsidized merchants a week)
  3 - At least 100 thousand tons/year
  4 - At least 500 thousand tons/year
  5 - At least 1 million tons/year
  6 - At least 2.5 million tons/year
  7 - At least 5 million tons/year
  8 - At least 7.5 million tons/year
  9 - At least 10 million tons/year
  A - At least 50 million tons/year
  B - At least 100 million tons/year
  C - At least 500 million tons/year
  D - At least 1 billion tons/year
  E - At least 2.5 billion tons/year
  F - More than 5 billion tons/year

Facilities Code

  X - Abandoned, Destroyed, or Converted to another function
  0 - Does not actually meet all requirements for Starport Class
  1 - Inadequate facilities in at least one respect
  2 - Bare minimum to meet all requirements for Starport Class
  3 - Cramped, low capacity facilities
  4 - Substandard facilities or services
  5 - Small, crowded, expect delays for all facilities and services
  6 - Small but not overcrowded,
  7 - About average, busy for its size
  8 - About average
  9 - Better than average facilities or services
  A - Spacious facilities, easily handles present traffic requirements
  B - Spacious facilities and efficient, skilled services
  C - Capable of almost anything
  D - Large, cavernous facilities with plenty of room for expansion
  E - Excellent facilities, can meet any requirement within Starport Class
  F - Outstanding, large, efficient, meets most requirements for next
      higher Starport Class.



Examples of Traffic and Facilities Generation

Key to Maps:                ___
                           /   \
                          /  A<--- Starport Class Code
    Starport Trade Level -->1 2<-- Starport Facilities Code
                           \___/

Classic Traveller: Regina Subsector, Spinward Marches, ca 1100
  ___       ___       ___       ___
 /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \          Example Calculations:
/     \___/     \___/     \___/     \___
\     /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \     Regina: For Traffic, 2d6-2 rolls
 \___/     \___/     \___/  C  \___/     \      a 5.  Applicable DMs are for
 /   \     /   \     /   \ 4 7 /   \     /      Class A port, +2; Rich, +2;
/     \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/       worlds within J-1: 3 Class C,
\     /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \       for +3.  Regina is Subsector
 \___/  B  \___/     \___/  A  \___/  B  \      capital, +1; and on the Xboat
 /   \ 8 2 /   \     /   \ 8 5 /   \ 9 9 /      route, +1.  Traffic is E (14).
/     \___/  A  \___/     \___/  C  \___/       For Facilities, 2d6-6 rolls
\     /   \ 8 D /   \     /   \ A 7 /   \       a 1.  Applicable DMs are for
 \___/  C  \___/     \___/     \___/     \      traffic, +14; bases, +2, and
 /   \ 9 4 /   \     /   \     /   \     /      local technology, +1. Thus,
/     \___/  A  \___/     \___/     \___/       Facilities max out at F (15).
\     /   \ 5 8 /   \     /   \     /   \
 \___/     \___/     \___/  D  \___/     \    Algine: For Traffic, 2d6-2 rolls
 /   \     /   \     /   \ 3 4 /   \     /      a 9.  Applicable DMs are for
/  A  \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/       Class X starport, -4; High
\ A D /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \       Population, +2; Interdicted
 \___/  B  \___/  B  \___/  C  \___/  E  \      world, -4; worlds within J-1:
 /   \ B F /   \ 6 A /   \ A A /   \ X X /      3 Class E, for +3; there are
/  B  \___/     \___/  X  \___/  X  \___/       no Class A ports within J-2,
\ F F /   \     /   \ X X /   \ 1 X /   \       for -2.  Traffic is 4.  For
 \___/  E  \___/     \___/     \___/  C  \      Facilities, 2d6-6 rolls a 1.
 /   \ 1 0 /   \     /   \     /   \ 2 3 /      Applicable DMs are traffic,
/     \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/       +4; local technology, -4; and
\     /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \       travel zone, -2.  Facilities
 \___/  E  \___/  C  \___/  E  \___/     \      are 3.
 /   \ 9 4 /   \ 6 8 /   \ X X /   \     /
/     \___/     \___/     \___/  X  \___/       Comments: Algine is aparrently
\     /   \     /   \     /   \ 4 3 /   \       being blockaded, and rather
 \___/  E  \___/     \___/     \___/  E  \      ineffectually, at that.
 /   \ 7 5 /   \     /   \     /   \ 6 5 /
/     \___/  C  \___/     \___/  E  \___/     Notes: Subsector data was taken
\     /   \ 5 A /   \     /   \ X X /   \       from Traveller Suppliment 3;
 \___/  C  \___/     \___/     \___/     \      The Spinward Marches as input
 /   \ 9 9 /   \     /   \     /   \     /      to the traffic and facilities
/     \___/  A  \___/  C  \___/     \___/       generator.
\     /   \ E F /   \ 7 8 /   \     /   \
 \___/  C  \___/     \___/     \___/  B  \
     \ A F /   \     /   \     /   \ 8 B /
      \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/


MegaTraveller (Rebellion-Era): Promise Subsector, Diaspora Sector, ca. 1124
  ___       ___       ___       ___
 /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \          Comment: Xboat routes are not
/  D  \___/     \___/     \___/  B  \___        indicated in the 1124 data;
\ 1 3 /   \     /   \     /   \ 6 8 /   \       presumably the Rebellion had
 \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/     \      already severed Xboat and
 /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \     /      scheduled traffic to the
/     \___/     \___/  B  \___/     \___/       sector by 1124.  Trade routes
\     /   \     /   \ 0 4 /   \     /   \       indicated in the small map
 \___/     \___/     \___/  C  \___/     \      were used in generating both
 /   \     /   \     /   \ 8 8 /   \     /      the 1124 and 1129 trade and
/     \___/     \___/     \___/  A  \___/       facilities.
\     /   \     /   \     /   \ E D /   \
 \___/     \___/     \___/  B  \___/     \    Promise: For Traffic, 2d6-2
 /   \     /   \     /   \ 3 0 /   \     /      rolls 3.  Applicable DMs are
/  D  \___/  B  \___/     \___/     \___/       for Class A starport, +2; High
\ 4 3 /   \ 7 7 /   \     /   \     /   \       Population, +2; Industrial,
 \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/  B  \      +4; Poor, -2.  Trade partners
 /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \ 9 9 /      are 1 Class A and 1 Class B
/     \___/  D  \___/  A  \___/     \___/       starport, +4.  It is also a
\     /   \ 9 4 /   \ C C /   \     /   \       subsector capital, +1.  Thus
 \___/     \___/  B  \___/     \___/  E  \      traffic is E (14).  Facilities
 /   \     /   \ 5 5 /   \     /   \ 1 0 /      2d6-6 roll 1.  Applicable DMs
/     \___/     \___/  B  \___/  B  \___/       are for traffic, +14; and
\     /   \     /   \ E C /   \ 4 3 /   \       technology, +1.  Facilities
 \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/     \      max out at F (15).
 /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \     /
/     \___/     \___/  A  \___/     \___/
\     /   \     /   \ B E /   \     /   \
 \___/     \___/  A  \___/  X  \___/     \
 /   \     /   \ E F /   \ X X /   \     /
/  C  \___/  B  \___/     \___/     \___/
\ 0 4 /   \ 6 6 /   \     /   \     /   \
 \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/  B  \
 /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \ 3 8 /
/     \___/  A  \___/  A  \___/  C  \___/
\     /   \ B F /   \ 6 6 /   \ 7 8 /   \
 \___/     \___/     \___/  D  \___/     \
 /   \     /   \     /   \ 6 8 /   \     /
/     \___/     \___/  C  \___/     \___/
\     /   \     /   \ D C /   \     /   \
 \___/     \___/  C  \___/  C  \___/     \
     \     /   \ 8 A /   \ 5 8 /   \     /
      \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/


MegaTraveller (Hard Times): Promise Subsector, Diaspora Sector, ca. 1129
  ___       ___       ___       ___
 /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \          Comment: By 1129, the whole
/  E  \___/     \___/     \___/  C  \___        subsector is coded as Wilds;
\ X X /   \     /   \     /   \ 2 4 /   \       in addition pirate activlty
 \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/     \      has reduced trade to a
 /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \     /      number of worlds, mainly on
/     \___/     \___/  D  \___/     \___/       the trailing edge of the
\     /   \     /   \ X X /   \     /   \       subsector.
 \___/     \___/     \___/  E  \___/     \
 /   \     /   \     /   \ 1 2 /   \     /    Promise: For Traffic, 2d6-2 roll
/     \___/     \___/     \___/  B  \___/       a 3.  Applicable DMs are for
\     /   \     /   \     /   \ 4 4 /   \       High population, +2; Poor, -2;
 \___/     \___/     \___/  X  \___/  E  \      and Industrial, +4.  Trading
 /   \     /   \     /   \ X X /   \ X X /      partners are two worlds with
/  E  \___/  D  \___/     \___/     \___/       Class D starports, +2.  I
\ 1 0 /   \ X X /   \     /   \     /   \       assumed that Promise is the
 \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/  X  \      "capital" of the League of
 /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \ X X /      Promise, giving it another +1.
/     \___/  D  \___/  C  \___/     \___/       It is also in the Wilds, -2;
\     /   \ 5 2 /   \ 6 A /   \     /   \       but is part of a polity, +1.
 \___/     \___/  D  \___/     \___/     \      Finally, there are no Class A
 /   \     /   \ X X /   \     /   \     /      starports within 2 parsecs,
/     \___/     \___/  E  \___/  X  \___/       for a final -2.  Traffic is
\     /   \     /   \ 1 0 /   \ X X /   \       therefore 7.  For Facilities,
 \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/     \      2d6-6 roll 2.  Applicable DMs
 /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \     /      are traffic +7; and WarZone,
/     \___/     \___/  D  \___/     \___/       -1.  Facilities are 8.
\     /   \     /   \ 1 0 /   \     /   \
 \___/     \___/  B  \___/  X  \___/     \
 /   \     /   \ 7 8 /   \ X X /   \     /
/  E  \___/  D  \___/     \___/     \___/
\ X X /   \ 4 5 /   \     /   \     /   \
 \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/  C  \
 /   \     /   \     /   \     /   \ 0 0 /
/     \___/  C  \___/  D  \___/  E  \___/
\     /   \ 3 2 /   \ 1 4 /   \ 0 0 /   \
 \___/     \___/     \___/  D  \___/     \
 /   \     /   \     /   \ 1 1 /   \     /
/     \___/     \___/  X  \___/     \___/
\     /   \     /   \ 2 X /   \     /   \
 \___/     \___/  E  \___/  C  \___/     \
     \     /   \ X X /   \ 0 1 /   \     /
      \___/     \___/     \___/     \___/


Expanded Format Used in our playtest maps:

I generated the above sample subsectors by hand; partly this was to prove that
the procedure is not too compilcated to implement with only a pencil, paper,
and dice.  After the first time through (I generated Regina twice; once before
I revised the system, and once after) I came up with the following mapping
system.  I enlarged a subsector grid on a xerox machine until the hex grid
filled the page with just enough space left over for 3-ring binder holes. This
made the hexes big enough to code all sorts of interesting information. I used
the following format to code almost anything of interest directly on the map.
The world type (water, desert, asteroid belt) is omitted from the subsector
grid because it can be determined from the trade classifications.   If I was
going to use the map for a campaign, I would also use a green highlighter to
mark Xboat routes, a blue one to mark polity boundries (I highlighted the
hexlines of the porders), and (of course) pink and yellow ones to mark Red and
Amber zones.
                     ________
                    /  0201  \
   Military Bases -->B      G<-- Gas Giant
                  /            \
   Starport ---------->A    In<--- Trade Classsifications
                /           Hi<  \
   Trade and -------->8 9   Ri<  /
   Facilities    \              /
                  \            /
   Misc Codes ------>CTX    F<-- Tech Level
   A=Amber Zone     \________/
   R=Red/Interdict
   T=Trade Route
   P=Polity
   C=Subsector/Local Capital
   X=X-Boat Route
   Z=Rampant Piracy
   (greek letter)=Research Station

Opposite each page, I put a sheet of graph paper (college-ruled notebook
paper would work just as well).  On this sheet I put the world data in the
usual format (I put the trade and facilities right after the "extended"
population, asteroid belt, and gas giant data; ie: 123-45).



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

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

Bundle: 423
Archive-Message-Number: 4984
Subject: Re: 100 diameter limits
From: gwh@lurnix.COM (George William Herbert)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 11:11:05 -0800


Steve Higginbotham replying to Lewis Taylor Goss:
>>There was an article in the Journal of the Traveller's Aid Society
>>several years ago, in which Marc Miller suggested that nothing was
>>known about Jump Drive physics in our era because a society could not
>>begin to do the proper research until it had set up permanent bases
>>beyond 100 diameters from its primary star.  In the case of the
>>Terrans, this meant not until they had developed bases in the Asteroid
>>Belt.
>
>Yes, I read the article.  Fascinating.  But wrong.  100-diameters from
>Sol is only 139,190,000Km.  Which is closer to the sun than Earth is.
>So all you'd really need is a lab about 1,300,000Km from Earth.

Actually, no, the asteroid belt is the likely cantidate for that.
The 1.3 million km. excludes both the Moon and the terrestrial Lagrange
points.  Any Mars bases we make are within _it's_ 100 diameter limit.
The only place likely in the solar system clear of major 100 diameter
zones is the asteroid belt.  We aren't likely to build permanent bases
anywhere else.  There's nothing out in random deep space to make
putting bases there likely 8-)

- -george


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

Bundle: 423
Archive-Message-Number: 4985
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 09:07:58 +1100
From: "Bruce Pihlamae" <pihlab@hhcs.gov.au>
Subject: 40 years on


>40 years later the first person says "Told you!" as a Lockheed F-104 flies
>past. :-)

40 years from bi-planes to supersonic jets.

Wow, mind bogling advance.

Sort of makes you wonder what we've been up to since.

Makes me wonder why it takes the IMPERIUM over 500 years per tech level
advance.

Thanks for the 40 years info.  Makes me feel insignificant in the
scheme of things again.

Bruce...           pihlab@hhcs.gov.au

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

Bundle: 423
Archive-Message-Number: 4986
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 22:12:30 EST
From: Seth the Lesser <slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu>
Subject: 100-diameter limit, re-re-revisited

Steve Higginbotham followed by George Herbert:
>>Yes, I read the article.  Fascinating.  But wrong.  100-diameters from
>>Sol is only 139,190,000Km.  Which is closer to the sun than Earth is.
>>So all you'd really need is a lab about 1,300,000Km from Earth.
>
>Actually, no, the asteroid belt is the likely cantidate for that.
>The 1.3 million km. excludes both the Moon and the terrestrial Lagrange
>points.  Any Mars bases we make are within _it's_ 100 diameter limit.

Umm, anyone here but me ever read the "Venus Equilateral" stories by George O.
Smith? "Mars Equilateral," anyone? Although I suppose that Jove so near by
might make Mars's L-4 and L-5 a wee bit shaky.

Seth "the Lesser"

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

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 424  4987 24-Nov-1992 "Steve Higginbo  100 diameters and other odds 'n' ends..
 424  4988 25-Nov-1992 l.wiseman1@geni  Apologies << Sorry for the lack of comm
 424  4989 25-Nov-1992 Bill Smart       DGP questions << More innane questions
 424  4990 26-Nov-1992 Derek Wildstar   Venus Equilateral, T&F Generator << Set
 424  4991 26-Nov-1992 Pauli            Re: other odds 'n' ends << Steve Higgin
 424  4992 27-Nov-1992 Hans Rancke-Mad  Starport trade << Derek Wildstar writes
 424  4993 28-Nov-1992 Jeff Zeitlin     weight and balance? <<   I was chatting
 424  4994 28-Nov-1992 "Steve Higginbo  J-1 and Wildstar's trade... << Wildstar
 424  4995 29-Nov-1992 Seth the Lesser  More on this nifty "center of mass" ide
 424  4996 30-Nov-1992 "Carl Makin"     RE: Weight and Balance. << jeff.zeitlin
 424  4997 29-Nov-1992 Rob Dean         Mass and Drives << Jeff Zeitlin asks ab
 424  4998 30-Nov-1992 Seth the Lesser  Atmospheric pressure << A few days ago,
 424  4999 30-Nov-1992 Edward Swatsche  More on this nifty "center of mass" ide
 424  5000 30-Nov-1992 "Cynthia Higgin  IMPERIUM.GIF <<  A while back, someone
 424  5001 02-Dec-1992 metlay           cynthia? << Cynthia Higginbotham, I've
 424  5002 02-Dec-1992 Stephen Camp     subscribe hobbes@spacemanspiff.den.mmc.
 424  5003 03-Dec-1992 Scott S. Kellog  I wonder if the TML is up?  (GDW contac
 424  5004 04-Dec-1992 cornwell@minste  Fifth Frontier War... << I have been tr

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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4987
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 22:33:19 -0600
From: "Steve Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: 100 diameters and other odds 'n' ends...

George Herbert:

>>Yes, I read the article.  Fascinating.  But wrong.  100-diameters from
>>Sol is only 139,190,000Km.  Which is closer to the sun than Earth is.
>So all you'd really need is a lab about 1,300,000Km from Earth.

>Actually, no, the asteroid belt is the likely cantidate for that.
>The 1.3 million km. excludes both the Moon and the terrestrial Lagrange
>points.  Any Mars bases we make are within _it's_ 100 diameter limit.
>The only place likely in the solar system clear of major 100 diameter
>zones is the asteroid belt.  We aren't likely to build permanent bases
>anywhere else.  There's nothing out in random deep space to make
>putting bases there likely 8-)

George, I didn't say that we would build a base there.  I said we
COULD.  Going out to the asteroids is all very nice, but it is also all
very UNNECESSARY in order to develop jump.  Especially since we would
get a good look at the oddities of flat space during those eight month
voyages to Mars in Hohmann transfer orbits.  And almost that entire orbit
is outside the 100-diameter limit of everything (except possibly the
Galaxy as a whole).


Wildstar:

<starport/traffic generator>

I liked your generator.  I didn't agree with the modifier for worlds
within J-1 of wherever, since I disagree with the notion of J-1 traffic
being significant (how many one-cycle steam engines are still in use in
the US Merchant Fleet?  They're a 150 year old idea, and J-1 is ten
thousand years old.  And was superseded much more than 3500 years ago.)

However, this is a minor quibble.  A slightly (only slightly) more
serious quibble is the extra information you are adding into the
standard hex display - those hexes are crowded enough as it is.  They
really don't need anything else stuffed in there.  The extra information
either needs to be relegated to the world listings, or a different way
of listing the information needs to be developed, so that required
information is not buried under a cloud of teensy little
base/starport/GG/whatever symbols in each hex....

---Steve


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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4988
From: l.wiseman1@genie.geis.com
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 09:14:00 EDT
Subject: Apologies

Sorry for the lack of communication of late...I've been having some
computer problems. More news after Turkey day, when things should improve.
     Loren Wiseman

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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4989
From: Bill Smart <wsmart@mcs.dundee.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 17:23:28 GMT
Subject: DGP questions

More innane questions from a new poster....

I'm sure it's been asked before, but how many books/supplements did
DGP actually publish for MT?  All that I can find in the shops are the
Solomani/Aslan book, the World Builders Handbook and the Starship
Operators Guide, Vol 1.  Are any more planned or have they ditched
Traveller completely now?


Bill Smart
wsmart@uk.ac.dund.mcs

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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4990
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 92 00:14:46 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Venus Equilateral, T&F Generator

Seth the Lesser <slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu> writes:
> Umm, anyone here but me ever read the "Venus Equilateral" stories by George O.
> Smith? "Mars Equilateral," anyone? Although I suppose that Jove so near by
> might make Mars's L-4 and L-5 a wee bit shaky.

I have.  Very good stuff; clearly right up there in the classics of
Science Fiction with Doc Smith's Lensman, Heinlien's Future Histories,
Asimov's Foundation Trilogy, and Clarke's early fiction.

As far as establishing communications relay stations at the Lagrange
points go, probably pretty unlikely.  But stations might be put there
for other reasons.  Anybody want to do some *EXTREMELY* long baseline
interferometry?  How does a baseline from Mars's L4 to L5 sound?

Steve Higginbotham (did I spell thant right?) writes:
> I liked your generator.  I didn't agree with the modifier for worlds
> within J-1 of wherever, since I disagree with the notion of J-1 traffic
> being significant (how many one-cycle steam engines are still in use in
> the US Merchant Fleet?  They're a 150 year old idea, and J-1 is ten
> thousand years old.  And was superseded much more than 3500 years ago.)

Thank you!  As far as the modifiers go, I have one suggestion:

Well change it!  Instead of J-1, use whatever the jump number of the
most common trading vessels in your game is.  Instead of +2 per Class A
or B port, and +1 per Class C, D, or E port, use whatever will give you
an expected value of 4.442 in a standard (50%) density subsector.
The same goes for the -2 if no Class A port within jump-2.  Use whatever
the jump number of your universe's "long range" traders is.  The
expected value should be -0.4082 in a standard density subsector.  Or
simply remove both modifiers and change the die roll from 2d6-2 to
2d6+2.

I assumed that most merchant starships would use as small a jump number
as possible.  Larger jump drives are considerably more expensive,
require a larger crew, and additional fuel requirements.  All of these
typically come at the expense of cargo space.  The result is higher
expenses and lower revenues, a situation which most merchants detest.

Finally, checking all worlds within jump-1 or jump-2 is a practical
thing to do by hand, on a hand-written map.  Checking all worlds within
jump-6 (for each and every world in the subsector) is a daunting task.
In a case like this, I would simply ditch the modifiers and change the
die roll as indicated.

Go for it!  (and let me know how it turns out)  Kinda reminds me of my
college wargaming society's motto: "We can fix these rules!"

> However, this is a minor quibble.  A slightly (only slightly) more
> serious quibble is the extra information you are adding into the
> standard hex display - those hexes are crowded enough as it is.  They
> really don't need anything else stuffed in there.  The extra information
> either needs to be relegated to the world listings, or a different way
> of listing the information needs to be developed, so that required
> information is not buried under a cloud of teensy little
> base/starport/GG/whatever symbols in each hex....

By no means am I suggesting that the "expanded" hex display is needed to
run the traffic and facilities system.  The two extra digits go into the
standard world listings, over on the right side, after the population
multiplier, gas giants, and asteroid belts.

I presented my example subsectors in map format because I think that
this makes the traffic patters more clear; I didn't intend to suggest
that it replace the standard subsector map format.  The map is also a
good deal more exciting that a listing for 40 or so two digit numbers.

The "expanded" subsector display presented at the end of the article is
simply something I found useful while generating the traffic and
facilities codes, and during subsequent use of the trade and commerce
system.  In both cases, all of the information you need is listed on the
map, so thatI didn't have to refer to the subsector data listings; this
makes it easier to work with when all you have is a pencil, paper,
and dice.  I have naturally small handwriting, and I enlarged the hexes
so that everything could fit and still be ledgible (no harder to read
than my other notes, anyway).

Anything that said "playtest" in it was simply the way I did things, not
a part of the traffic and facilites generator itself.


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


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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4991
Subject: Re: other odds 'n' ends
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 92 21:07:46 +1000
From: Pauli <grue@cs.uq.oz.au>

Steve Higginbotham writes:

>Wildstar:
><starport/traffic generator>

>I liked your generator.  I didn't agree with the modifier for worlds
>within J-1 of wherever, since I disagree with the notion of J-1 traffic
>being significant (how many one-cycle steam engines are still in use in
>the US Merchant Fleet?  They're a 150 year old idea, and J-1 is ten
>thousand years old.  And was superseded much more than 3500 years ago.)

But there is a major difference: one-cycle steam engines are not economical
to build or run these days.  Ships powered by steam would be much more costly
to run and would probably be slower travelling too (correct me on that bit
if necessary).  A starship with J-1 takes the same time as a J-6 ship to
make that short jump and it burns less fuel and it costs less to build and
maintain.  Sure, over longer distances J-1 isn't as economical but so long
as a world has trading partners close enough J-1 would be the way to go.

Also, the jump-1 drive of 3500 years ago is exactly the same as the jump-1
drive of the present imperium.  They have made no real progress in all that
time (actually, they can build jump drives that go further but the basic
jump-1 drive is still the same size/cost/everything else as it was originally).


>However, this is a minor quibble.  A slightly (only slightly) more
>serious quibble is the extra information you are adding into the
>standard hex display - those hexes are crowded enough as it is.

I agree with this completely.  Save our hexes from massive over crowding.
One possible way to improve the situation may be to colour code the symbols
giving some of them dual meaning (not that I've even started thinking about how
to double things up ;-).  Then again, this may still lead to information
overload and it wouldn't be as nice to photocopy and distribute.





        Pauli

Paul Dale                       | grue@cs.uq.oz.au
Department of Computer Science  | +61 7 365 2445
University of Queensland        |
Australia, 4072                 | Did you know that there are 41 two letter
                                |     words containing the letter 'a'?


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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4992
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Starport trade
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 92 10:36:37 MET

Derek Wildstar writes:
>I assumed that most merchant starships would use as small a jump number
>as possible.  Larger jump drives are considerably more expensive,
>require a larger crew, and additional fuel requirements.
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I've never accepted Megatraveller's removal of the jump governor. In
fact, I decided that a higher jump engine was more effective, so that
a jump-2 engine making a jump-1 would only use 7.5% fuel (half of
what it uses for a jump-2).

>All of these
>typically come at the expense of cargo space.  The result is higher
>expenses and lower revenues, a situation which most merchants detest.

The thing is that there is two types of merchant shipping: Regular and
tramp. Regular merchant ships would be tailored to fit the route it's
on. But most player's are interested in tramp freight. That ought to be
_less_ for well-established trade runs. As for jump-1 engines, there
are far too many unprofitable star systems even in a Main for a tramp
freighter to waste time with it. With a jump-2 engine he may have less
cargo space, but he saves a lot in being able to bypass unprofitable
worlds (not to mention other kind of troublespots).

I haven't had time to look your tables over in detail, but I will do so
and get back to you later. Keep up the good work!



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

                        ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir

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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4993
From: jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Date: 28 Nov 92 (02:52)
Subject: weight and balance?


  I was chatting with my father the other day, and we started
  discussing his favorite hobby - flying (he has a private pilot
  license).  One of the things we were discussing was the necessity
  and principles of weight and balance calculations.  The past couple
  of nights, I've been thinking about that, and realized (for no
  particular reason) that this concept seems to be absent from
  Traveller/Megatraveller.  I'd like some ideas on how to add it. My
  reasoning is as follows:

  Obviously, an aircraft, it's important.  You have a limited amount
  of power, and you must maintain a certain airspeed to stay up in the
  sky.  So, your weight must be below a certain limit, which, if you
  go above that limit, will cause the aircraft to be unable to achieve
  the necessary airspeed.  Balancing the load to keep the center of
  gravity at or below a certain point (center of gravity of the empty
  aircraft) ensures that you have the maneuverability required to
  provide full control over the aircraft (an improperly balanced load
  could make the plane tilt or flip).

  Similarly for a sea vessel:  If the load is centered too far above,
  ahead of, or behind the CG of the empty vessel, you could end up
  with one sunken wreck.  Too much weight, and you could find your
  decks awash when that big wave comes along.  That water will have to
  be bailed out really fast, because it's adding to your weight,
  compounding the problem.  Note that balance problems can be
  compensated for, to some degree, by taking on or dumping ballast
  (which is usually water) into the appropriate ballast tanks (of
  which there are several on your average cargo ship).

  Now, what about your spacegoing vessel?  Well, there are basically
  two cases to worry about here - 1) the vessel can not or does not
  enter atmosphere, or 2) the vessel can and does.

  In case 1), the issue of weight and balance would appear to be a
  non-issue.  The weight is in zero-gee, hence not a factor, and the
  center of gravity would be irrelevant, since there's no "preferred"
  attitude in space.  End of problem.  Or is it?  Well, not as
  _weight_, but as _mass_.  Mass possesses a quality called _inertia_.
  Inertia is why you can't get that big railroad car moving when you
  push on it with one finger, even though the brakes are off, the
  journals are properly lubricated, and you are on perfectly level
  track.  The formula (for you non-physicists out there) that
  describes this problem is F=ma (Force equals mass times
  acceleration).  Your one finger _F_ is pretty damn small, and the
  railroad car's _m_ is pretty large, which means that the _a_, for
  all practical purposes, is not distinguishable from zero.  An
  extreme example, but relevant:  Your maneuver drives, even though
  they violate Newton's second law, must be imparting an acceleration
  to the mass of your ship and everything aboard.  They are therefore
  applying a force.  Now, there is only a certain maximum level of
  force that they can provide.  How do you ensure that this level of
  force is going to be sufficient to move your ship?  If I don't have
  to worry about this, then obviously my drives can produce enough
  force to move my ship at its rated acceleration even if my cargo
  holds are packed to maximum capacity with pure osmium (the densest
  element known), or maybe the metal that is used for superdense
  armor, or maybe collapsium, or whatever the universe's densest
  material is.  O.K., I can accept that.  The logical implication is
  that when I am running with empty holds, or with holds filled or
  partially filled with materials less dense than those cited above, I
  have some extra acceleration available - since the drive can put
  out a maximum force _F_, and the mass of the ship _m_ has gone down,
  so _a_, the resultant acceleration, must go up.  Hmm, does that
  mean that my free trader rated at 1G acceleration can actually get
  1.5G or maybe 2G if I'm running empty?

  Now, case 2).  All of the comments above apply, once we get out of
  atmosphere.  In addition, we have the "conventional" issues to deal
  with, since when we are in atmosphere, we are far enough into a
  gravity well that there _is_ a preferred attitude for the ship to
  assume.  Which means that conventional weight and balance
  calculations must come into play.  I note that for all ships that I
  have seen deck plans for, if the ship was streamlined (or airframe),
  the internal arrangement appeared to be "acceptable" for "normal"
  weight and balance considerations.  Which would seem to me to be
  common sense, but still...

  Comments, anyone?

  J/
  jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com

 * QMPro 1.0 30-0183 * REALITY.SYS Corrupted: Re-boot universe?
- --
Executive Network Information System  (914) 667-4567
International ILink Host

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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4994
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 92 12:22:33 -0600
From: "Steve Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: J-1 and Wildstar's trade...

Wildstar:

>Steve Higginbotham (did I spell thant right?) writes:

You did...


>Thank you!  As far as the modifiers go, I have one suggestion:

>Well change it!

I have every intention of doing so.  I let you know primarily to give
you some feedback.


>I assumed that most merchant starships would use as small a jump number
>as possible.  Larger jump drives are considerably more expensive,
>require a larger crew, and additional fuel requirements.  All of these
>typically come at the expense of cargo space.  The result is higher
>expenses and lower revenues, a situation which most merchants detest.

J-2 for a 200T ship costs only MCr4.8 more than J-1.  About 7.5%
increase in cost, with the benefit of making (on average) three times as
many worlds accessible with one jump.  Unless you are on a fixed route
(in which case your ship would have the J-drive required by the route,
neither more nor less), a J-2 will (probably) pay for itself just from
the extra flexibility it gives all those footloose free-trader types out
there.


>Finally, checking all worlds within jump-1 or jump-2 is a practical
>thing to do by hand, on a hand-written map.  Checking all worlds within
>jump-6 (for each and every world in the subsector) is a daunting task.
>In a case like this, I would simply ditch the modifiers and change the
>die roll as indicated.

I don't believe in J-6 merchants, though Hans recently gave me an idea
that might make me start to believe.


>Go for it!  (and let me know how it turns out)  Kinda reminds me of my
>college wargaming society's motto: "We can fix these rules!"

I'll let you know...

Pauli:

>But there is a major difference: one-cycle steam engines are not
>economical to build or run these days.  Ships powered by steam would be
>much more costly to run and would probably be slower travelling too
>(correct me on that bit if necessary).  A starship with J-1 takes the
>same time as a J-6 ship to make that short jump and it burns less fuel
>and it costs less to build and maintain.  Sure, over longer distances
>J-1 isn't as economical but so long as a world has trading partners
>close enough J-1 would be the way to go.

Too true.  But a ship with J-1 has real problems going across two
parsecs of empty space.  A ship on a set route will have whatever drives
are required, be they J-1 or J-4.  On an unscheduled trip (like most PC
types make), a higher J-drive number is almost always worth the cost -
especially if you carry most of the fuel in drop tanks, so your cargo
capacity doesn't suffer.


>Also, the jump-1 drive of 3500 years ago is exactly the same as the
>jump-1 drive of the present imperium.  They have made no real progress
>in all that time (actually, they can build jump drives that go further
>but the basic jump-1 drive is still the same size/cost/everything else
>as it was originally).

This is true.  This makes very little sense, but that IS the way the
rules are written.  This is not really relevant to my point, which was
that J-1 is too low to use as a favourable mod, since heavy traffic
systems will trade with anyone within J-4 probably.  J-1 is too
restrictive an assumption for defining areas of heavy traffic.


---Steve



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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4995
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 92 4:25:55 EST
From: Seth the Lesser <slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu>
Subject: More on this nifty "center of mass" idea

Jeff Zeitlin (jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com) talked about center of mass as
an important, neglected consideration in Traveller & MT ship designs,
to which I reply from my sickbed with fevered brow and palsied typing
finger:

I agree that center of mass is a critical design consideration in
Traveller spacecraft, but not for quite the same reasons that you
raise.

F=ma is important, yes, and the design rules for *anti-grav* vehicles
take it into account, by guaranteeing that one has no more thrust than
one pays for.  The design evaluation step in MegaTraveller (and
presumably Striker, though, cheapskate that I am, I never got around
to buying it before the change-over) explicitly uses F=ma to determine
the maximum possible acceleration of a craft with a given
thrust-to-mass ratio, then applies black magic to convert the maximum
acceleration into a maximum safe speed in atmosphere.

However, as soon as we change over to "thrusters" as a means of
propulsion, we wave hands and make F=ma go away.  Instead, we
calculate the acceleration of a ship based on its thrust-to-*volume*
ratio.  This has never seemed entirely satisfactory to me--what it is,
is an attempt to make all those _High Guard_ ship designs vaguely
salvageable in MegaTraveller--and I've tried several times to juggle
the rules to make mass more important than volume in determining
thruster acceleration.  Unfortunately, doing so *demands* that ship
designers sit down with a spreadsheet (or a custom set of software for
their programmable calculator) and iterate, iterate, iterate until
they get a workable design.  If your players never want to design
their own ships (or you never give them the money to do so :-), and if
you have a computer and a lot of time to spare, this is all fine and
dandy, but as a general mechanic for the non-computer-oriented gaming
public, it just doesn't work.  IMHO.  (Whoops, that should probably be
at the top, shouldn't it....)

However, none of this is strictly relevant to center-of-mass.
Center-of-mass (or center-of-inertia, or kurtosis point, depending on
what power you raise the moment arm to) only comes into play when you
dig out the ol' 1 cm grid and start doing the deckplans.  Although
there's no intrinsically preferred attitude in vacuum, the Traveller
"thruster" drives have a preferred axis of thrust.  If this preferred
axis of thrust *doesn't* pass through the center of mass, you'll find
yourself spinning rather rapidly, since torque equals the
cross-product of radial displacement and force.  Or else you sacrifice
maneuver power by biasing the plates to thrust a bit off-axis.

Since Traveller has never had much more than a vague set of guidelines
for doing deckplans, there are no rules for dealing with
center-of-mass.  I take it into account in a vague sort of way in my
own deckplans (which are few and far between, since I'm an absolute
perfectionist), and then make players sweat about it when they load
and unload cargo.  It's nice to see the supercargo of a free trader
ordering the sweating, cursing, exhausted command crew to "push that
container just a liiiittle more to port...a liiiittle more...wait stop
that's too far" as he frantically fingers controls on his hand
computer.  It's *really* nice when a blown die roll by the supercargo
can mean a lost battle a few days later.  Makes his player feel wanted.

Seth "the Lesser"

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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4996
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 92 11:13:01 +1100
From: "Carl Makin" <makinc@hhcs.gov.au>
Subject: RE: Weight and Balance.


jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin) writes:

>  license).  One of the things we were discussing was the necessity
>  and principles of weight and balance calculations.  The past couple
>  of nights, I've been thinking about that, and realized (for no
>  particular reason) that this concept seems to be absent from
>  Traveller/Megatraveller.

Yes it's missing as, I suspect, it's too complicated and difficult
to calculate accurately in a gaming situation and the vast majority
of gamers arn't interested in that level of detail.

The problem is that weight and balance calculations are different for
every aircraft type, and often for individual aircraft of the same
type if they've had modifications.  This would become very unweildy in
a game (such as one I'm currently playing in) where aircraft are a
major part of the equipment of the characters.

> I'd like some ideas on how to add it. My reasoning is as follows:

You can do it either of two ways.
1) Make the players calculate it out, or

2) Create a preflight "check" roll against the pilot's (and in fact,
all pilots in the aircraft) skill level.  Make it a normal task.

Also, for those situations where the pilot doesn't load the aircraft
make the "loadmaster" do the roll against their skill (work out which one
applies).  It should be an normal task for one with experience.  Give the
pilot (or pilots) a chance to detect problems on their "preflight check"
roll.  This would encampass more than just weight and balance though.
Is the cargo properly secured?  Did the ground handlers forget to put the
fuel cap back on?  Are the tyres/wings/control surfaces/air intakes/
instrumentation probes and holes in good condition, not blocked etc.
NOTE most of these a non-pilot just wouldn't think of.

Consequences.
Out of balance:  The aircraft will either want to turn towards the
heavier side, or raise/lower the nose.  It will require some control
input to override this however it may be masked by the trim controls.
Often, in light aircraft the weight and balance shifts as fuel burns off
so the problem may get worse (rarely better though. :-() the longer you
fly.  This problem may not manifest itself until the aircraft is in the
air and climbing to the desired altitude.

Overweight:  Sluggish climb performance.  How badly overweight will
determin how badly it performs.  This problem would tend to get better
as fuel burns off.  An overweight aircraft also won't climb as high as
a lightly loaded one.  This probably wouldn't be detected until aircraft
rotated off the runway.  As soon as it's in the air the pilot will know
something is wrong (but it could be a bad engine!).

The GM can devise other "problems" as needed. :-)

>  Obviously, an aircraft, it's important.  You have a limited amount
>  of power, and you must maintain a certain airspeed to stay up in the
>  sky.

There is a saying in aviation circles, "Takeoff is optional, Landing
is compulsory". :-)

>  Now, what about your spacegoing vessel?  Well, there are basically

>  force that they can provide.  How do you ensure that this level of
>  force is going to be sufficient to move your ship?  If I don't have
 ...
>  so _a_, the resultant acceleration, must go up.  Hmm, does that
>  mean that my free trader rated at 1G acceleration can actually get
>  1.5G or maybe 2G if I'm running empty?

That depends on how you specify the drives work.

I've never been satisfied with Traveller drives (either maneuver or jump)
because of these inconsistancies, however it does make the game a little
easier to play.  Less worrying about practicalities and more emphasis
on situations.

BTW the "Hooded Swan" series by Brian Stableford has a very interesting
universe with a number of maneuver and translight drives with different
characteristics.  Have a look for some ideas. :-)

Carl.


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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4997
From: Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.com>
Subject: Mass and Drives
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1992 21:49:56 -0500 (EST)

Jeff Zeitlin asks about mass in starship designs.  Others have adequately
covered the "real world" aspect of needing to ensure that the thrust is
through the center of mass, so I won't go over that again.  As to the question
of how thrusters work--I've always assumed that they _really_ work on
F=ma, and that the drive ratings are simple approximations of what per-
formance would be expected with a typical weight on a given hull size.
However, given that the TL9 antigrav drive unit is the same size and has
the same power input as 650 tons of thrust worth of grav units from the
vehicle part of the deisgn sequence, I always calculate a "true acceleration"
based on 650 tons/drive unit.  I've found that with ships carrying little
or no extra armor, the resulting number is usually within 20% of the "drive
rating" number.  For thrusters I continue to assume 650 tons per unit, with
the extra power required going to account for whatever magic makes them
work in deep space.

In practice, I've never really bothered to recalculate accelerations with
varying cargoes during a game, but it wouldn't be prohibitively difficult,
as long as you peg the thrust of a drive unit at some set value.  I have
recalculated acceleration for a ship with a disabled power plant that had
to jury rig some power for the thrusters using a portable fusion plant from
the cargo during a game, but I seem to recall that I just used the default
"loaded weight" for the calculation.

Rob Dean
robdean@access.digex.com

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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4998
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 92 0:49:17 EST
From: Seth the Lesser <slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu>
Subject: Atmospheric pressure

A few days ago, some folks (I don't archive the TML, so I don't
remember who, though I'm pretty sure wildstar was one of 'em) were
talking about revising the UPP system to have an integrated
"composition" digit that would include atmosphere type and planetary
makeup.

I just looked at an article on Titan (the second-biggest satellite in
the Sol system, bigger than Luna), and it seems that the postulated
relationship between surface gravity and atmospheric pressure is
contradicted by astronomical observation.

Titan has a radius of 2575 km (that's a diameter of 5150 km or 3219 miles, for
a size digit of 3), a mass 0f 0.022 Earths, a surface gravity of 0.14 g, and a
surface pressure of approximately 1.5 bars.  That's 50% *more* pressure than
Earth, on a *much* lighter planet.  So much for the idea that atmospheric
pressure is directly related to planetary mass or surface gravity....

Titan's atmospheric composition is not precisely known, but the
primary gas is nitrogen (pp around 1.3 bars), the secondary is methane
(around 0.15 bars), there might be some argon (pp disputed), and there
are traces of all sorts of nasty nitrogen compounds, from hydrogen
cyanide to cyanoacetylene.  There are almost no oxygen compounds (as
befits a strongly reducing atmosphere like that); carbon monoxide
might have a partial pressure as high as 0.2 millibars.

However, current astronomical speculation on Titan fits the
previously-expressed theory of "everything has a core."  With a
density of 1.88 grams per cubic centimeter (0.34 Earth densities), the
_World Builders' Handbook_ gives Titan a designation of "icy body."  The best
current estimates give Titan a 1000 km radius core of liquid iron and ferrous
sulfide, surrounded by layers of silicate rock, clathrates, and various ices,
with the exterior being a miniscule crust of water-ammonia ice floating on
(possibly liquid) water-ammonia.

Obviously, the WBH nomenclature of "icy body"/"rocky body"/"molten
core"/"heavy core" needs revision; however, any revision will not be able to
encompass atmospheric pressure as well.

(BTW, I've assigned Titan a tentative atmosphere digit of A: exotic-irritant.
Any comments?)

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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 4999
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 92 04:15 PST
Subject: More on this nifty "center of mass" idea
From: Edward_Swatschek@mindlink.bc.ca (Edward Swatschek)

> Seth the Lesser <slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu> writes:
>
> Jeff Zeitlin (jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com) talked about center of mass as an
> important, neglected consideration in Traveller & MT ship designs, to which
> I reply from my sickbed with fevered brow and palsied typing finger:
>
> ...
> However, as soon as we change over to "thrusters" as a means of propulsion,
> we wave hands and make F=ma go away.  Instead, we calculate the
> acceleration of a ship based on its thrust-to-*volume* ratio.
> ...


   I've never liked using thrusters that accelerate a volume instead of mass.
One problem is with relativity: if mass does not affect the acceleration, you
can approach and exceed c without penalty to the acceleration. Also, how does
the maneuver drive define the volume to be accelerated? Can you extend it out
beyond the hull? Why are inertial compensators needed if every part of the
ship is being accellerated equally?

   Using mass-based thrusters does add to the book keeping however; you'll
need accelerations defined for empty, average, and full loads. But, in the
interests of keeping things from becoming too complex, I would not worry
about center-of-gravity problems.

- --

               Edjs                    _
              ------                _ //  CI$  : 76427,662
   Edward_Swatschek@mindlink.bc.ca  \X/   GEnie: E.SWATSCHEK



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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 5000
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 92 06:30:41 -0600
From: "Cynthia Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: IMPERIUM.GIF

A while back, someone (Rob Dean? Mike Metlay?) posted a GIF of
Imperium/Shattered Imperium logos that he used as icons.  (I misplaced
that GIF.)  Do you have the Xlib bitmap files for those logos, and could
you e-mail them to me?

Thank you,
Cynthia


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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 5001
From: metlay@netcom.com (metlay)
Subject: cynthia?
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 92 12:27:11 PST

Cynthia Higginbotham, I've lost your new address, alas, alackaday,
and I have more obnoxious news footage to send you for your collection!
Have pity upon a poor Metlay, and send me your address, please?

- --
dr. michael metlay       | Today's "Context is Everything" quote:
atomic city              |
p. o. box 81175          | "What happens to the finish when a roadie
pittsburgh pa 15217-0675 |  stubs out a fag on it?"
metlay@netcom.com        |                             (n. rothwell)

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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 5002
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 92 13:52:38 -0700
From: hobbes@spacemanspiff.den.mmc.com (Stephen Camp)
Subject: subscribe hobbes@spacemanspiff.den.mmc.com



please subscribe hobbes@spacemanspiff.den.mmc.com

(there doesn't seem to be a traveller-request@nova.ungrg.uwo.ca...)

Steve Camp
(303)971-4379
hobbes@spacemanspiff.den.mmc.com
Martin Marietta Launch Systems


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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 5003
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: I wonder if the TML is up?  (GDW contact report)
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 92 12:45:37 CST

Forwarded message:
From CS171308011@UTSA86  Thu Dec  3 09:53:12 1992
Date:    Thu, 3 Dec 1992 9:48:01 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86
Message-Id: <921203094801.331b8@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU>
Subject: GDW news
To: skellogg
X-Vmsmail-To: ME

Hey Folx,

I was just making some orders to GDW, when, I got switched over to
Loren Wiseman.  So, here's some news fer ya'll.  I haven't seen any
advertizements of ImperialLines, but they've put up a few issues,
I gather they've already sent out issue #3.  They do still have
some back issues for those of you who didn't subscribe yet.

Astrogators Guide to Diaspora is also out.

TNE is due out in March, but Loren was guessing at early April.
He's not on the design team, so he's not really in on it, but
apparantly several disks of info have been filled up for
publishing.

Loren asked me to say that he has an apparantly freaky mail node.
He does recieve all the mail he's been sent, but has trouble
getting mail out.  So, if some of you feel he's snubbed you, it is
because of a bad mailer.  He doesn't get a whole lot of time to
read and respond to mail though.  This and the messed up mailer
will slow his responces to your messages.

We chatted fer a bit, and I will confirm Metlay's statement that
it's nice to connect a human voice to the writing on the computer.
(Yes, folks, he's human, and... Even *I'm* human. :-)

All in all, a cool guy.

Scott 2G Kellogg^Z



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

Bundle: 424
Archive-Message-Number: 5004
From: cornwell@minster.york.ac.uk
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 92 14:31:22
Subject: Fifth Frontier War...


I have been trying to get hold of a copy of this game for
absolutely ages..from just about every concievable source I can think
of.  Does anyone out there know where I can get a copy? First or
second hand I don't care.

Apologies if this is an inappropriate place to post, this is the
biggest concentration of trav players I know of :-)

cheers,

Pete C.

***********************************************************************
* Pete Cornwell               me@blighty: cornwell@uk.ac.york.minster *
* Dept. of Computer Science   me@world : cornwell@minster.york.ac.uk  *
* University of York                                                  *
* England.                                                            *
***********************************************************************


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

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 425  5005 04-Dec-1992 Scott S. Kellog  Zhodani Commando Tactics << Forwarded m
 425  5006 08-Dec-1992 Jeff Zeitlin     trade starships << TML::>I don't believ
 425  5007 11-Dec-1992 Michael A. Surm  Re: Technology Marches On << Chrysler o
 425  5008 12-Dec-1992 Hans Rancke-Mad  << Scott writes:
 425  5009 12-Dec-1992 Hans Rancke-Mad  Piracy and Sword Worlds << Steve Higgin
 425  5010 12-Dec-1992 Rob Dean         Sword Worlds -- Quick Notes << Hooray!
 425  5011 12-Dec-1992 Derek Wildstar   Old Stuff << Here are a bunch of things
 425  5012 12-Dec-1992 Derek Wildstar   Replies to recent topics << Rob Dean <r
 425  5013 12-Dec-1992 Scott S. Kellog  Challenge 67 & *ROB DEAN*! << YAHOOO!!!
 425  5014 12-Dec-1992 Derek Wildstar   Current Subjects << Hans Rancke-Madsen
 425  5015 13-Dec-1992 "Steve Higginbo  as requested << From: cdr@kpc.com (Carl
 425  5016 13-Dec-1992 "Cynthia Higgin  Needed: standard file format for extend
 425  5017 14-Dec-1992 cornwell@minste  Fifth frontier war...Thanks! << Ta very
 425  5018 14-Dec-1992 Martin Snow      Ship Maintenance << Instead of raising

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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5005
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Zhodani Commando Tactics
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 92 9:38:02 CST

Forwarded message:
From CS171308011@UTSA86  Tue Dec  1 12:29:38 1992
Date:    Tue, 1 Dec 1992 12:28:09 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86
Message-Id: <921201122809.30a29@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU>
Subject: Zhodani Commando Tactics
To: skellogg
X-Vmsmail-To: ME

Hey Lads & Lassies,

[Murray Atkinson wrote up some Psionic rules in private
correspondence but the comments I have may be of interest
to the TML.]

One of the ideas he presented (And bandied about on the TML
not long ago) was the idea of taking some of the restrictions
off teleportation and putting on some different ones.

Specifically, The inertia & conservation of energy problems
are solved, allowing someone to teleport with far greater
freedom and even up to interplanetary ranges.  To counteract
this new advantage, he proposed that there is a delay time
between when a teleport starts to form in the new environ
and when they can actually move and act.  (A few seconds
making teleportation similar to the transporter effects of
Star Trek.)

Well, I maintain that this (and the mechanical teleporter
suggeted recently on the TML) are just TOO Powerful as
weapons to be allowed into Traveller.

If someone can teleport across interplanetary ranges,
Ship to ship combat would be useless in the Frontier Wars
with the Zhos.  A Zho teleport commando would be able to
teleport right to the bridge and wipe it out.

Ah!  I hear cries of, 'Not enough firepower!'  Or 'The
teleporter must have a clear picture of the target!'
Remember, they *DO* have both.  Teleport commandos usually
operate under a clairvoyant telepathic troop director.
The Clairvoyant scopes out the target, and places the image
of the target into the mind of the teleporting troops.
That way the Teleporting troops save their psi strength
for the journey there and back.  So, if you remove the
inertia problems, you will have teleport commandos
everywhere.  A few seconds is just not enough time to react
to their presence.

'I teleport into the closet where nobody's looking...'

What about firepower?

Well, The Zho commando's standard armament is battledress
and fusion gun.  A fusion gun, if fired in an enclosed
room (like a ship's bridge...)  Kaboom.  Every unprotected
person in the room is dead.

Ok, suppose the entire bridge crew wears combat armor?

No Problem!  The average commando carries 20-30Kg of
equipment when they teleport.  Battle Dress is 10-15 Kg
and the FGMP-14 is 10Kg, plus an assorted 5 or so Kg of
stuff... (Grenades...)  Well, combat armor *MIGHT* be
able to stand up to stuff like that, *BUT* I did some
checking in Striker...  At TL 13 (just below Zhodani
common levels) a .1 Kiloton nuclear warhead weighs in
at 10 Kg.  Give up the fusion gun and you got a REAL
NASTY grenade.  Can *YOU* disarm a nuclear warhead
with a fuse of only a few seconds?

(In case you're wondering, the nuclear missiles used
in ship combat are .1 Kiloton.)

And if the teleporter only goes in a Vac suit or so,
well a 2 kiloton bomb weighs in at only 20Kg.

Now, if you try to limit the amount that the teleport
can carry (to outlaw large conventional warheads)
Don't forget the collapsing rounds! (TL 13).  A 2Kg
collapsing grenade would explode with a force of
1 ton of TNT, and a 4Kg grenade would be worth 10 tons
of TNT.  That's an AWFUL lotta bang.

Why is it that the Zho's don't use these things?  Well,
Teleport range being as limited as it is, it's hard to
get out of range of the blast by just teleporting away.
If you can go accross continents, there would be no
inhibitions on doing so.  I also have assumed that the
Zhos don't use nuclear warheads against 'Soft' targets.
The only place nuclear rounds really get used is in
ship to ship combat, or bombarding isolated planetary
defense postions.  (But, don't get any idea about
putting that deep site meson gun under a major city...)

Now, if you want to have a mechanical transporter
either akin to Blake's Seven, or (Ohmygod) Star Trek
Then nuclear mayhem will similarly be out of control.

Murray also pointed out that the aquisition of psi-skills
is easier for the Zhodani than it is for Imperials.  The
rolls required to pick up talents are less when you compare
Alien Module 4 with MegaTraveller and Book 3 (The counter
part for Alien Module 4).

Ah HA!  He's Right!  Well, it just goes to show that the
Zhodani education is FAR superior in terms of psionics
than Imperial Psi-Institutes.  (Sorry Catie!  But Jiet
was RIGHT!  The Lying Deadheads are Far behind...  :-)

Scott 2G Kellogg



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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5006
From: jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Date: 8 Dec 92 (00:54)
Subject: trade starships


TML::>I don't believe in J-6 merchants, though Hans recently gave me an idea
   ::>that might make me start to believe.

   Some of the MT background material would seem to imply that J6 is
   EXTREMELY uncommon, if not reserved to the Imperial government.
   The one thing that strikes me as strong evidence for this view is
   that the gov't had to come up with the "stealth courier" which
   looks like a conventional J2 ship (of I forgot which class), but
   which instead has minimal cargo capabilities, with the cargo space
   being used for the increased volume for the Jdrive and the
   additional fuel needed to run it.  If J6 was common, the special
   fleet would _not_ have been the way that Norris, et alia heard
   about the assassination before the general populace in their
   domains; it would have leaked pretty fast to some areas, and once
   the unofficial version of the news gets ahead of the official
   version of the news, it _will_ stay ahead - "News always travels by
   the fastest available route."  Implication: The Imperial
   Government's J6 couriers are the fastest available route.
   Secondary implication: Commercial spacecraft with J6 do not exist.

  J/
  jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com

 * QMPro 1.0 41-4533 * Photons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!
- --
Executive Network Information System  (914) 667-4567
International ILink Host

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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5007
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 07:37:17 -0600
From: surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
Subject: Re: Technology Marches On

Chrysler or Chevrolet has installed a basic HUD as an option in
some of their models. It only displays your speed but it does so
by projecting the information onto the windshield.

Mike


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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5008
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject:
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 18:54:55 MET

Scott writes:
> One of the ideas he presented (And bandied about on the TML
> not long ago) was the idea of taking some of the restrictions
> off teleportation and putting on some different ones.
>
> Specifically, The inertia & conservation of energy problems
> are solved, allowing someone to teleport with far greater
> freedom and even up to interplanetary ranges.  To counteract
> this new advantage, he proposed that there is a delay time
> between when a teleport starts to form in the new environ
> and when they can actually move and act.  (A few seconds
> making teleportation similar to the transporter effects of
> Star Trek.)
 .
 .
 .
> If someone can teleport across interplanetary ranges,
> Ship to ship combat would be useless in the Frontier Wars
> with the Zhos.  A Zho teleport commando would be able to
> teleport right to the bridge and wipe it out.
>
> Ah!  I hear cries of, 'Not enough firepower!'  Or 'The
> teleporter must have a clear picture of the target!'

Nope. My cry is: 'My warships have built-in psionic screens and
in my universe psionic screens prevent all psionic phenomena!'

Personally I would suggest keeping the inertia & conservation
of energy restrictions and make psionics a bit cheaper instead.



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "This gives a possible range of 56 to 178 starships
         total  in the three Terran starport facilities,  a
         believable quantity for such a star system."

        "We have a maximum of 178 ships in port, and (as it
         is a busy star system)  we will say that there are
         70 docking berths at the Phoenix facility."

                        ---Journal of the Traveller's
                           Aid Society # 18

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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5009
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Piracy and Sword Worlds
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 19:11:22 MET

Steve Higginbotham writes:
>Alistair Langsford:
>
>>Piracy
>
>>To me Piracy is either small operations on the Frontier, or big
>>business organised crime in anywhere better policed.  I think that
>>there was a Journal (ie JTAS) or early Challenge article some time back
>>which talked about the economics of Piracy, and how to work out where
>>it would occur.  Anyone remember this?
>
>Piracy is big business.  Remember how much pirate ships cost.  Remember
>that even if you steal the ship, you have to spend millions to arm it,
>and more millions to repair it and maintain it.  This implies support
>form someone who already has millions, like a government.

I've been toying with making the price of yearly maintenance higher the
older the ship is while making the risks of an inadequately maintained
ships less. The result should be that established corporations would
get rid of their ships after 30 or 40 years because they became too
expensive to maintain. Thus lots of cheap but old ships on the market.

The problem with fleet sizes I still can't quite see how to overcome.
More star systems and less high-population planets is what's needed here.

- ---

Mark Urbin writes:
>  Putting a little though into it, a Darrian/Sword World mutual defense
>treaty (against the Zhodani) would probably spring into place.

This would be something like a Monaco/San Marino alliance against Germany.

Incidentally, the last I heard GDW intended to use the "Light behind the
Claw" idea. Norris will manage to avert the virus (somehow), so the Sword
Worlds would not be affected at all.


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

                        ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir

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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5010
From: Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.com>
Subject: Sword Worlds -- Quick Notes
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 20:20:53 -0500 (EST)

Hooray!  The TML is back up!

Just a couple of notes on Mark Urbin's questions about the Sword Worlds
in TML-Not! #6:

In the Rebellion Era, the Sword Worlds are still divided into the the two
groups that they were split up into at the end of the Fifth Frontier War.
(Details on request).

If you believe the numbers in the world descriptions, there are only three
really important Sword Worlds--Sacnoth, which has the highest TL--12,
Narsil, whose A population represents the majority of the total population
of the polity, and Gram, in between the two in both tech level and
population.  So, the important question is whether or not Sacnoth would
retain jump capability.

However, as I recall, the question cannot really be answered "authoritatively",
since the Hard Times book deosn't show a category for subsectors in the
Spinward MArches outside the Imperium.  Ah well.

I don't think the general tone of historical data would support a Sword Worlds-
Darrian alliance, since they've been at odds for centuries.  (Think of the
Serbs and Croats here--they've had centuries to make peace with each other,
too, and it hasn't stuck, now, has it?)

Rob Dean

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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5011
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 20:39:11 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Old Stuff

Here are a bunch of things I was going to post to TML during the period
that it was down; I saved them up so here they come all at once!

I may have mentioned some of these things on TML-Not!, but as far as I
remember I did not post the following messages generally.


Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se> writes:
>   Assuming a static total tonnage in the Imperium, the shipyards must divide
> their space into doing the yearly overhaul and building ships to replace those
> who go away (through age or destruction).

Right.  Class A or B ports can do yearly maintainance and all types of
repairs.  In Classic Traveller and MegaTraveller, no mention is made of any
TL requirements for these overhauls; they can be done at *ANY* class A or B
port.  According to Trillion Credit Squadron, repairs can be performed at a
Class A or B port (although Jump-Drive repairs take twice as long and cost
twice as much at Class B facilities).  TCS also imposes the limitation that
the facility doing the repair must be at the same (or higher) tech level as
the listed TL (in the High Guard construction tables) for the system.  Only
Class A ports can construct new ships.

One problem I see with the TCS rules is that there are 29 Class A starports
listed at tech levels below 9.  By definition, these ports are able to
construct jump-capable starships; however, TCS rules makes them unable to
repair the jump-drives of any ships that they construct.

Furthermore, the definition of Class C ports indicates that they are capable
of some types of repairs, but not annual maintainance overhauls.  A complete
model should assign some type of capacity to these ports for repairing
damaged starships.

> [comments on the economics of overhauls, maintainance, and repairs]

Huh?  Where did your numbers come from?

From the designs I have available, military starships can cost over 1 MCr per
ton, while commercial ships cost between 0.3 and 0.1 MCr per ton.
Construction time depends on the size of the vessel, with larger ships taking
longer to construct.

Repair is more difficult to estimate.  According to TCS, "normal" battle
damage takes 1 to 4 weeks to fix, and costs 1/4 of the cost of the damaged
system.  In the case of partially damaged systems (for example, factor 3
system damaged by 1 factor), the fraction is also applied to the repair cost
(in this example, the repair cost would be 1/4 of 1/3 of the cost of the
system).  Critical hits require the complete replacement of the system, at
full purchase price; this takes 4 to 8 weeks.  In the examples below, I have
assumed damage that involves the power plant (damaged to inoperability
through normal weapons fire) and the jump drive (destroyed by a critical
hit); and minimum time to replace the systems.

A bulk freighter of 100,000 tons, built at TL-15 with Jump-1 performance
costs 0.1179 MCr per ton, and will take 208 weeks to construct.  The income
from this works out to 566.59 credits per ton-week.  The same ship pays
11.785 MCr for its annual maintainance, which occupies 100,000 tons of
shipyard capacity for two weeks, or 58.92 credits per ton-week.  Repair of
normal damage costs 628.75 MCr, or 1,571,88 credits per ton-week.  Critical
repairs cost 6,000 MCr, or 7,500.00 credits per ton-week.

A 400 ton subsidized merchant (built using my own design, rather than the one
in the Imperial Encyclopedia) built at TL-15 with Jump-1 performance costs
0.2125 MCr per ton, and will take 64 weeks to construct.  This works out to
be 3,320.31 credits per ton-week.  For annual maintainance, this ship will
pay 85,000 Cr for two weeks work, or 106.25 credits per ton-week.  Repairs
cost 2.675 MCr and 24 MCr; or 1,671.88 and 7,500.00 credits per ton-week.

A 400 ton Q-ship (pirate catcher disguised as a subsidized merchant) built at
TL-15 with maneuver-4, jump-4 performance costs 1.1075 MCr per ton, and will
take 64 weeks to complete, for 17,304.69 credits per ton-week.  Its annual
maintainance will cost 443,000 Cr for two weeks work, or 553.75 credits per
ton-week.  Repairs cost 23.9 MCr and 60.0 MCr; or 14,937.50 and 18,750
credits per ton-week.

The following ships are purely Naval vessels (although I assume that it is
possible that the destroyer or escorts could turn up in the Rebellion or Hard
Times as vikings or starmercs.

A 9,500 ton escort costs 9,499 MCr, while a destroyer based on the same hull
costs 14,178 MCr; both would take 160 weeks to construct, for 6,249.34 and
9,327.63 credits per ton-week, respectively.  The maintainance figures are
499.95 and 746.21 credits per ton-week.

A 95,000 ton frigate costs 117,668 MCr, and takes 208 weeks to complete.
This makes its figures 5,954.86 and 619.31 credits per ton-week for
construction and maintainance.

I think that it is reasonable to conclude that merchant ships will cost
between 1,000 and 5,000 credits per ton-week to construct (with smaller ships
costing more, and therefore being more profitable).  Annual maintainance
overhauls are much less profitable, at 50 to 200 credits per ton-week.
Military and starmerc ships of any size are much more profitable than
merchant craft; again smaller ships are more profitable.

Repairs are more profitable than annual maintainance; these profits are of
the same order of magnitude as new construction (repair of critical hits can
be more lucrative than new construction).  This business is much less secure
(depending as it does on essentially random events) than construction or
annual overhauls.

All of these numbers suggest some assumptions about the way shipyards work,
and about the way they make a profit.  I'm assuming that the cost per
ton-week of capacity is a measure of the shipyards resources, both in terms
of capacity and in terms of the labor, parts, and materials required.  Since
the shipyard is in business to earn a profit, this figure also includes the
yard's profit margin.

Small ships (certainly under 5,000 tons, with most of them being under 1,000
tons) is quite profitable.  Enough so that they may be produced on
speculation when the shipyard is otherwise idle.  If the market for such
vessels is strong, this type of speculation can even be more profitable than
performing annual maintainance.

Annual maintainance is the least profitable of all shipyard activities.
However, it is the only one which can be performed by Class B starports, and
presumably almost all of this work is done there.  Annual maintainance at a
Class A port would be unusual, and an indication of unusually high demand for
this service.  At this point, prices would start to go up, as demand
outstripped supply.  These price increases are almost all profit for the
shipyard; as the price goes up, overhauls start to become as profitable as
new construction.

Larger ships are more efficient for the operator.  The 100,000 ton bulk
freighter's cargo bay is slightly over 77% of the ship's entire volume, while
a comparable 400 ton subsidized merchant can devote slightly over 62% of its
volume to cargo and passengers.  However, these larger ships are less
profitable for the shipyards.

The construction and maintainance of large ships is probably done under long
term or large order contract.  During the Imperium, transport companies with
long term freight contracts or secure routes could easily borrow money to
build such ships.  Outside of the Safes in the post-Rebellion era, the
companies which used to let these kinds of contracts no longer exist, and the
lack of stability prevents their re-creation; very large transports are
therefore unknown.  This, and not the large amounts of repairs, is what
breaks the interstellar economy (in my not-so-humble opinion).


Steve Higginbotham writes:
> This is not really relevant to my point, which was
> that J-1 is too low to use as a favourable mod, since heavy traffic
> systems will trade with anyone within J-4 probably.  J-1 is too
> restrictive an assumption for defining areas of heavy traffic.

Heavy traffic systems will still be heavy traffic systems even if they are
isolated; there is a certain amount of traffic which travels farther than
most.  The difference works out to about 4 "points" of traffic density.  How
this translates into numbers and tons of ships depends on your interpretation
of the traffic density chart, and how you divide up the traffic.

A workable interpretation would be to take the total "trade partners" DM
(which can range from -2 to +12, and is typically +4) and compare it to the
traffic level.  If the DM is negative, almost all (at least 95%) of the
traffic is "long-distance".  If the DM is larger than the trade level, almost
all (at least 95%) of the trade is "local".  If the DM is positive and less
than the trade leve), the ratio of the "trade partners" DM to the traffic
level shows the ratio between short and long distance trade.  If the DM is
zero, the amount of local trade is small (less than 1 / traffic level), but
greater than if the DM were negative.

For example, Regina has a trade level of 14 (E), and its partners DM is +3.
About 3/14ths, or about 21% of its trade is with local partners, and the
balance of 79% goes farther than the next parsec or two.  Rebellion-Era
Promise with a trade level of 14, and a partners DM of +4 is about the same:
29% of the traffic is local, and 71% is long-distance.  During the Hard
Times, this shifts dramatically, to a new trade level of 7, and a partners DM
of 0.  Nearly all of it's trade is "long distance": presumably to that
relatively undamaged agricultural world at the other end of the League of
Promise.  The local trade (probably to the nearby agricultural world) is less
than 1/7th of Promise's trade (over 5% but under 14%, pick any reasonable
number).

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

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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5012
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 22:01:44 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Replies to recent topics

Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.com> writes:
> of how thrusters work--I've always assumed that they _really_ work on
> F=ma, and that the drive ratings are simple approximations of what per-
> formance would be expected with a typical weight on a given hull size.

I'd like to see this change, one way or another, in TNE.  Either
everything should be calculated based on tons of thrust and tons of mass
(which has the advantage of making sense), or both accelleration and
agility should be computed on volume of the drive field (which has the
advantage of being easy to calculate).


Edward_Swatschek@mindlink.bc.ca (Edward Swatschek) writes:
>    I've never liked using thrusters that accelerate a volume instead of mass.
> One problem is with relativity: if mass does not affect the acceleration, you
> can approach and exceed c without penalty to the acceleration. Also, how does
> the maneuver drive define the volume to be accelerated? Can you extend it out
> beyond the hull? Why are inertial compensators needed if every part of the
> ship is being accellerated equally?

Well there is an intertialess drive in the "literature".
It's called the Bergenholm, and it's an old and honourable stardrive
(created by Edward E. "Doc" Smith for his Lensman saga) with a long
history of science fiction behind it.

But it's not Traveller.


skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg) writes:
> I was just making some orders to GDW, when, I got switched over to
> Loren Wiseman.  So, here's some news fer ya'll.  I haven't seen any
> advertizements of ImperialLines, but they've put up a few issues,
> I gather they've already sent out issue #3.  They do still have
> some back issues for those of you who didn't subscribe yet.

What a weird bit of synchronicity.  I spoke to Dave Nilsen, apparrently
on about the same date that you were talking to Loren.  The subject of
our discussion was made public on TML-Not! (and presumably the thread
will move over here).

I will simply have to subscribe to Imperial Lines.  No way around it.

> Astrogators Guide to Diaspora is also out.

I have it; it's apparrently been out for about a month now.  It is very
nice, and I reccommend it.  The price is right for the amount of data
provided.  I have only a few minor nits to pick.  First of all, I found
the large map to be overly "busy" - trying to code travel zone
(Frontier, Outland, Wilds) as well as everything else was confusing.
Since this information was already represented on the small map, I don't
see why it was coded twice.  The text also includes some minor errata
for Hard Times and Assignment: Vigilante (the Outlands/Wilds coding in
the Hard Times map legend is backwards, and some of the world UWPs in
Assignment: Vigilante are wrong).

I forget which one it was in (I bought Assignment: Vigilante and
Diaspora Sector at the same time), but one contained Imperial Lines #1,
while the other contained a multi-page, full-color, slick-paper ad for
(UGH!) Dangerous Journeys.  Save your advertising budget, folks; I'm not
interested.

> We chatted fer a bit, and I will confirm Metlay's statement that
> it's nice to connect a human voice to the writing on the computer.
> (Yes, folks, he's human, and... Even *I'm* human. :-)

I'll add that Dave Nilsen is a good guy, too.  It turns out that he is
from around here (Rockville, MD; near Washington, DC) and we chatted
about some things of local interest.


From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
> Specifically, The inertia & conservation of energy problems
> are solved, allowing someone to teleport with far greater
> freedom and even up to interplanetary ranges.  To counteract
> this new advantage, he proposed that there is a delay time
> between when a teleport starts to form in the new environ
> and when they can actually move and act.  (A few seconds
> making teleportation similar to the transporter effects of
> Star Trek.)

I don't think that this is enough of a disadvantage to offset the
greater freedome and range of teleportation.  Although this is a start.
Let me see if I can come up with some logical limitations (I wouldn't
mind seeing teleport become more powerful, as long as it didn't
unbalance the game).  Such things are not necessicarily too powerful ...

> If someone can teleport across interplanetary ranges,
> Ship to ship combat would be useless in the Frontier Wars
> with the Zhos.  A Zho teleport commando would be able to
> teleport right to the bridge and wipe it out.

First of all, teleportation (and clairvoyance, and any other psionic
power) should not be able to cross an artifical psionic shield.  I
assumed that it was ordinary practice for the hulls of Imperial warships
(and for the secure areas of important Imperial installations) to have
integral psionic shields.  End of problem.

> Now, if you want to have a mechanical transporter
> either akin to Blake's Seven, or (Ohmygod) Star Trek
> Then nuclear mayhem will similarly be out of control.

Number One: make the transporter unable to beam through a nuclear damper
and/or a meson screen.  That makes it much less useful for large-ship
actions.

I used a "Blake's Seven" style transporter in one of my early campaigns.
It had this limitation (and also couldn't beam through superdense or
bonded superdense materials).  Finally, it had a really significant
power draw (about 4ep, in High Guard terms, which would now be what,
about 1,000Mw) and a relatively short range (low orbit at most) and was
limited in the amount of material it could beam through.

Yes, it did give the players a big advantage.  On the other hand,
because they had the device, they got a lot of the otherwise
"impossible" assignments.  It all comes out in the end.

For many player character groups, this would be too much.  As a referee,
"Star Trek" sized gimmics go with "Star Trek" sized responsibilities.

Here's one for all of the psionics experts out there.  What are the
range and conservation of energy effects for a teleport going from one
artifical gravity field to another, or from one artifical gravity field
to a world's surface?


surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman) writes:
> Chrysler or Chevrolet has installed a basic HUD as an option in
> some of their models. It only displays your speed but it does so
> by projecting the information onto the windshield.

Then again, one of the plants that GM will be closing is it's Willow Run
facility, which makes automatic transmissions.  Willow Run was
originally constructed by Ford in 1941 to build B-24 bombers for the
USAAF.  At 2.5 million square feet, it was the largest in the world, and
by 1944, it was producing a finished aircraft at the rate of one an
hour.  After the war it was sold to Kaiser-Fraiser to produce
automobiles and C-119 cargo planes; GM bought the facility in 1953.
Some of the original equipment installed by Ford (including heavy
machinery like the overhead cranes) is still in regular use.

Late TL-5 or very early TL-6.


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


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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5013
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Challenge 67 & *ROB DEAN*!
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 21:05:26 CST

YAHOOO!!!

I just got Challenge 67 in the mail.
There's a bit by Chuck Gannon with 3 vehicle designs.

And Rob Dean's name is featured Prominantly for the
designs.  I don't think the vehicles have Rob's
original names on them, but *IT'S GOT HIS NAME!*

YAHOOO!!!!!!  :-)

Congrats Rob,

2G Scott


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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5014
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 22:30:10 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Current Subjects

Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> writes:
> I've been toying with making the price of yearly maintenance higher the
> older the ship is while making the risks of an inadequately maintained
> ships less. The result should be that established corporations would
> get rid of their ships after 30 or 40 years because they became too
> expensive to maintain. Thus lots of cheap but old ships on the market.

I like this idea; do you have any specific numbers?

Here is a possibility to play with:

Age of ShipOverhaul cost(delta)
 0 to  9 years00.10%-na-
10 to 19 years  00.11%00.01%
20 to 29 years00.13%00.02%
30 to 39 years00.16%00.03%
40 to 49 years00.20%00.04%
50 to 59 years00.25%00.05%
60 to 69 years00.31%00.06%
70 to 79 years00.38%00.07%
80 to 89 years00.46%00.08%
90 to 99 years00.55%00.09%
 . . . well, you get the idea . . .

By the time the ship has turned 40, it's maintainance cost has doubled
and the cost will double again in less than 30 years.

> The problem with fleet sizes I still can't quite see how to overcome.
> More star systems and less high-population planets is what's needed here.

Probably the only real fix for this is to change the formula for
shipyard capacity and tax revenues; change from a linear system to a
non-linear one, so that high population worlds pay and produce less per
person than less populous worlds.


Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.com> writes:
> However, as I recall, the question cannot really be answered "authoritatively"
,
> since the Hard Times book deosn't show a category for subsectors in the
> Spinward MArches outside the Imperium.  Ah well.

Presumably, if the "light behind the claw" scenario is being used, then
things should be approximately the same as the pre-Rebellion Spinward
Marches.  The Darrians and the Sword Worlds balance each other in a sort
of microcosm of the Deneb/Zhodani balance.

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


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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5015
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 20:12:18 -0600
From: "Steve Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: as requested

From: cdr@kpc.com (Carl Rigney)
Subject: Re: Steve's Cheap Traders

[Put this in TMLN if you like.]

> [Steve describes a Mcr27 Free Trader with annual operating costs of
> MCr1.577 that brings in MCr3.5/year with 25 trips, but for a tiny bit
> more you have local agents to cut down on the week-stay and do 40 trips]

Which means MCr4/year return on a MCr7 investment, or about a 56%
return on investment - Silicon Valley should do so well!

Which means in 18 months you have enough profit to make a down payment
on a 2nd ship.  Another 18 months, 2 more ships.  In 6 years you have
16 ships; by the time you pay off your original note in 20 years you
have over 8000 ships, and you're not competing with Tukera, you ARE
Tukera.

This is the *real* reason there should be no Free Traders - they all
become fabulously wealthy and turn into major lines.  The smart ones,
anyway.

- --
Carl Rigney
cdr@kpc.com

"There are lots of neat things you can do with roleplaying, most of
which have some tendency to explode if mishandled." -- Mary Kuhner

PS:

This is one of the reasons why I never use money as a motivation when I
play or run.  Money is too easy to come by, unless the GM goes out of
his way to screw you, or you haven't the patience to acquire it.

---Steve


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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5016
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 15:07:39 -0600
From: "Cynthia Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: Needed: standard file format for extended systems

ATTENTION: TML, HIWG, and GDW:
In working on my subsector viewer, and thinking of ways I would
like to extend it, I've run headlong into a brickwall that has always
been there, but that I've successfully dodged in the past.  The problem
is, there is NO standard flat ASCII file format for representing a
sector or subsector of extended systems (stars, all worlds, satellites).
The current standard Sector file format reports only the
traditional main world, stars, # of gas giants, # of belts, and position
in the sector.  With that, one can lay out a nice little
sector/subsector map -- BUT, report no more detail on a system than the
main world UPP and data derived from that.  I would like to be able to
display system/orbit data in a format similar to that shown for system
write-ups in "Flaming Eye" and "Knightfall".
I could make up my own extended file format, but then my program
would have to have even more customized data files than it does now.
And, source data files used by my program would not be usable with all
the other sector file manipulation programs out there, nor could your
programs work with my proprietary format... I dislike proprietary protocols.
Jo's Library program is the only one I have seen that deals with
extended systems, and I believe it generates them on the fly and stores
them in a proprietary binary file format.  For my personal use, I shoved
the Domain of Deneb into a Paradox data base and add additional worlds
of significance in a system myself.  BUT, what I am seeking (and
strongly suggesting we create) is a Standard (so all future sector
manipulation programs can use it as long as the programmer adheres to
the published format), ASCII (easy to mail, read, and manipulate), File
format that:
1) Shows all the worlds in a system,
2) preserves the relationships between primaries,
secondaries, planets and satellites,
3) somehow avoids unnecessary detail (we need to know that 5
worlds in the system have the standard S00000-0 rocks for satellites,
without actually entering S00000-0 in our file 5 times..)
4) Will be used by TML and GDW in future publications, posts to
GENIE archives, whatever.  Think "STANDARD".

Loren, can you help us on #4?

Perhaps I can start the ball rolling with a suggestion of my
own.  In my Paradox database, I key worlds by
Sector - Hex - Star# - Orbit [ - Satellite Orbit] - Name
example:
Spinward Marches 1705 1 3 - Efate
Spinward Marches 1610 1 4 55 Regina

Sort by Hex, Star, Orbit & Satellite Orbit and you have a fairly
good, quick listing of a system.  This solution doesn't deal with
redundant description of "the same old rock", though.  You could leave
them out, but then the "rock" satellites suddenly don't exist when you
need them ("Do fly-bys of every body in this orbit -- Indro couldn't
have gotten very far with a crippled M-Drive and no J-Drive!"  or
"Tukera has placed a refueling station on that rock in Orbit 55 -- it's
near enough the 100-diameter limit that the time saved by not maneuvering in
and out of the gravity well to the starport more than pays for it...")

-- Cynthia




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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5017
From: cornwell@minster.york.ac.uk
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 15:32:25
Subject: Fifth frontier war...Thanks!


Ta very much to all who replied,
I have now managed to get hold of a copy.

Pete C.

***********************************************************************
* Pete Cornwell               me@blighty: cornwell@uk.ac.york.minster *
* Dept. of Computer Science   me@world : cornwell@minster.york.ac.uk  *
* University of York                                                  *
* England.                                                            *
***********************************************************************


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

Bundle: 425
Archive-Message-Number: 5018
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 12:28:49 -0500
From: snow@lyrae.DNET.NASA.GOV (Martin Snow)
Subject: Ship Maintenance

Instead of raising the cost of the yearly overhaul for older ships, why
not just require more frequent maintenance.
0-20 years old  -- 1 overhaul per year
21-30 years        1 overhaul per 10 months
31-40 years        1 per 9 months
etc.

That makes the "tune-up" fairly standard, but the older parts don't stay
in tune as well.  And the additional time wasted while the ship is "in the
shop" will probably make older ships even less economical to run.  (which
may or may not be a good thing)

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

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

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 426  5019 13-Dec-1992 Rob Dean         Old Ships << Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke
 426  5020 14-Dec-1992 Duncan Law-Gree  HIWG(UK) << Sigh! I finally get round t
 426  5021 14-Dec-1992 James T Perkins  TML alive, and improved << Hello TMLers
 426  5022 14-Dec-1992 "Cynthia Higgin  SSV Beta << Okay, to everyone that expr
 426  5023 15-Dec-1992 "Steve Higginbo  "older" ships, etc. << Martin Snow:
 426  5024 15-Dec-1992 MARK URBIN       Sword Worlds in the News Era & TW2K rul
 426  5025 15-Dec-1992 Derek Wildstar   TML Nightly - Not! (#6.01a) << [Jim Bar
 426  5026 15-Dec-1992 George William   tne-pocket mailing list << For those of
 426  5027 16-Dec-1992 Hans Rancke-Mad  Ship maintenance << Derek Wildstar writ
 426  5028 18-Dec-1992 "Cynthia Higgin  PBSEM (play-by-slow-email) <<  I've los
 426  5029 18-Dec-1992 "Cynthia Higgin  PBSEM (play-by-slow-email) <<  I've los
 426  5030 18-Dec-1992 "Steve Higginbo  TCS, and other stuff... << Mark Urbin:
 426  5031 21-Dec-1992 M.A.S.           Auto rifles in boot camp << Steve Higgi
 426  5032 22-Dec-1992 Adrian Hurt      Re: Auto-rifles in boot camp << mas@vor
 426  5033 22-Dec-1992 Richard Johnson  Re: Hi! << Roger Moore (a new member sa

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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5019
From: Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.com>
Subject: Old Ships
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 07:49:19 -0500 (EST)

Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> writes:

> I've been toying with making the price of yearly maintenance higher the
> older the ship is while making the risks of an inadequately maintained
> ships less. The result should be that established corporations would
> get rid of their ships after 30 or 40 years because they became too
> expensive to maintain. Thus lots of cheap but old ships on the market.

This is an idea that keeps coming back to me, too.  Has anyone tried putting
some rules together yet?  It makes good sense, and I really think that some
such rule ought to be part of the core for TNE, especially considering that
their background will be full of wretched flying wrecks, judging from the
way that they have described it so far.  Something like a a doubling of
of maintenance cost each ten years maybe?  With extra age "awarded" to a
ship repaired after extensive battle damage?  (Rather like old Twilight:
2000 in that regard).

> The problem with fleet sizes I still can't quite see how to overcome.
> More star systems and less high-population planets is what's needed here.

Given that transportation is not free, the tendency is going to be for most
good systems to eventually end up as high population worlds.  I always have
a hard time explaining why a world that has been settled for a thousand years
isn't full....

Rob Dean


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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5020
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 13:53:33 +0000 (GMT)
From: Duncan Law-Green <dlg@jb.man.ac.uk>
Subject: HIWG(UK)


Sigh! I finally get round to posting something to TML Nightly(Not!), and I
find that the real thing is up and running again!

For anyone who's already seen this, I apologise:-

>==========

With reference to two messages recently posted on TML Nightly (Not!):-

>
>==========
>
>From: Wildstar
>Subject: History of the Imperium Working Group
>
>As far as I know, HIWG is still going fine.  According to Dave Nilsen,
>HIWG members are part of a group developing a pocket empire for
>Traveller: The New Era to be published in Imperial Lines.  Is anybody
>out there on TML also a HIWG member?
>
>=========

and....

[From: Corran J. Webster, HIWG Australia]
>HIWG
>Is alive and kicking. I am a member of the Australian branch of HIWG
>which is currently developing an entire sector spinward of the Spinward
>Marches (yiklerzdanzh, for those who have the Zhodani supplement). At the
>moment it is still being kept in the Rebellion era, but given that it is so
>far from the imperium, virus, etc. not much change is anticipated for TNE.
>The american branch has recently undergone a change of leadership
>- Ed Edwards resigned as chairsophont and Mark Gelinas replaced him. Clay
>Bush is in charge of membership. The British group, STarport recently went
>into indefinite hibernation ...

Duncan Law-Green, founder member of HIWG(UK), at your service!

To paraphrase Mark Twain, the reports of HIWG(UK)'s death have been greatly
exaggerated! Although we aren't *quite* as active as we once were, we
still have several members interested in making a contribution to the
future of Traveller.

The group is not, and never was "STarport" --- the STarport
newsletter, although now temporarily shelved, only formed a small part
of our activities. The main part of our creative effort has been
directed towards the fanzine *Signal GK*, set in the Dagudashaag
Sector, a quarterly 'zine with over forty pages of adventuring and
background material each issue. Issue #6 should be out sometime
around February.

In addition, Mike Mikesh of Imperial Lines has asked us if we would be
interested in helping with the development of a New Era "pocket
empire". Though the details have yet to be decided, it would certainly
be possible for UK Travellers to have a significant impact on the
shape of New Era.

UK TMLer's out there! Are you interested? Adie Stewart is
co-ordinating the next stage in HIWG(UK)'s activities, and he can be
contacted at:-

  Adie Stewart,
13 The Retreat,
Frome, Somerset
BA11 5JU

Jae Campbell is the Signal GK Distributor, and he *may* still have a
few copies of GK#5 left:-

Jae Campbell
45 Fairfield
Hebden Bridge
Halifax
W.YORKS. HX7 6JD

One last thing. PLEASE DO NOT EMAIL QUESTIONS TO ME, at least, not until
mid-January, as I'm taking a month's Christmas holiday, starting tomorrow!

*******************           MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!           ********************


DUNCAN LAW-GREEN

  ==========================================================================
Jim --

Could you remove me from the TML mailing list until Jan. 15th? The system
manager here's about 7ft tall, and built like a brick outhouse, and I
*really* wouldn't want to make him mad by flooding my mailbox!

Thanks

Duncan

 ==========================================================================


- -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
-
J.Duncan Law-Green                     | dlg@jb.man.ac.uk        (Internet)
University of Manchester               | JBVAD::DLG              (STARLINK)
Nuffield Radio Astronomy Laboratories  |
Jodrell Bank                           | +44 (0)477-71617        (Home)
Macclesfield                           | +44 (0)477-71321 x206   (Work)
Cheshire SK11 9DL                      | +44 (0)477-71618        (FAX)
UNITED KINGDOM                         | 36149 JODREL G          (Telex)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
-
                       Twinkle, twinkle little star,
                       I know exactly what you are,
                       You're nothing but a ball of gas,
                       And all the while you're losing mass...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -



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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5021
Subject: TML alive, and improved
Reply-To: traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Administrator)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 08:37:11 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@sp-eug.sp-eug.com>


Hello TMLers,

Between Dan Corrin and myself, the TML is up and alive again.  And now,
it is less likely to have problems than before.

I'd like to thank Guy Garnett (Derek Wildstar) publicly for his efforts
to keep people connected via TML-Not!  His efforts were appreciated.

What had happened, was that in the disk crash and attendant efforts, Dan
didn't get my home directory restored and working. Dan's oversight isn't
any reason to condemn him, as he was under intense employer pressure to
get things working again, and my home directory got lost in the wild hard
disk shuffle.

The TML digester jobs run as userid jamesp at engrg.uwo.ca, so without
the home directory the jobs refused to run. Compounding this is that the
TML digesters were self-rescheduling at jobs, and they had to run
successfully to reschedule themselves. So, the TML digester jobs would
fail to run and never restart.

I discovered all this when I was finally able to telnet over to
engrg.uwo.ca, an arduous task that requires some inconvenience at work
(so I don't do it unless I really have to).  Once I had it figured out,
Dan had the problem fixed in the twinkling of an eye.  Thank you Dan!
You saved the TML's bacon once again!

The improvement I made is that the TML is run out of a set of crontab
entries. As such, the jobs don't need to run successfully to be
rescheduled, so hopefully the TML will need much less maintenance than
it used to (I can hear Mark Cook sighing with relief, after having
manually restarted the TML for me a dozen times or so over the last six
months).

James

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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5022
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 22:18:19 -0600
From: "Cynthia Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: SSV Beta

Okay, to everyone that expressed an interest in BETA-testing my
subsector viewer: Wildstar has posted it to sunbane for anonymous ftp
for me.  I don't remember sunbane's full address, but somebody here does...
Be sure to read the README and SSV.DOC; there are some instructions and
important caveats scattered about.
Oh yes, wherever it is, it should be named SSV.ZIP.  Remember to
use BINARY mode to ftp it, and you'll need pkunzip or compatible utility
to decompress/unarchive it.



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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5023
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 08:07:28 -0600
From: "Steve Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: "older" ships, etc.

Martin Snow:

>Instead of raising the cost of the yearly overhaul for older ships, why
>not just require more frequent maintenance.
>0-20 years old  -- 1 overhaul per year
>21-30 years        1 overhaul per 10 months
>31-40 years        1 per 9 months
>etc.

>That makes the "tune-up" fairly standard, but the older parts don't
>stay in tune as well.  And the additional time wasted while the ship is
>"in the  shop" will probably make older ships even less economical to
>run.  (which may or may not be a good thing)

I like this one better than the first suggestion.  Among other things,
it actually makes the increased cost of an older ship meaningful.  It
also ties older ships fairly strongly to their homeports, since by the
time a ship is a century old, it'll need maintenance every three
months...


Rob Dean:

>Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> writes:

>> I've been toying with making the price of yearly maintenance higher
>> the older the ship is while making the risks of an inadequately
>> maintained ships less. The result should be that established
>> corporations would get rid of their ships after 30 or 40 years
>> because they became too expensive to maintain. Thus lots of cheap but
>> old ships on the market.

>This is an idea that keeps coming back to me, too.  Has anyone tried
>putting some rules together yet?

Cynthia and I have been playing with this one for several months now.
We are experimenting with variations on the T2K2 old age/maintenance
rules.

So far, the biggest difficulty is assigning a base amount of maintenance
to a starship:  does the required engineering crew work full time
keeping it operating?  If so, then an older ship would require more
engineering crew, else it might have to be quite beat up before that
occurs.

Right now, we assume that the absolute minimum maintenance can be
performed by the number of engineers computed in the required crew
formulas, without rounding.  So most Free Trader types need less than
half an engineer, and the one engineer they carry can keep the ship
operating even after it gets quite old.  But sooner or later, you'll
need extra engineers, or extra time planetside between jumps, or the
ship just doesn't go anymore.

So far, this has worked out fairly well, but we really haven't used it
long enough to see all the problems...


>> The problem with fleet sizes I still can't quite see how to overcome.
>> More star systems and less high-population planets is what's needed
>> here.

>Given that transportation is not free, the tendency is going to be for
>most good systems to eventually end up as high population worlds.  I
>always have a hard time explaining why a world that has been settled
>for a thousand years isn't full....

Likewise.  Even if transportation were free, unless it were also
instantaneous, good systems WILL fill up.  The only solution I've ever
seen is to get away from this umpteen-thousand year old civilization,
and play in places where people (ANY kind of people) are just now
arriving for the first time.

---Steve


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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5024
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 10:19:23 EST
From: MARK URBIN <urbinm@rimail.interlan.com>
Subject: Sword Worlds in the News Era & TW2K rules

Rob Dean writes:
>Hooray!  The TML is back up!
   It is?  I've been pinging it and not getting an answer back.

>Just a couple of notes on Mark Urbin's questions about the Sword Worlds
>in TML-Not! #6:
>In the Rebellion Era, the Sword Worlds are still divided into the the two
>groups that they were split up into at the end of the Fifth Frontier War.
>(Details on request).
   Thanks for the info.  Most of my data is Classic Traveller.  I'm going
by `Supplement 3:  The Spinward Marches'.  It shows Sacnoth at TL C, five
other worlds at TL B (including Gram), 14 at TL A and one at TL 9.  Could
you please send the Rebellion data.

>If you believe the numbers in the world descriptions, there are only three
>really important Sword Worlds--Sacnoth, which has the highest TL--12,
>Narsil, whose A population represents the majority of the total population
>of the polity, and Gram, in between the two in both tech level and
>population.  So, the important question is whether or not Sacnoth would
>retain jump capability.
  I depends on how far it slides.  The key TL appears to be 9.  That's where
you get Jump-1, anti-grav, superconductors and fusion power plants.  It
depends on the TL drop.  I just picked up the Hard Times book during lunch.
I see lots of tables for TL and other world data changes.  I'll have to sit
down with this one.
  If Sacnoth drops 4 TLs, the Sword Worlds are screwed.  If the drop on that
planet is less than that...a mini empire can spring up.  Only 9 planets are
not part of a jump-1 main that includes Sacnoth.  There is another jump-1
main that contains Hrunting, Tizon, Colada, Joyeuse and Gram.  If any of
those retain TL 9 or better, no problem either.
  If the Sword World military vessels didn't use Imperial transponders, they
should have been free from the virus.  GDW might claim that merchant vessals
that traded with the Imperium used the bloody things.  I'll have to go back
and check that Challenge issue that talked about how the virus travelled
through out the Imperium and beyond.   I recall a bit from it stating that
the Imperium required all ships operating in its borders to have the things.

>However, as I recall, the question cannot really be answered "authoritatively",
>since the Hard Times book doesn't show a category for subsectors in the
>Spinward MArches outside the Imperium.  Ah well.
   GDW is issuing an entire book to just the background for the New Era.
There is lot of material to be covered.  The Spinward Marches (under Archduke
Norris) have been set up to be a pocket of civilization in the darkness of
the New Era.  They are not going to be bothered by the Zhodani (I did find my
copy of the Rebellion Sourcebook) and the Vilani will probably be busy
reestablishing their empire to cause too much trouble for a fairly strong
Spinward Marches.  They do use Imperial Transponders on their jumpships, so
the virus should strike there as well.  The standard TL level there will
drop, but the Spinware Marches is being set up to recover quickly.
  This assumption is based on material I read in the Rebellion Sourcebook.
Archdukes Norris' SMART project is my basis for the Spinward Marches climb
back toward `Old Era' Imperial Tech Levels.

>I don't think the general tone of historical data would support a Sword
>Worlds-Darrian alliance, since they've been at odds for centuries.  (Think
>of the Serbs and Croats here--they've had centuries to make peace with
>each other, too, and it hasn't stuck, now, has it?)
   Let me try this picture instead.  Zhodani probably aren't going to bother
with the Darrians or the Sword Worlds.  Small empires don't bother the Zhodani.
The Sword Worlds can raid in toward the old Imperium and trade their blunder
to the Darrians, who will probably maintain a slightly higher tech level.
  The old Imperium there will have their hands full between: rebuilding; the
Aslan expansion; the Solmani Empire; Sword Worlders ; something else I'm sure.
  New data from Hard Times show lots of `Wild' and `Outland' areas for Sworld
World Vikings to raid.  Some of it may be what Piper called `Chicken Stealing',
but there are sections are are going to be unknown.


  Skipping over to TW2K rules:  In the `Special Operations' book, GDW changed
the rules for 3 round burst fire.  A three round burst may be an aimed shot,
using the characters small arms (rifle) skill.  One or two of the three rounds
may hit the target.  All other 3 round bursts fired that action phase are
treated as standard full autofire fire.  i.e. roll a d6 for each shot fired in
the burst and any 6 is a hit.
  This helps a bit, but is still kind of icky from my point of view.  I' m
still kind of bummed over a character with autoweapons-5 have no better chance
of hitting his target with an autorifle than a new recruit who has just
finished basic training using a standard semi-auto rifle.


- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Urbin  Racal-Datacom  Boxborough, MA   urbin@interlan.interlan.com
These opinions are mine.  No one else will admit to them.
It was a typical net.exercise -- a screaming mob pounding on a greasy spot
on the pavement, where used to lie the carcass of a dead horse.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------


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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5025
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 10:51:28 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: TML Nightly - Not! (#6.01a)


[Jim Baranski sent the following for TML-Not!; since TML is back
 I am no longer producing TML-Not!, so Jim requested that I send
 this to TML.   -- Wildstar]

Date:    Mon, 14 Dec 1992 10:33:12 -0500 (EST)
From: BARANSKI@VEAMF1.NUSC.NAVY.MIL
Subject: RE: TML Nightly - Not! (#6)

""Exterior demountable tanks and drop tanks simultaneously increase fuel
capacity and ship tonnage;  drop tanks, however, MAY (emphasis mine) be
detached just prior to jump to reduce ship tonnage in order to achieve
greater performance.""

I see...  I would think that drop tanks would not have jump grids.  How would
you play unarmored tanks different then unarmored tanks?

"Assuming your ships will not get into combat just because you don't intend
them to is "pretty stupid".  What if your enemy has other plans?!?"

NOTE: right after the start of the TCS game I lost reliable network access, so
I don't know how much of my original intentions were carried out by my
successor.

The intent was for the carriers to jump in, deliver the riders, and jump out
again immediately to the roundevous (or have different pickup ships jump in at
the prearranged roundevous point)

"The lack of J-drives ensured that they didn't escape."

That was my point.  That they were outnumbered explains thier loss of the
battle.  They were designed to be used in situations where *they* had numerical
superiority.


"Jim, when your 1G riders tried to run, they were followed by 6G fighters and
riders.  When your 1G carriers tried to rendezvous with your riders, those 6G
riders and fighters shot your carriers to pieces, thus putting even more of New
Colchis' ships in the bag.  Whenever your riders tried to get to a carrier to
jump away, the effect was to put the carrier out of action too."

Poor tactics for the riders to lead overwhelming enemies to the roundevous
point, when they couldn't shake them...

All in all, it would have been better if they all had Jump drives.

BTW, can you put me on the TCS 'listeners' list?  and fill me in on what's gone
on?

Jim.


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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5026
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 18:44:09 -0800
From: George William Herbert <gwh@soda.berkeley.edu>
Subject: tne-pocket mailing list


For those of you interested in actively participating in the
development of the pocket empire for T:NE as Wildstar has
described, there is now a mailing list dedicated to
that subject and only that subject: tne-pocket@ocf.berkeley.edu

If you want to join, mail to tne-pocket-request@ocf.berkeley.edu

While this is a seperate list from the TML, there should ne
no information withheld from the TML membership.  This is forseen
as a "quicker more direct" way for the active people to work
on things.  A gateway to the TML (digests?  who knows?) will
probably eventually be set up.  I will personally archive everything
that comes through the list, too.

Anyone wanting to join is welcome.  Keep in mind that it's aimed
at people who want to be active, so being active will probably
be encouraged 8-)

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

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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5027
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Ship maintenance
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 7:17:35 MET

Derek Wildstar writes:
>Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>writes:
>>I've been toying with making the price of yearly maintenance higher the
>>older the ship is while making the risks of an inadequately maintained
>>ships less. The result should be that established corporations would
>>get rid of their ships after 30 or 40 years because they became too
>>expensive to maintain. Thus lots of cheap but old ships on the market.
>
>I like this idea; do you have any specific numbers?
>
>Here is a possibility to play with:
>
>Age of Ship   Overhaul cost   (delta)
> 0 to  9 years        00.10%          -na-
>10 to 19 years  00.11%                00.01%
>20 to 29 years        00.13%          00.02%
>30 to 39 years        00.16%          00.03%
>40 to 49 years        00.20%          00.04%
>50 to 59 years        00.25%          00.05%
>60 to 69 years        00.31%          00.06%
>70 to 79 years        00.38%          00.07%
>80 to 89 years        00.46%          00.08%
>90 to 99 years        00.55%          00.09%
> . . . well, you get the idea . . .
>
>By the time the ship has turned 40, it's maintainance cost has doubled
>and the cost will double again in less than 30 years.

The figures I've been thinking of is 100 hours for a yearly maintenance
of a new ship. That works out as 12.5 8-hour days which, with one day
of the week off, is very close to the standard two weeks (this also gives
you the option of getting it done faster if you're willing to pay for it).
I'd then increase this by 1 hour per year the ship is old. I'd also
introduce an 'overhaul' which takes longer and costs more, but reduces the
effective age of a ship. On the macro level (fleets) I'd use one extra day
per 8 years of age.

>>The problem with fleet sizes I still can't quite see how to overcome.
>>More star systems and less high-population planets is what's needed here.
>
>Probably the only real fix for this is to change the formula for
>shipyard capacity and tax revenues; change from a linear system to a
>non-linear one, so that high population worlds pay and produce less per
>person than less populous worlds.

Here's my suggestion for this:

Argument: The more people a society consists of, the higher the proportion of
non-contributing members. By contributing members I mean anyone in a primary
or secondary occupation. I don't mean to imply that people in tertiary occu-
pations dosen't work, but they all live one way or another on whatever wealth
the primary and secondary occupations creates. The amount of money that a
planet can afford [1] to spend on naval forces is therefor modified by a
factor that depends on the size of the population:

    Factor = 1/(2 to the power of (8 - log (population))).

This factor is 1 for a population of 100 million, 1/2 for one of 1 billion
and 1/4 for one of 10 billion. It will be 2 for a population of 10 million
and go on doubling every time the population level goes down by one.
(Obviously there is a limit to this. I ignore any world with a population
less than 100.000. Such will tend to be colonies and outposts and thus go
on the parent planet's budget anyway.)

Note that you can provide another explanation for this if you don't like
mine. Perhaps people on a low-population world is just willing to use more
money on the military than people on a high-pop world, because they feel
less secure.

In a federation all planets will want the other planets to pay proportionally
the same as themselves, so the budget must be tuned to the ones who can pay
the least per citizen. Fortunately these will constitute a majority, so they
will be able to ensure that. (I ignore the possibility that the majority will
force the minority to pay disproportionally much). So (using TCS figures)
Planet Big, with population 1 billion, can't pay more than 250 Cr/citizen.
30% of this goes to the federation, so Planet Big pays 75 Cr/citizen to the
federation fleet. They retain 175 Cr/citizen for their own planetary
defenses. Planet Medium, with population 100 million, can afford to use 500
Cr/citizen, but they still only pay 75 Cr/citizen to the federation. They
retain 425 Cr/citizen for their own planetary defenses. (Incidentally, they
don't _need_ to use all the 425 Cr left over on defense. If they're near an
unfriendly border they propably will, if they feel secure they may give
their citizens a tax break or use the money for other purposes).

Note that if you multiply the population by 10 you multiply the naval
budget by 5, so a high-pop world will still be considerably stronger
than a low-pop world.


[1] Actually "are willing to spend". This is what the government can get
    their taxpayers to pony up with without them growing resentful. And
    we're talking peacetime. In wartime all bets are off. A society will
    willingly spend much more than they can afford in such circumstances,
    witness how WWII more or less ruined Britain even though they won.

- ---

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

                        ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir

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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5028
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 16:08:37 -0600
From: "Cynthia Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: PBSEM (play-by-slow-email)

I've lost a few players due to end of semester loss-of-net
access over the last several months... Would any of you be interested in
picking up existing characters or NPCs?  If interested, please respond
via e-mail...


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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5029
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 16:08:37 -0600
From: "Cynthia Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: PBSEM (play-by-slow-email)

I've lost a few players due to end of semester loss-of-net
access over the last several months... Would any of you be interested in
picking up existing characters or NPCs?  If interested, please respond
via e-mail...


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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5030
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 20:06:59 -0600
From: "Steve Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: TCS, and other stuff...

Mark Urbin:

>   Let me try this picture instead.  Zhodani probably aren't going to
>bother with the Darrians or the Sword Worlds.  Small empires don't
>bother the Zhodani.  The Sword Worlds can raid in toward the old
>Imperium and trade their blunder to the Darrians, who will probably
>maintain a slightly higher tech level.

The Sword Worlds trading with the Darrians?!?  What a concept!  I would
expect the Sword Worlds to attempt to conquer the Darrians, as soon as
Imperial interference disappeared.  As if they could...


>  The old Imperium there will have their hands full between:
>rebuilding; the Aslan expansion; the Solmani Empire; Sword Worlders ;
>something else I'm sure.
>  New data from Hard Times show lots of `Wild' and `Outland' areas for
>Sworld World Vikings to raid.  Some of it may be what Piper called
>`Chicken Stealing', but there are sections are are going to be unknown.

Why should the Solomani matter to Norris?  They're two or three years
travel away.  For that matter, why should the Sword Worlds matter?  He
can swat them like flies whenever he decides to.  I suspect that fear of
Zhodani retaliation is the only thing that has kept him from securing
that particular section of his borders...


>  This helps a bit, but is still kind of icky from my point of view.
>I' m still kind of bummed over a character with autoweapons-5 have no
>better chance of hitting his target with an autorifle than a new
>recruit who has just finished basic training using a standard semi-auto
>rifle.

Just finished basic with a standard semi-auto rifle???  When did we
switch to a semi-auto rifle for basic training?  I thought we were still
using the M-16, and full auto is part of training with the M-16...


Jim Baranski:

>""Exterior demountable tanks and drop tanks simultaneously increase
>fuel capacity and ship tonnage;  drop tanks, however, MAY (emphasis
>mine) be detached just prior to jump to reduce ship tonnage in order to
>achieve greater performance.""

>I see...  I would think that drop tanks would not have jump grids.  How
>would you play unarmored tanks different then unarmored tanks?

They probably don't.  But if they sit within a meter of the hull, they
don't need jump-grids.  And why would I WANT to play unarmoured tanks
different than unarmoured tanks?  They seem pretty much the same to
me...


>NOTE: right after the start of the TCS game I lost reliable network
>access, so I don't know how much of my original intentions were carried
>out by my successor.

Very little, really.  He developed his own doctrine for use, adapting
what he wanted out of your doctrine, I presume.


>"The lack of J-drives ensured that they didn't escape."

>That was my point.  That they were outnumbered explains thier loss of
>the battle.  They were designed to be used in situations where *they*
>had numerical superiority.

Well, assuming that you will always have numerical superiority is not
really a safe way to bet.  Especially if the other guy jumps YOU.
Because then he will ensure that HE has numerical superiority before
ever he starts.

TCS Guideline:  You can guarantee local superiority when YOU attack.  If
you can't, don't attack.  It is impossible to get superior numbers into
a defensive operation, unless your opponent doesn't know what he is
doing.

Which is to say, Jim, that your basic operational assumption was always
that you would be on the offensive.  Nothing wrong with the assumption,
assuming you start offending right away, and never let the other guy get
the initiative.  But sitting back till you are attacked will trash that
whole doctrine right away.


>>"Jim, when your 1G riders tried to run, they were followed by 6G
>>fighters and riders.  When your 1G carriers tried to rendezvous with
>>your riders, those 6G riders and fighters shot your carriers to
>>pieces, thus putting even more of New Colchis' ships in the bag.
>>Whenever your riders tried to get to a carrier to jump away, the
>>effect was to put the carrier out of action too."

>Poor tactics for the riders to lead overwhelming enemies to the
>roundevous point, when they couldn't shake them...

Of course it was.  But your "rendezvous point" assumed that your ships
would be able to get there without interference from the enemy.  NEVER
assume that the enemy won't interfere with your plans if he can.


>All in all, it would have been better if they all had Jump drives.

It certainly would have :-)


>BTW, can you put me on the TCS 'listeners' list?  and fill me in on
>what's gone on?

There really isn't a TCS "listeners list" as such.  Occasionally, when I
get ambitious, I post an update to the TML.  I will always answer
questions privately (when I have time).  If there is any interest in a
"listener's list", let me know, and I'll start posting generally
available information to it every turn or two.


And since the last time I posted to the TML, nothing much has happened.
Serendip Belt has had a revolution (the new ruler is a complete loon).
The "Serendipity" (the Belt's big battleship) has just invaded Zuflucht,
thus bringing all the worlds of the Islands (except Topas) under the
control of one or another of the major powers.  The Topas
government-in-exile seems to be returning to Topas.  And diverse great
powers are sitting around talking, getting paranoid, and trying to
prepare for the "next war".

And all you people who asked for the unedited copy of Jane's should be
getting it this weekend.  Possibly even with commentary added...

---Steve

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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5031
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 08:19:00 -0600
From: mas@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (M.A.S.)
Subject: Auto rifles in boot camp

Steve Higginbotham writes:

>>Just finished basic with a standard semi-auto rifle???  When did we
>>switch to a semi-auto rifle for basic training?  I thought we were still
>>using the M-16, and full auto is part of training with the M-16...

Well, when I was in boot camp, we had M-16 A1's and they were full auto.
However, you actually only *saw* them fired full auto once, and, if you
were one of the lucky dozen or chosen from an entire company, fired it
full auto yourself.  By the time I went to Infantry Training School, the
M-16 A1's had been replaced by M-16 A2's, and they do not have a full
auto selection.  It had been changed to a three round burst feature.

When they showed us full auto fire with the M-16 A1, it was an example
of what *not* to do with your weapon.  Full auto fire from anything
other than a tripod or vehicle mounted autoweapon is generally a waste
of ammunition, thus the switch to a burst feature on the M-16 A2.
Of course, that was in the Marine Corps, I don't know if the Army does
things the same way.

Lee Eilers  mas@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu



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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5032
From: Adrian Hurt <adrian@cee.heriot-watt.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Auto-rifles in boot camp
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 9:16:43 WET

mas@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (M.A.S.) writes:
> Steve Higginbotham writes:
>
> >>Just finished basic with a standard semi-auto rifle???  When did we
> >>switch to a semi-auto rifle for basic training?  I thought we were still
> >>using the M-16, and full auto is part of training with the M-16...
>
> Well, when I was in boot camp, we had M-16 A1's and they were full auto.
> However, you actually only *saw* them fired full auto once, and, if you
> were one of the lucky dozen or chosen from an entire company, fired it
> full auto yourself.

I have not been in any military service myself, but I can tell you that
until recently, the British Army at least did use semi-auto rifles.  Their
SLR (Self-Loading Rifle) was a version of the Belgian FN-FAL, modified so
that it could not fire full auto.  Why it was so modified, I do not know;
perhaps to save ammo, perhaps to save money on ammo, perhaps to encourage
the soldiers to shoot more accurately, perhaps because letting a soldier
loose with a full auto weapon in a situation such as the streets of Belfast
was decided to be too risky.  The decision has since been reversed, though,
because the newer rifle, the SA-80, can fire full auto.  Mind you, it only
fires those toy 5.56mm bullets, so perhaps it needs to. :-)

(Yeah, I know, they aren't really toys, and I wouldn't want to be hit by
one! :-)

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

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

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

Bundle: 426
Archive-Message-Number: 5033
From: richard@agora.rain.com (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Re: Hi!
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 5:52:28 PST


Roger Moore (a new member says):


:I haven't yet recieved anything back from cat@engrg.uwo.ca to let me know
:I have joined, but since you have replied presumably something has happened?

Well, something will eventually happen anyway.  CAT is usually a fairly
low priority with us, expecially with PBEM chaos in the works.



:By the way, what is this Traveller the New Era? I have heard mention that it
:is a new version of traveller coming out (soon?). Do you know how different
:it is going to be from MT and when it is likely to be coming out (in the
:states at least, I presume it will take another few months to reach the UK!)
:
:Look forward to hearing from you, Happy Christmas!
:
:Roger


Happy Christmas (or midwinter [midsummer for some of us] festival of
choice) to you and everyone else on the list, too.

I copied the mailing list because this is a truly interesting question,
with lots of long, emotional, and reasonable, answers.  In a nutshell,
TNE is the product that GDW will introduce (real soon now?) to replace
Traveller and MegaTraveller.  I personally don't know if they also plan
to replace 2300 with it (or even if 2300 is still a product).

Might be good, might be bad.  Depends on who you talk to, and what they
liked or didn't like about T and MT.

But, it is coming from GDW.  And, while they have been roundly abused in
our forum, they really have produced products of reasonable quality for
many years now, so it shouldn't be too bad.

Anyone else have Cr 0.02 they'd like to throw in?  (please no flames
this time - it's just an information inquiry).


- --
Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com
Rust never rests.

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

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 427  5034 22-Dec-1992 "Cynthia Higgin  Peter Berghold, where are you? << Peter
 427  5035 23-Dec-1992 David Johnson -  Re: Auto Rifiles in Boot Camp << When I
 427  5036 14-Dec-1992 Stephen Camp     System Charts in / near Reaver's Deep (
 427  5037 23-Dec-1992 George W Herber  What the tne-pocket mailing list is and
 427  5038 23-Dec-1992 Rob Dean         Merry Christmas to All! << We're about
 427  5039 21-Dec-1992 Anthony Neal     Meggrry Christmas and, well... <<  Gr
 427  5040 23-Dec-1992 M.A.S.           Auto Rifles in Boot Camp << Adrian Hurt
 427  5041 24-Dec-1992 Jason Smith      Full vs. Semi Automatic fire << => Stev
 427  5042 25-Dec-1992 metlay           Alternate weapons << >  Also, I remembe
 427  5043 26-Dec-1992 Bertil Jonell    Re: Pulse Rifle << > =09I was just wond
 427  5044 27-Dec-1992 "Cynthia Higgin  PBSEM openings <<  Okay, I've gotten se
 427  5045 27-Dec-1992 Matthew Proske   Re: TML nightly: Msgs 5044-5044 V49#13
 427  5046 28-Dec-1992 Derek Wildstar   Pocket Empire Report #0 << Pocket Empir
 427  5047 29-Dec-1992 Michael Glew     Attn: Lauren Wiseman << Lauren,
 427  5048 29-Dec-1992 Anthony Neal     Laser pistols, Rifles, etc... <<  Happy
 427  5049 29-Dec-1992 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.  Planetary Formation << Hey folx,


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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5034
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 09:16:09 -0600
From: "Cynthia Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: Peter Berghold, where are you?

Peter Berghold, I can't get thru to you using the address on your e-mail.
The mail-daemon keeps bouncing it, telling me "unknown mailer" error.
What is your proper address?

-- Cynthia


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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5035
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 09:24 GMT
From: David Johnson - CIX Staff <djohnson@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Auto Rifiles in Boot Camp
Reply-To: djohnson@cix.compulink.co.uk


When I was in the Cadet force, we were shown a 9MM Sub machine gun on
full auto, to get this special permission had to be given by the
Major. The British forces very rarely use full auto due to the danger
of jams in the Gun. Even the SAS when storming buildings use two
burst of two rounds, no more or the N.C.Os get a bit upset and you
wouldn't want that would you, (no I didn't think so)

Dave

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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5036
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 15:54:51 -0700
From: hobbes@spacemanspiff.den.mmc.com (Stephen Camp)
Subject: System Charts in / near Reaver's Deep (Tuvir)


Hi,

Can someone point me to reference materials showing the system charts for
Reaver's Deep (Tuvir) such that 1)  I can see what systems are nearby,
2)  where they are in relation to the Solamini Rim, Spinward Marches,
Imperium core etc

I guess I'm asking to be pointed to an overall map of the Imperium as
it appears in Traveller/MegaTraveller?  (I'm assuming that the PBEM
game is based in the same universe...?)  These references could
be GDW published stuff, Postscipt files available for FTPing, or Challenge
or other periodical articles...

Thanks


Steve Camp
(303)971-4379
hobbes@spacemanspiff.den.mmc.com
Martin Marietta Launch Systems


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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5037
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 16:12:40 PST
From: gwh@lurnix.COM (George W Herbert)
Subject: What the tne-pocket mailing list is and is doing


There's been a sudden decrease in posts to the Traveller Mailing
List, and not all of it is due to the hollidays.  Many of the
most prolific posters are off on a new project now, which ha
been alluded to previously; we're developing a pocket empire
in the Traveller: The New Era universe.

Since we're all scattered around, it's being done via email, sort
of like a smaller more intense TML focused on this one area
and topic.  I was origionally planning on relaying what we
were doing back to the TML; one problem that has cropped up
is that there were over 115k of mail on the tne-pocket mailing
list in the first week of operation.  I don't like the idea of
dropping all that on the TML at once.

The idea behind tne-pocket was to create a more focused, faster
reaction list for this specific purpose, but not cut the TML
out of seeing what's going on on the tne-pocket list.  Towards
that end, three things are or can happen: 1, I'm archiving all
the tne-pocket list mail at the ftp site ocf.berkeley.edu;
2, individuals who are interested can join the tne-pocket list;
and 3, I'll try and post a summary of what's been going on
each week to the TML.  Or maybe someone else on the tne-pocket
list can be coher...convinced to do it 8-)

If you have any questions about joining the tne-pocket list
or how to access the archive (if you're not used to using
FTP for instance) then just go ahead and contact me by
email at gwh@lurnix.com and I'll help.

The first summary should be out before christmas, if I can
get my last bits of shopping in. 8-)

- -george

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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5038
From: Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.com>
Subject: Merry Christmas to All!
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 21:21:53 -0500 (EST)

We're about to be off for a little visit to relatives, away from a modem, so
I'd like to take this opportunity to wish you all a very Merry Christmas, and
I'll look forward to diving back into things when I get back next week.

Rob Dean

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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5039
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:33:04 -0330
From: Anthony Neal <anthonyn@ODIE.CS.MUN.CA>
Subject: Megg^H^Hrry Christmas and, well...


Greetings from Newfoundland...

Well, I've been a passive subscriber to the TML for about
a year now and have found everything said quite fascinating. I may
be beating a dead horse here, but, I recently invaded sunbane and
retrieved the postscript deck plans for the Chrysantemum Class
1000 ton Light Escort and the Louegkhou Class 200 ton Vargr Trader.
Great Deckplans! Unfortunately, I cannot locate the UCP on any either
of these two craft. Are these craft from a GDW release (and probably
not allowed on the archive sites as a result of copyright laws)? Is
there somewhere I could get a look at these plans? Hmmm.
For that matter, are there any other postscript deck plans floating
around the net? I would greatly appretiate it someone could point me in
the right direction.
Also, I remember somebody was doing a listing of alternate personal
weaponry for Trav... Maybe Robert Dean?  I was just wondering if there
were any traveller versions of the 10mm pulse assault rifle used in the
movie "Aliens" around.
Well, thanks ahead of time! Merry Christmas to all!

Anthony Neal
anthonyn@odie.cs.mun.ca


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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5040
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 23:04:03 -0600
From: mas@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (M.A.S.)
Subject: Auto Rifles in Boot Camp

Adrian Hurt writes:
>I have not been in any military service myself, but I can tell you that
>until recently, the British Army at least did use semi-auto rifles.  Their
>SLR (Self-Loading Rifle) was a version of the Belgian FN-FAL, modified so
>that it could not fire full auto.  Why it was so modified, I do not know;
>perhaps to save ammo, perhaps to save money on ammo, perhaps to encourage
>the soldiers to shoot more accurately, perhaps because letting a soldier
>loose with a full auto weapon in a situation such as the streets of Belfast
>was decided to be too risky.  The decision has since been reversed, though,
>because the newer rifle, the SA-80, can fire full auto.  Mind you, it only
>fires those toy 5.56mm bullets, so perhaps it needs to. :-)

Well, in the U.S. Military, it was because of ammo considerations.
I believe that they were disturbed by the ratio of rounds expended to
number of kills; it was *way* to high.

>(Yeah, I know, they aren't really toys, and I wouldn't want to be hit by
>one! :-)

No, you wouldn't.  The reason they use those 5.56mm bullets is because
velocity kills, not size.  I'm not saying that it dosen't hurt to get
hit with a .45 caliber at 450fps, but a 5.56mm at about 3000fps is a
lot nastier.  They tend to bounce around inside the body a bit, and
even when they don't, hydrostatic shock will probably get you.  I
assume that's why a 4mm Gauss Rifle round is deadlier in the game than
your standard autorifle, or ACR.  (And you thought Traveller wasn't
going to get into this!) :-)

Lee Eilers  mas@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu
^Z


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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5041
From: jasons@atlastele.com (Jason Smith)
Subject: Full vs. Semi Automatic fire
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 92 8:48:05 PST


=> Steve Higginbotham writes:
=>
=> >>Just finished basic with a standard semi-auto rifle???  When did we
=> >>switch to a semi-auto rifle for basic training?  I thought we were still
=> >>using the M-16, and full auto is part of training with the M-16...
=>
=> Well, when I was in boot camp, we had M-16 A1's and they were full auto.
=> However, you actually only *saw* them fired full auto once, and, if you
=> were one of the lucky dozen or chosen from an entire company, fired it
=> full auto yourself.

Ah, I see you got the budget tour :^) ... When I did my duty, every
one of us was "required" to empty a short magazine (20 rds).  And we
were DIVARTY (artillery), of all things.  During M16 qualifications,
I got the Expert Medal (BARELY), so I think I was a pretty crack shot.
*BUT*
When it came time for us to "blow our wad", I'd be durned if I could hit
anything on full auto.  Even at 50m.  The weapon likes to climb, and you
end up spending more energy keeping it level than targetting.  When we
got to do short-burst (semi-auto) firing, the situation improved, *slightly*.
The biggest problem with any flavor of auto fire, is that it is almost
a complete waste of time on a *still* target.  Some of us got to try
this (short burst firing) out on moving targets, and the success rate
was much better (it was explained to me that a moving target is more likely
to move into the path of any one of a smattering of bullets - in a sense you
are making the surface area of the round much large by throwing out alot of
'em at once.  It's the same principle that makes it easier to hit a fastball
with a tennis racket than a baseball bat - increased "surface" area).

There are a number of other reasons to avoid full auto-fire as well.
If any of you have had the "opportunity" to do that, you may remember
how warm the barrel gets (that's why the handguards *wrap* the barrel).
Amoung other things, the hotter the barrel gets, the greater the
likelihood of a weapon jam (in a fire-fight, something like that could
ruin your whole day...).  The short-burst style of firing helps to
avoid that.  I imagine that is one of the biggest reasons for going to
short burst in the M16A2.

The vets in this group (the US vets, anyway) also may remember that
most weapons designed explicitly for auto-fire are issued with TWO barrels.
Any guesses as to why?

On a slightly different note, most of us hated having to do any auto-fire
qualifications, because it really makes a MESS of your weapon (carbon
deposits), and the day ain't over till the last one is SPOTLESS...

Jason.

I might add here -- It's great seeing the interaction.  We have some
sharp minds at play here.  Keep it up.

Then again, I might not ... 8*]



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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5042
From: metlay@netcom.com (metlay)
Subject: Alternate weapons
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 92 8:03:40 PST

>Also, I remember somebody was doing a listing of alternate personal
>weaponry for Trav... Maybe Robert Dean?  I was just wondering if there
>were any traveller versions of the 10mm pulse assault rifle used in the
>movie "Aliens" around.

I was putting together a listing of nonlethal and other weapons for MT before
the ann0ouncement of TNE put a hole in my preparations. These days I have
other fish to fry Travellerwise, and until TNE comes out I leave MT weapons
rules to others. Sorry.


- --
mike metlay                | Today's "Context is everything" quote:
atomic city                |
p. o. box 81175            | "Heck, I'd write music if all I had was
pittsburgh pa 15217-0675   |  a kazoo. Synths are more fun, though."
metlay@netcom.com          |                              (m. simon)

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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5043
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Re: Pulse Rifle
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 12:24:55 +0100 (MET)

> =09I was just wondering if there
> =09were any traveller versions of the 10mm pulse assault rifle used in the
> =09movie "Aliens" around.

  Yes: The Gaussrifle. Good range, good penetration, good damage, large
magasine capacity and in at least one version (the one illustrated in the
Traveller Digest) it had an integral pump action 3rd RAM grenade launcher under
the barrel.

> =09=09=09=09=09=09=09=09=09=09=09=09=09Anthony Neal

- -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."

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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5044
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 92 13:48:46 -0600
From: "Cynthia Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: PBSEM openings

Okay, I've gotten several queries; here's an update on
characters I would like to see, and which ones have already been picked up.
Right now, I need interested players to "step into the shoes" of the
following:

   - (open) an Aslan female CO of a navy tender, currently acting as XO...
   - [*Taken*] an young, inexperienced, but very wealthy Imperial noble...
   - (open) the young noble's barbarian bodyguard...
   - [*Taken*] a confused roboticist who has recently taken up
               interstellar trade..
   - (open) merchant Captain/navigator of the above roboticist's ship...
   - (open) 1st Officer/ex-Scout pilot of the above roboticist's ship...
   - (open) 2nd Officer/merchant engineer of the above roboticist's ship...
   - (open) 3rd Officer/merchant asst. engineer of the above....
   - (open) graduate robotics student/commo operator of the above...
   - (open) Imperial Army/Marine Captain/Lt, with combat experience
   - (open) Navy ensign/LtJG, flight branch with combat exp.
   - (open) two commando types
   - (open) other Impy military...
   - various Sword Worlders
   - various Vargr, either military or other...

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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5045
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 20:08:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Matthew Proske <proske@unssun.scs.unr.edu>
Subject: Re: TML nightly: Msgs 5044-5044 V49#13

On Sun, 27 Dec -1, TML Admin wrote:

> Okay, I've gotten several queries; here's an update on
> characters I would like to see, and which ones have already been picked up.
> Right now, I need interested players to "step into the shoes" of the
> following:

>    - (open) two commando types

I'm interested in playing one of the commando types.  I'm kind of new to
this conference.  Have you been playing Traveller by correspondence here?

Matthew
proske@unssun.nevada.edu

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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5046
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 92 10:08:05 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Pocket Empire Report #0


Pocket Empire Report #0 - Initial Data

Aoreriyya Region of Reavers' Deep Sector

"Aoreriyya" is an Aslan word which is best translated as "New Veldt"; it is
the Aslan name for this region of space.  Aoreriyya is a vague astrographic
region which includes most of subsectors J, K, N, and O of Aeitle Sakh sector,
better known in Galanglic as Reavers' Deep.  It was applied by early Clan
explorers because of the relatively large number of worlds with climates
and ecosystems well-suited to Aslan comfort.

Early Solomani explorers named this region ??.


Subsectors    Name
=--=========--================
J  0921-1630  Ea
K  1721-2430  Drexilthar
N  0931-1640  Eakoi
O  1731-2440  (unknown)
=--=========--================

To use the subsector data with Cynthia Higginbotham's SSV program,
simply cut apart each subsector (they start with the "@name lines",
and each one is in order).


Classic Traveller Data

Three subsectors need star generation, and two subsectors need names
for the worlds.  I note that there is quite a mix of Aslani and
Solomani names in this area, perhaps some folks out there can suggest
names so we can fill in that part.  It would be nice to get somewhat
of a mix of different Solomani languages, and get some Aslan names
too (we can always use a random generator for that, though).  The
unnamed worlds are identified as ?-#### (where #### is the hex number).


World Name    Hex  UWP        B Trade Class     Z  Ext Al Stellar Data
=============-====-=========--=-===============-=--===-==-======================
@Ea
Dunmarrow     0921 B444653-A  S Ag Ni              200 Cs
Hrou          0923 D200579-8    Ni Va              310 Na
Lestrow       0926 C798764-8    Ag              R  813 Ma
Laroaetea     1024 E556555-6    Ag Ni              512 Na
Fask          1028 C9868AA-8                    R  321 Ma
Theodora      1030 B857563-A  M Ag Ni           R  104 Ma
Tearlach      1121 E569749-8    Ri                 413 Na
Gaajpadje     1124 E667874-4    Ri                 904 Na
Earlo         1125 D242102-7    Lo Ni Po           404 Na
Mirak         1127 C766763-A  M Ag Ri           R  702 Ma
Dran          1129 C451566-9    Ni Po           R  123 Ma
Leaa          1222 E100488-9    Ni Va              312 Na
Roakhoi       1224 C969543-4 +  Ni                 702 Na
Ea            1225 C7586AA-7    Ag Ni              214 Na
Htalrea       1226 E767610-0    Ag Ni              100 Na
Marlheim      1230 A5759A8-B  M Hi In           R  303 Ma
Shamas        1321 E456305-6    Lo Ni              703 Na
Vincit        1327 C8987A9-8  N Ag                 400 Cd
Andiros       1328 C799566-8    Ni                 605 Na
Kingston      1428 B764994-C  M Hi                 813 Na
Fort William  1521 C240467-A    Ni Po De           600 Cd
Fulton        1524 C98A788-9    Ri Wa              100 Cd
Ranald        1526 C456544-9    Ag Ni              622 Cd
Invermory     1622 B484789-A  M Ag Ri              525 Cd
Duncinae      1624 A686648-8  M Ag Ni Ri           500 Cd
Just          1625 C7487AA-5  M Ag                 420 Cd
@Drexlithar
Lajanjigal    1721 DAB6583-3    Ni Fl              805 Na F8 V
Coventry      1723 X565733-2    Ag              A  404 Na F8 V
Traneer       1727 E576679-7    Ag Ni              323 Na G5 V
Dakaar        1821 B425612-B  M Ni                 202 Na K0 V DM
Drexilthar    1826 B46969D-7  S C0 Ni Ri        R  914 Cs G4 V
Kraan         1828 C501456-8    Ni Va Ic           223 Na A7 III F5 V K0 V
Daken         1830 C630233-9    Lo Ni Po De        902 Na F3 V
Cassandra     1924 B000538-C    Ni As Va           914 Na F0 V
Outpost       1926 B110442-E  N C2 Ni              413 Cs K7 V M5 V
Tashrakaar    1927 D651695-7    Ni Po              213 Na F6 V
Luushakaan    2021 D541513-4    Ni Po              810 Na M1 V
Dutrissal     2027 CAC4235-8    Lo Ni Fl           802 Na K3 V
Drellesarr    2029 B310550-A    Ni              R  502 Na M3 V M5 V
Drenslaar     2030 D453694-7    Ni Po              313 Na K5 V
Grendal       2127 C889855-A  S Ri                 613 Cs G3 V
Tharrill      2128 C885741-9    Ag Ri              722 Na G0 V
Sarrad        2129 D88A300-8    Lo Ni Wa        R  820 Cb G4 V
Garrison      2221 A35796B-B  N Hi              R  312 Im M1 V
Kaaniir       2223 C688611-6  S Ag Ni              723 Cs G1 V
Yarhfahl      2228 C658796-6    Ag                 110 Na K3 V
Datinar       2230 B431685-A    Na Ni Po           303 Cb K7 V
Gaargir       2322 B465304-C  A Lo Ni              713 Im K4 V
Ildrissar     2326 C995836-7                       200 Na F5 V
Carrill       2330 A0009AE-E  M Hi Na In As Va  R  113 Cb A5 III
Kaanash       2421 B55687A-7  A                    414 Im G5 V
Diablo        2423 B9C7477-8    Ni Fl           R  724 Im F0 V DG
Lindritar     2429 C5796A7-8    Ni                 210 Cb G8 V
@Eakoi
?-0933        0933 E63A48B-7    Ni Wa              404 Na
?-0937        0937 B779666-9  M Ni                 622 Uh
?-0940        0940 C997754-8    Ag                 514 Na
?-1031        1031 C243313-8 +  Lo Ni Po        R  401 Ma
?-1034        1034 D433677-5    Na Ni Po           102 Na
Freedom       1036 C587966-6    Hi                 603 Uh
?-1037        1037 A887767-8  M Ag Ri              614 Uh
?-1133        1133 E326340-7    Lo Ni           R  903 Na
?-1136        1136 E686889-5    Ri                 423 Na
?-1137        1137 E885858-6    Ri                 614 Na
?-1138        1138 C200453-A    Ni Va              604 Na
?-1139        1139 D4409B9-8    Hi In Po De        102 Na
Pendang       1231 B8769A7-A +M Hi In           R  503 Ma
Eakoi         1235 E8579B9-5    Hi                 704 Na
?-1433        1433 D749220-3    Lo Ni              700 Na
?-1434        1434 D000686-9    Na Ni As Va        502 Na
?-1531        1531 D24247A-5    Ni Po              910 Na
Venice        1534 C35A995-8    Hi Wa              714 Na
?-1537        1537 C674504-8    Ag Ni              723 Na
Soloman       1538 B897A97-B  N Hi In              302 Cs
?-1540        1540 B55948B-A    Ni              R  820 Na
Collins World 1631 B20098C-B  N Hi Na In Va     R  604 Cs
?-1632        1632 C337322-6    Lo Ni              322 Na
?-1634        1634 C546616-7    Ag Ni              912 Na
?-1635        1635 C646200-9    Lo Ni           R  713 Na
?-1636        1636 E796313-7    Lo Ni              722 Na
Himalaya      1638 C9D9978-9    Hi Fl              304 Na
@(unknown)
?-1733        1733 C595778-5    Ag                 614 Na
?-1734        1734 E643569-4    Ni Po           R  310 Ga
?-1735        1735 B758899-A  M                    111 Ga
Carter        1740 A7589A8-B  M Hi                 402 Ct
?-1831        1831 C516310-A    Lo Ni Ic           601 Na
?-1832        1832 C7B4352-A    Lo Ni Fl           703 Na
?-1839        1839 B8878AC-9  M                    313 Ct
?-1840        1840 B000666-9  M Na Ni As Va        603 Ct
Rintarna      1933 B887A99-D    Hi                 313 Na
?-1937        1937 D767551-7    C6 Ag Ni           804 Ly
?-1938        1938 B89A569-B    Ni Wa              314 Ly
?-2032        2032 C799435-A    Ni                 803 Na
Lanixohn      2033 A789973-D  M Hi              R  700 Cb
?-2034        2034 C885665-7    Ag Ni Ri           702 Cb
?-2037        2037 B446562-8  M Ag Ni              803 Ly
?-2038        2038 B659698-8    Ni                 811 Ly
?-2133        2133 B877687-A  M Ag Ni              105 Cb
?-2136        2136 E323523-5    Ni Po              610 Na
?-2234        2234 D87A466-8    Ni Wa              505 Cb
Purgatory     2239 C213367-B +  Lo Ni Ic           201 Pu
?-2337        2337 D567585-5  S Ag Ni              904 Cs
?-2431        2431 B554759-9  M Ag                 421 Cb
?-2433        2433 C999563-7  M Ni                 204 Cb
?-2438        2438 E6A1453-8    Ni Fl              212 Na
Purity        2440 B8889DC-A  M Hi              R  813 Pu
=============-====-=========--=-===============-=--===-==-==================
                             \
                              A "+" in this column indicates changes

Since most of this area has never been a part of the Third Imperium, there
are a decent number of established polities.  Presumably, some of these
will form the nucleus for Hard Times and New Era polities, while some of the
Non-Aligned worlds will band to gether to form totally new polities.


    W   Best
    o
C   r   P
o   l   o P
d   d   r o T
e   s   t p L  Polity Name              Comments
==--==--=-=-=--=======================--======================================

Cb  10  A 9 E  Carillian Assembly       Destroyed by Daibei/Solomani fighting
Cs   8  B A E  Imperial Client-States
Ma   8  A 9 B  Grand Duchy of Marlheim  Totalitarian, Expansionist, Civil War
Cd   7  A 7 A  Confederacy of Dulcinae
Im   4  A 9 C  Third Imperium
Ly   4  B 6 B  ?
Ct   3  A 9 B  Carter Technocracy
Uh   3  A 9 9  Union of Harmony         Chinese, Racist, Solomani Client State
Ga   2  B 8 A  Gralyn Assemblage
Pu   2  B 9 A  Purity                   Religous Dictatorship
==--==--=-=-=--=======================--======================================
- -- 105  A A E  Overall (4 subsectors)  54 worlds are Non-Aligned





Other Information

World Name    Hex   Comments
=============-====--=========================================================
@Ea
Dunmarrow     0921
Hrou          0923
Lestrow       0926
Laroaetea     1024
Fask          1028
Theodora      1030
Tearlach      1121
Gaajpadje     1124  Location of Night of Conquest
Earlo         1125
Mirak         1127
Dran          1129
Leaa          1222
Roakhoi       1224  Source of Tlaospice, detailed in FT#1
Ea            1225
Htalrea       1226  Source of the perfume Rithscent
Marlheim      1230
Shamas        1321
Vincit        1327
Andiros       1328
Kingston      1428
Fort William  1521
Fulton        1524
Ranald        1526
Invermory     1622
Duncinae      1624
Just          1625
@Drexlithar         Subject of Pilot's Guide to Drexilthar (Gamelords)
Lajanjigal    1721
Coventry      1723
Traneer       1727
Dakaar        1821
Drexilthar    1826
Kraan         1828
Daken         1830
Cassandra     1924
Outpost       1926
Tashrakaar    1927
Luushakaan    2021
Dutrissal     2027
Drellesarr    2029
Drenslaar     2030  Location of Drenslaar Quest
Grendal       2127
Tharrill      2128
Sarrad        2129
Garrison      2221  HT Daibei Frontier
Kaaniir       2223
Yarhfahl      2228
Datinar       2230
Gaargir       2322  HT Daibei Frontier
Ildrissar     2326
Carrill       2330  HT War Zone
Kaanash       2421  HT Daibei Frontier
Diablo        2423  HT Daibei Frontier
Lindritar     2429
@Eakoi
?-0933        0933
?-0937        0937
?-0940        0940
?-1031        1031
?-1034        1034
Freedom       1036
?-1037        1037
?-1133        1133
?-1136        1136
?-1137        1137
?-1138        1138
?-1139        1139
Pendang       1231
Eakoi         1235
?-1433        1433
?-1434        1434
?-1531        1531
Venice        1534
?-1537        1537
Soloman       1538
?-1540        1540
Collins World 1631
?-1632        1632
?-1634        1634
?-1635        1635
?-1636        1636
Himalaya      1638
@(unknown)
?-1733        1733
?-1734        1734
?-1735        1735
Carter        1740
?-1831        1831
?-1832        1832
?-1839        1839
?-1840        1840
Rintarna      1933
?-1937        1937
?-1938        1938
?-2032        2032
Lanixohn      2033  HT War Zone
?-2034        2034
?-2037        2037
?-2038        2038
?-2133        2133
?-2136        2136
?-2234        2234
Purgatory     2239  Mining/Penal colony owned by Purity
?-2337        2337
?-2431        2431
?-2433        2433
?-2438        2438
Purity        2440
=============-====--=========================================================
All worlds are Hard Times Outlands unless otherwise indicated.


Assigning Stars

Steve Higginbotham writes:
We have 105 worlds here, of which 27 have their stars already, I
believe.  So we need stars for 78 worlds.  Assuming normal distribution,
we should have 43 M's, 11 K's, 9 G's, 13 F's, and 2 A's.  So let's be
arbitrary and burn some of those G's for all the Ag and Ri worlds left.
Of course, there are 28 Ag, Ri, or Ag Ri worlds without stars, so we'll
need to use up most of the K's and F's getting them decent stars...


Toward the New Era

During Hard Times, and up to the onset of the Virus, some polities will
decide that its time to become Reavers in the Grand Old Tradition (RitGOT).

Near the beginning of the Rebellion, a relatively large group of (alien
minor race or races) fled Solomani persecution into Aoreriyya.  They passed
through Carrillian Assembly (through Carrill and/or Lanaxion) on their way
to a suitable colony world.  Their transporation was two or three very
large (100,000-ton+) imperial-design bulk transports, with over 100,000
colonists in cold sleep, and such supplies as could be transported.

During the Rebellion and Hard Times, the area recives a continuing trickle
of refugees (especially minor-race aliens seeking refuge from Solomani
opression).

An idealistic Imperial officer and the remains of her CruRon (badly damaged
in the initial fighting; only 2 ships are space-worthy, and only one could
be called combat-ready) set course for the Deep.  These people are not
Reavers, but an idealistic, pro-Imperium, good-guy group who are trying to
recreate in microcosm all of the good things the Imperium has lost in the
Rebellion.  The choose a relatively good world, and play Guardian Angel.

And of course, the usual mob of desperadoes generated by Hard Times.
Some Vargr may even show up to join in the fun.

All of this section is still fluid, and Mike Metlay's Near Miss will
probably fit into it somewhere.

And then the Virus hits.


Sources

From Lewis Taylor Goss, Reaver's Deep information can be found in:
o Atlas of the Imperium. - by GDW
    Barebones sector map, starport types, names of high population worlds.
o Pilot's Guide to Drexilthar Subsector. - by Gamelords, Ltd.
    Detailed information on one of the subsectors of Reaver's Deep, including
    full Classic Trav UWP info, maps, names, page-long descriptions of each
    planet, etc.
o Far Traveller #1, #2 - by FASA.
    Information on two different subsectors in Reaver's Deep, including full
    Classic Trav UWP info, maps, names, adventures set in the same subsectors,
    detailed information on a few planets only.  [FT#2 does not cover
    Aoreriyya, but details a subsector to coreward].
o Dune Raiders. - by Gamelords, Ltd.
    Detailed adventure situation on a desert planet in Reaver's Deep.
o Drenslaar Quest. - by Gamelords, Ltd.
    Detailed adventure underwater on a planet in Reaver's Deep.
o Ascent to Anekthor - by Gamelords, Ltd.
    Detailed mountain adventure on a planet in Reaver's Deep.
o The Traveller's Digest #16 - by DGP.
    Information on a fourth subsector in Reaver's Deep.  Full MegaTraveller
    UWP data (pre-Rebellion), map, names, etc.
o Double Adventure #5: Night of Conquest - by GDW.
    Detailed adventure situation during a revolution on a planet in the Deep.
o Digest Group's GENIE database.
    A compilation of some of the data about the Reaver's Deep.  Many but not
    all planets named, full MegaTraveller UWP data (pre-Rebellion).  [The
    above UWP data was extracted from there].
o High Passage #3 - by ??.
    contains a disccussion of the Caledon Highlanders, a mercenary unit
    based in the Caledon Subsector.
o High Passage #5 - by ??.
    Contains a sector map that specifies subsector names and political
    borders only.  No planets, no UWP data, no names.
o Pilot's Guide to the Caledon Subsector - by GameLords, Ltd.
    May never have been published.
o Far Traveller #3 - by FASA.
    May never have been published.

Availability of Data (who has what)
Atlas of the Imperium:          wildstar,Higginbotham
Pilot's Guide to Drexilthar:
Far Traveller #1:               wildstar
Far Traveller #2:               wildstar
Far Traveller #3:
Dune Raiders:                   Higginbotham
Drenslaar Quest:
Ascent to Anekthor:
Travellers' Digest #16:
Double Adventure #6:            wildstar,Higginbotham
High Passage #3:
High Passage #5:
Pilot's Guide to Caledon:
GENIE UWP Database:             included above, version for SSV11 on request


Library Data and Other Information

The following general on Ea data was printed in Far Traveller #1:

Originally Explored by Aslan traders and clan scouts looking for new
territory, the Ea subsector has been the scene of numerous
confrontations between Humans and Aslans in competition for the same
real estate.  During the era of the Reaver Warlords, several small human
states sprang up here; as a result, competition is stiff.

Two substantial human states, separated by a scattered band of unclaimed
independent worlds, dominate this region.  The Grand Duchy of Marlheim
is a tightly controlled, expansionist totalitarian state.  The
Confediracy of Duncinae is a less restrictive interstellar community
with close ties to the Principality of Caledon to coreward.

[TNE-POCKET: The Grand Duchy entered an internal civil war, primarily
 a struggle between Pendang and Marlheim for control of the polity
 (similar to the internal politics of the Sword Worlds).  The civil
 war causes this polity to be classified Red Zone for the duration.]

Htalrea, lying between the two states, is a primitive world hitherto of
greatest importance to Aslan traders.  It is the home of the risth, a
large, dangerous predator whose scent glands are a source for rare and
expensive perfumes.

Library Computer: The Reavers.  Name given to any of the petty warlords
or pirates who have operated in the area of space known as Reavers'
Deep.  The first Reavers flourished in the region during the Long Night,
when individual warlords with a handful of working starships could
dominate several worlds.  Expansion by Aslan and Imperial interests into
the region, culminating in the Aslan Border Wars (ca. 200-380), led to a
lessening of the Reaver presence, but in the aftermath of those wars the
neutral strip of border worlds in the Deep [became] havens for criminals
and pirates.  To this day the name is sometimes applied, often in a
fanciful or romantic manner, to freebooters, pirates, privateers, or,
occasionally, to small interstellar states found in the area.

Library Computer: Tlaosierlahrau.  Also known as tlaospice, tlao, or
seasongold; a spice derived from the seed of tlaosier, a tree found on
Roakhioc[sic]/Ea in Reavers' Deep.  The golden seed kernels, when ground,
produce a fragrant, light seasoning popular with both Aslan and Human
gourmets on meat, soups, and stews.  Because of the scarcity of
tlaosier, and the expense of shipping it, tlaospice commands an
impressive price of Cr 3 per gram in offworld markets.

Library Computer: Tlasayerlaahel.  Merchant corporation controlled by
the Yehaso clan, a strong Aslan group in Reavers' Deep.  Tlasayerlaahel
is a powerful company with many interests in the Deep, among them the
tlaospice trade with Roakhoi, the rithscent trade with Htalrea, and some
commercial contact with the natives of Gaajpadge, from whome glasswares
and other objets d'art are obtained.  Tlasayerlaahel is currently
engaged in stiff economic competition with the human merchants of
Caledon Ventures, Ltd. from Caledon/Caledon.


TNE-POCKET Data:

Union of Harmony:
Cynthia suggests that the Union of Harmony actually be a Confederation
wannabe:  they have applied for membership, and are busy showing how
zealously Solomaniac they are (being Chinese, they probably think this
whole Solomaniac shtick is drivel - they KNOW that being Chinese is far
more important than (and far superior to) anything else out there):-)).
This gives a good excuse for lots of Solomani support, with room for them
to be dropped like a hot rock when things start to look dark...

And although they are getting lots of Solomani support, they have to use
almost all of it to keep the Aslan out of their spinward border (and
therefore have very little resources left to do more than act obnoxious to
everyone else).  Once they stop recieving Solomani support, then they get
the nasty shock of finding out how alone they can be ...

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

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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5047
From: Michael Glew <mglew@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>
Subject: Attn: Lauren Wiseman
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 12:02:18 EST

Lauren,

Could you please email me at this addess as I have lost your email
address.

Regards,

Mike.
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Internet:mglew@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au
    Phone:+61 43 841525

                     "I have a cunning plan..."- Baldrick (Black Adder)
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Michael Glew - School of Math Phys Comp & Elec - Macquarie University
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------


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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5048
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 16:56:31 -0330
From: Anthony Neal <anthonyn@odie.cs.mun.ca>
Subject: Laser pistols, Rifles, etc...



Happy New Year!!

Thanks for the response on those 10mm Pulse rifles! Much appretiated.
I'm gonna bug you a little more about weapons now, What about these laser
weapons?
Now, I have read all sorts of stuff on these "power packs" which are
unique for each different weapon, but I have no Idea about the size (vol)
of these things. I got a weight listing here in the Imperial Encyclopedia
that says a typical Laser Pistol-9 power pack should weigh 2 kg. Fantastic.
Now, depending upon the makeup of the power cell, the casing material
and what ever power flow governing equipment the little bugger has on it,
this means absolutely nothing to me. If we are talking heavy elements,
it is conceivable that the power cell is about the size of a typical
weapon clip for a slug thrower. (Yes, No, Maybe?)
Ahhhh, but then we take a little gaze at the weapons tables in the
Players Handbook and notice that a typical Laser Pistol-9 has a 50 shot
capacity per power cell. The plot thickens... And we see that a Laser
Pistol-13 (with a Power Cell weight of 1 kg) has a 200 shot capacity!
That's right, we have an increase of shot power per kilogram of factor 8!
Now, I have no problem with this as long as we are talking a backpack
that is akin to the size of a small Microwave oven. But we also have a
drawing of an imperial trooper on page 35 of the Rebellion Sourcebook
(Potential Boo-Hiss?) which depicts a Laser Pistol (I assume TL 13) with
the power link cord running behind him... He doesn't look too encumbered
to me. Now, I don't claim that artistic endeavors should become the be
all end all of judgement in this case, but I am REALLY confused.
And What about this 200 shots per magazine... How about clips that
contain 20 shots, which can load into the grips? Wisdom anyone? Advice?
Also, Can anybody direct me to some net accessible robot designs? I
got a lot of Scott Kellogg's designs (Cargo Lifters and Pizza Boxes)
but I have a great need for more.

Thanks, Happy New Year,
Anthony Neal

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Anthony Neal                 |"Lets bring up the cargo manifest. 2300 laser
anthonyn@odie.cs.mun.ca      | pistols, 1600 laser rifles, 1 ATV, 67 suits of
Memorial University Of       | combat armor and... What the hell are
Newfoundland                 | 'tribbles'?"
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--

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

Bundle: 427
Archive-Message-Number: 5049
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 16:24 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Planetary Formation

Hey folx,

Guess I'm a bit behind in the times, but I've been a bit busy.  A
while back there was a thread on the TML about planetary
atmospheres.  Basically the argument went along the line that since
Earth has a standard atmosphere, a planet with a more dense
atmosphere in Traveller must have a more dense core than Earth.
I'm afraid that is not the case.

You see any analysis of Earth's atmosphere has to take the actions
of Earth's Moon into account.  The moon is substantially larger
than any standard moon.  The Earth - Moon system is much more like
a double planetary system than a single planet with a regular moon.

The moon is so large and so close that it is slowly skimming off
the Earth's atmosphere, thinning it out.  Tidal action of the moon
actually gives escape velocity to some of Earth's upper atmosphere.

By contrast, Venus is slightly less dense than Earth (Surface
gravity 0.9G), yet it has an atmosphere of between 10 and 25
atmoshperes.  (CRC handbook Chem/Physics)  Why?  Venus has no moon,
not even tiny asteroid moons like Mars.

I also seem to remember reading an article a couple years back that
suggested Earth may have been hit by a small planetoid.  Approx
Mars size.  When the planetary core hit, it spread a large amount
of heavier metals over the surface of the planet.  That was
supposed to explain why there are measureable amounts of metals
like gold, silver, platinum, lead, copper, iron etc. etc. in the
crust instead of them being tied up in the core of the planet.

Catie?  You heard anything like that?  Or is there a more
conventional explanation for the distribution of metals in the
Earth's crust?

Scott 2G Kellogg

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

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

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 428  5050 29-Dec-1992 KELLOGG@DUCVAX.  Psionic Counter Counter Counter Counter
 428  5051 29-Dec-1992 "Steve Higginbo  Trillion Credit Squadron << My TCS game
 428  5052 29-Dec-1992 George William   Arrival Vengance is out << I just picke
 428  5053 30-Dec-1992 LTG3878@ZEUS.TA  << Here is an updated file of informati
 428  5054 30-Dec-1992 Corran J. Webst  Universal Universe Profiles << About a
 428  5055 30-Dec-1992 Richard Johnson  Personal Archives <<
 428  5056 30-Dec-1992 Rob Dean         Psionic Shields and Deep Meson Sites <<
 428  5057 30-Dec-1992 Rob Dean         Robot Design files << Anthony Neal asks
 428  5058 30-Dec-1992 Derek Wildstar   Universal Universe Profiles << I would
 428  5060 31-Dec-1992 Derek Wildstar   A computer question << I picked up an o
 428  5061 31-Dec-1992 "Cynthia Higgin  PBSEM <<  Did everyone who enquired abo
 429  5065 31-Dec-1992 Richard Johnson  Re: Personal Archives << I so far have
 429  5066 31-Dec-1992 Corran J. Webst  Re: A Computer Question... << I think t
 429  5067 31-Dec-1992 Seth 'the Lesse  Psi shields and deep meson gun sites <<
 429  5068 01-Jan-1993 Derek Wildstar   Re: Computers << I'm replying to the co
 428  5059 30-Dec-1992 CS171308011@UTS  Ossscar Sierrra Foxtrrot Fourrrr << Gre
 428  5062 31-Dec-1992 Robert S. Dean   A Few Robots << Since there was some in
 428  5063 31-Dec-1992 Robert S. Dean   A few more tidbits... << More stuff...

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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5050
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 16:25 CST
From: KELLOGG@DUCVAX.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Psionic Counter Counter Counter Counter Measures

Got an odd question for ya'll on psi shields:

Now, we know psi shields prevent a telepath from reading a person's
mind.  We also have more or less accepted that if a large area is
covered with a psi-shield, a teleport can not teleport inside, nor
can a clairvoyant see within the shield.  Telekinesis won't work
accross the barrier either etc.

Now for the odd part:
What about Clairvoyance.  As far as I know it works by a person
concentrating on an object or person, and then they will be able to
determine the location of what is sought.  Make sence?

What if a clairvoyant tries to spot the psi-shield?  Can a
clairvoyant 'see' the shield, even if they can't see inside it?

If so, then having a psi-shield around your deep-site meson gun
won't help an awful lot.

Of course, as the Imps come up with psi counter measures, the Zhos
will come up with psi counter counter measures, and then psi
counter counter counter measures & psi counter counter counter
counter measures & psi counter counter counter counter counter...

Scott 2G Kellogg
"Where there are counter measures, there are counter counter
measures." - Sun Tzu (paraphrased)

"Hey Rock! It's an anti-anti-missile-missile-missile!" - Bullwinkle

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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5051
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 16:46:39 -0600
From: "Steve Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: Trillion Credit Squadron

My TCS game is proceeding toward the point where I need another playe or
two.  Is anyone out there interested in taking on the job?

---Steve


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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5052
Subject: Arrival Vengance is out
From: gwh@lurnix.COM (George William Herbert)
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 14:50:42 -0800


I just picked up Arrival Vengeance.

"Tell Norris I'm sorry." -Emperor Strephon's last message to the
officers of the Arrival Vengeance before they depart his stronghold
across the rift back to Deneb.

Oh, and he sends ?someone? a young, 8 year old boy, (gee, precisely
the right age to be a son or clone born at the beginning of the
War...), off with the ship.

- -george william herbert



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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5053
Date:    Wed, 30 Dec 1992 11:42:08 -0600 (CST)
From: LTG3878@ZEUS.TAMU.EDU

Here is an updated file of information about Reavers' Deep.  It should be
considered a replacement for any information previously submitted by me.

12-30-92:  Reavers' Deep pre-published information.

High Passage #4, FASA, "STRIKER FORCE:  Caledon Highlanders," 1982, pp. 53-57,
J. Andrew Keith.  Fairly detailed information about a human mercenary regiment
operating out of Caledon/Caledon.

High Passage #5, FASA, "Outside the Expanses," 1982, pp. 62-63.  A brief para-
graph discussing the history of Reavers' Deep, an outline of political
boundaries (pre-Rebellion), and subsector names as follows:
A - Farift     E - Hryaraoaa      I - Keiar         M - Uhtaa
B - Riftdeep   F - Scotian Deep   J - Ea            N - Eakoi
C - Riftrim    G - Caledon        K - Drexilthar    O - Drinsaar
D - Gulf       H - Nightrim       L - Urlaqqash     P - Fahlnar

Aslan Mercenary Ships, FASA, 1982, J. Andrew Keith.  Deckplans for two 3000
ton aslan warships, two enclosed books.  One book discusses the ships and
presents a sample ticket against the Caledon Highlanders (mentioned above).
The other book discusses the Aslan at war, and contains information about an
aslan mercenary regiment operating out of Uhtaa subsector, the Teahleikhoi
regiment.

Adventure Class Ships Vol. II, FASA, 1982, J. Andrew Keith.  Deckplans for ten
ships, among them a 200-ton aslan combat scout vessel used by the Teahleikhoi
regiment mentioned above.  Included are two books, the second of which contains
ship encounter tables for used in Reavers' Deep.

Far Traveller #1, FASA, 1982.  Various articles:
"Library Computer," pp. 9-10.  Library data about Reavers' Deep.
"PORT OF CALL:  The Roakhoi System," pp. 11-49, J. Andrew Keith & William H.
Keith, Jr.  Extensive data regarding Roakhoi/Ea.
"WHERE THE ACTION IS:  The Lion's Den," pp. 50-55. J. Andrew Keith.  An
adventure set on Roakhoi.
"Pilot's Guide to Ea Subsector," pp. 56-57, Marishcal Adventures.  Classic Trav
UWP data, map, planet names, political boundaries, communication routes for Ea.
"ADVENTURETTE:  Jailbreak," pp. 58-64, J. Andrew Keith.  Another adventure set
Roakhoi.

Far Traveller #2, FASA, 1982.  Various articles:
"ADVENTURETTE:  Night rescue," pp. 10-16, J. Andrew Keith.  An adventure set on
Roakhio (mentioned above).
"Library Computer," p. 17.  More Library data about Reavers' Deep.
"PORT OF CALL:  Rejhappur," pp. 20-42.  Extensive data about Rejhappur/Scotian
Deep.
"Encounters & Events on Rejhappur," pp. 43-51.  Still more about Rejhappur.
"Trial by Justice," pp. 52-55, J. Andrew Keith.  An adventure set on Rejhappur.
"The Last Bastion," pp. 56-69, John Marshal.  Another adventure on Rejhappur.
"Pilot's Guide to Scotian Deep Subsector," pp. 60-62.  Classic Trav UWP data,
map, planet names, political boundaries, communication routes for Scotian Deep.

Double Adventure 6:  Night of Conquest, GDW, 1982, J. Andrew Keith & William H.
Keith, Jr.  An adventure set on Gaajpadje/Ea, discusses the political situation.

The Drenslaar Quest, GameLords, Ltd., 1982, William H. Keith, Jr.  An adventure
set on Yarhfahl/Drexilthar.  Emphasis on underwater activities.  Discusses the
political situation.

Duneraiders, GameLords, Ltd., 1984, William H. Keith, Jr.  An adventure set on
Tashrakaar/Drexilthar.  Emphasis on desert activities.

A Pilot's Guide to Drexilthar Subsector, GameLords, Ltd., 1984, William H.
Keith, Jr.  Includes an outline of political boundaries of Reavers' Deep,
subsector names, and a brief sector history.  Classic Trav UWP data for
Drexilthar subsector, map, planet names, political boundaries, communication
routes.  Each planet has a page long description, and full Book 6: Scouts data,
including stellar data, etc.

Atlas of the Imperium, GDW, 1984, p. 27.  Planet locations, starport types,
political affiliations, names of high population planets, military bases,
desert planets indicated, for Reavers' Deep.

Best of the Journal, GDW, vol. 3, "CONTACT:  The Virushi," J. Andrew Keith &
William H. Keith, Jr.  Details of a minor race from Virshash/Urlaqqash.

Traveller's Digest #16, DGP, 1989.  Various articles.
"Twice Confounded," pp. 4-18, William Connors.  An adventure set on Irlaggur/
Urlaqqash (pre-Rebellion).
"Reavers' Deep Sector:  Library Data," pp. 27-28, John Theisen & J. Andrew
Keith.  Still more Reavers' Deep information (pre-Rebellion)
"Urlaqqash Subsector," p. 29.  Full MegaTraveller UWP data (pre-Rebellion),
map, planet names, political boundaries, communication routes for Urlaqquash.
"Communication Routes of The Reaver's Deep," p. 30.  Political boundaries,
communication routes, planet locations of Reaver's Deep (pre-Rebellion).

GENie data.  For some reason, the GENie data does not include the names for
Urlaqqash subsector, but does include the names for Caledon subsector.

So, to summarize:  full data available on five subsectors:
                   F - Scotian Deep
                   G - Caledon
                   J - Ea
                   K - Drexilthar
                   L - Urlaqqash

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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5054
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 13:06:37 -0800
From: Corran J. Webster <cwebster@math.ucla.edu>
Subject: Universal Universe Profiles


About a month back I had this neat idea:

>>   Perhaps a UUP (Universal Universe Profile) might be in order!

and Wildstar had this to say...

>Hey, good idea!  A simple string of digits which summarize many of the
>important points of a universe.  How about something like the following
>
>Tone : Rating of the overall tone and character of the universe; low
>numbers mean dark, depressing, morbid; high numbers indicate light,
>upbeat, hopeful.
>Contrast : Rating of the definition between "good" and "evil"; low
>numbers indicate that such a conflict is not a fundamental part of the
>universe, with the contrast increasing up to the high numbers, where the
>conflict between a well defined good and evil is central to the universe
>(Star Wars is a good example of this in science fiction).
>Scale : Shows the "size" of events in which the players will typically
>be involved; low numbers indicate that the events are likely to be
>unimportant on a cosmic scale, and of interest to the participants and
>a few others.  High numbers indicate world-shattering, star-spanning
>plots with strong consequences for entire worlds and billions of people
>Input : This indicates how much influence the players are likely to have
>in the course of these events; low numbers indicate that the rebellion
>will go on no matter what the players can do.  High numbers represent a
>larger player influence on their universe.
>
>Technology: A group of three digits which represents the low, average
>and high end of the technology available in the universe.
>
>Parameters: A group of digits for plugging into equations in design
>dequences; represents the type and effectiveness of specifc technologies
>in the game universe.  Likeley candidates include Fusion, Gravitics,
>Jump Drive, Stutterwarp, Stargates, and as many others as seem
>reasonable.
>
>Examples: (in my humble opinion, using a 2-B scale):
>
>Classic Traveller: 9469-AFG-87600
>Rebellion Era:     58A3-AFG-67600
>Hard Times Era:    4878-9CE-67600
>Star Trek TNG:     A79A-???-A90B1
>Star Wars:         BABA-???-88A00

Well it looks like GDW might be going to run with a similar sort of idea!
(Yes GDW may actually be taking some notice of what goes on here!) If you
check the last page of Arrival Vengeance you will see the following in the
ad for TNE...

Each campaign will have its own universe profile which describes what
is possible there. Is anti-gravity technologically possible? What
is the most efficient means of intestellar travel in this universe?
Jump Drive? Stutterwarp? Stargates? Is matter transport possible?
When was artificial intelligence created? In the universe of the
imperium, stutterwarp is physically impossible, but jump drive and
anti-gravity are easily discovered principles.

(I hope GDW doesn't mind people quoting their ads...)

From this it looks as if they are only going to use the "parameter" type
digits, but more than the ones wildstar suggested (like matter transport
and AI).

So perhaps, to get discussion going on TML again, we might have a discussion
(argument, flame war) about what should be included in a UUP and how it
should tie in with the rest of the rules (ie. what does a "stutterwarp 6"
rating mean?).

An obvious candidate for another digit in the UUP is psionics (Traveller has
moderately powerful psionics, the Star Wars universe has powerful psionics
(the Force), a universe like 2300AD has none). Also FTL communications:
This has been a big no-no in Traveller & 2300AD, but is used in a lot of
science fiction - Star Trek being a prime example. (By FTL communications
I mean FTL communications which are faster than the speed of travel for
matter).

Any others people can think of?

As for what the digits actually mean, for the FTL digits the maximum distance
which can be travelled is perhaps the obvious choice, but there are other
possibilities, such as the maximum speed or an efficiency rating.

For AI, perhaps the digit might be the maximum intelligence an AI can reach
and still be stable (as I remember, human level AI's in 2300AD were possible
but tended to suicide after a few months). How about the length of time
that an AI remains stable as the meaning of the digit?

Psionics may be the maximum level in any psionic-type skill.

The Fusion/Gravitics numbers seem best used as inputs into vehicle design
process.

Any other suggestions?

See ya 'round,
Corran Webster

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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5055
From: richard@agora.rain.com (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Personal Archives
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 14:33:42 PST



                         PBEM Archives

       R-Alpha Design Notes (much of this belongs to Alan Husscroft)

                      Just ask if you want it.

       If I don't hear from anyone, it goes away early next year.



I'm getting ready to make some room on the ol' hard disk here at home so
I can keep playing with the computer.  I have about 5Mb worth of of various
PBEM (the *original* series) :=) files.  Most notably, I have all the GM
notes and conversations with the R-alpha natives about R-alpha.  It's a
ready-made ring-world if somebody wants it.

I'd upload to sunbane, but don't really have that capability from here (but
the sysadmin is actually working on it.  Something useful for the money.)

Happy New Year.
- --
Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com
"When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love
has always won.  There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time they can
seem invincible.  But in the end they always fail.  Always." --- Mahatma Ghandi

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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5056
From: Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.com>
Subject: Psionic Shields and Deep Meson Sites
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 19:15:30 -0500 (EST)

2G Scott mentions that having a psionic shield around a deep meson gun site
would be a dead giveaway to a Zhodani attacker, since they could probably sense
the shield.  (I think that this business of sensing shields is correct, but
I've never used psionics in a game...)  This is correct as far as it goes,
but if decoy shields were substantially cheaper than deep sites, it might
not be too bad...

Of course, at the rate of fire of weapons in this game, engaging one real
site and two thousand decoy sites might not take very long.

Rob Dean

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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5057
From: Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.com>
Subject: Robot Design files
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 19:25:34 -0500 (EST)

Anthony Neal asks about robot design files.  As far as I know, they haven't
been collected, but there are a number of designs that have been published
here, by the "usual people"--me, Scott Kellogg, Bertil Joenll, and Juergen
Kirsch, if memory serves me correctly.  They can be accessed slowly by reading
the back issue bundles off the archives.  New designs are probably going to
be slow in coming, since I think that most of the designer types are holding
their metaphorical breaths waiting for some idea from GDW of whether or not
it will be worth changing over to the new system.  (On the other hand, I typed
up two TL12 dumbots today, and may do another one or two tomorrow, and I'll
upload whatever I've got then. Happy New Year!)

Rob Dean

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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5058
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 22:16:31 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Universal Universe Profiles


I would like to make a couple of follow-up comments about the UUP idea.

First of all, I'm glad GDW will do something of the sort with T:TNE; any sort
of multi-universe game needs something like this.  Personally, I felt that the
Tone, Contrast, Scale, and Input numbers are quite important.  Not everyone
likes the same kind of adventuring, and these allow you to quickly see if a
product fits in with the kind of game your players like to play.

The parameters were intended to go into equations in the vehicle and equipment
design sequences: exactly what each number means depends on what it is for.
As a rule of thumb, a 0 indicates that the technology is impossible (not
present in the universe at all).  Other numbers indicate greater or lesser
degrees of efficency; the larger the number, the more efficient or powerful
the effect.  Exactly how these numbers are interpreted would depend on the
rules contained in the design sequences for that technology.

Since none of these rules (currently) exist, then it is all rather
hypothetical.  But it would be nice to see such a scheme in place for T:TNE.


Speaking of Arrival Vengance, my local game store (Dream Wizards) does not
have it in stock yet (Dec 30th).  Tom Peters (who occasionally works there)
mentioned that he has yet to see the completed product, and he did the
cover art (!).  Tom also expressed a good bit of confidence in Dave Nilsen
and Traveller: The New Era.


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


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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5060
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 00:18:22 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: A computer question


I picked up an old issue of Byte magazine (before it sold out to
McGraw-Hill) from January 1979, and I'd like to quote from an article,
entitled "History of Computers: The IBM 704":


  The IBM 704, announced in 1956, was almost the last vacuum tube
computer.  It was rendered obsolete by the 709 in 1959, which became the
7090 in less than a year.  The addition of the zero suffix to the model
number denoted the replacement of vacuum tubes by transistors and the
start of the second comptuer generation.  The 704 was very definitely a
first generation machine in the tradition of the giant brains of the
1940s and 1950s.  The central processing unit occupied a hige L-shaped
cabinet of about 120 cubic feet.  There was not enough room in the
cabinet for the 32k 36-bit words of core storage that occupied its own
box - another 100 cubic feet at least.  Today [1979] the computing power
cotained in those two steel, glass, and dark grey enamel cabinets can be
equaled by a desktop machine; in fact the latter would easily outstrip
the 704's 12 us instruction cycle.  Nevertheless, the 704 was the
ultimate computer of its time.

  ... On the other hand, support for the hardware was much in evidence.
A customer engineer spent eight hours a day on the premises, including
an hour long daily preventive maintenance session before the normal
first shift began.  The session included bringing up power, which took
15 minutes, and running diagnostics with voltages 20 percent above and
below normal in an effort to find weak vacuum tubes.  The effort was
usually successful.

  ... The 704's input and output (I/O) units consisted of a card reader,
card punch, line printer, ten magnetic tape units, two magnetic drum
units (each composed of four 2k-word drums) and a cathode ray tube ...


What intrigued me was the following question: What (in MegaTraveller
terms) is the Model 704?  You might want to think about the answer
before reading on.  Another interesting question to think about is: Can
the Virus take over a Model 704 (and make it sentient, etc...)?
Finally, you might want to compare a Model 704 to a computer you are
familiar with: do you have the equivalent handy today?

^L

A quick examination of the MegaTraveller Referee's manual shows that
computer technology begins at TL-5, and (ignoring /fib) goes like this:

TL-5 : Model-0, -0/bis, -1
TL-6 : Model-1/bis
TL-7 : Model-2
TL-8 : Model-2/bis
TL-9 : Model-3
TL-A : Model-4 (and so on up)

Quickly flipping back to the TL descriptions, we find that TL-5 is the
rough equivalent to c.1930, TL-6 is about c.1950, TL-7 is c.1970, and
TL-8 is c.1990.

A naive application of this rough description would place the IBM 704 in
the late 1950's, or firmly TL-6 (making it a Model-1/bis or
thereabouts).  Instead, I would argue that (since it is a vacuum-tube
machine) the IBM 704 should be classified as a Model-1.  The Model-0 and
- -0/bis would then be earlier and smaller vacuum-tube machines (all
first-generation computers, though, and of the same general technology
level).

To continue this line of thought, the Model-1/bis should be about the
largest and fastest computer produced with discrete-transistor
technology (presumably sometime in the mid to late 1960's), while the
Model-2 is probably the equivalent of an early supercomputer (early
1980's: perhaps a Cray-1), and a Model-2/bis should be represented with
the most powerful supercomputers on the drawing boards today.

So, the IBM 704 can run a respectable commercial starship.  Can the
virus take one over?  I (personally) should think not: after all, the
Model 704 is a very limited machine: a floppy-based, 128k-RAM IBM PC is
more than the equal of the 704.

Comments, anyone?



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


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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5061
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 08:14:01 -0600
From: "Cynthia Higginbotham" <p00206@psilink.com>
Subject: PBSEM

Did everyone who enquired about the PBSEM get the information
they requested?  The Mail Demons have been active and at least one
person's stuff never got there...
Don't panic if you don't hear from me for a few days, I'll be
off-line for New Year's.  Steve says he'll get back to enquiries about
TCS on Sunday or thereabouts.

Happy New Year,
Cynthia


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

Bundle: 429
Archive-Message-Number: 5065
From: richard@agora.rain.com (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Re: Personal Archives
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 13:00:13 PST


I so far have three requests for the R-alpha material, and no-one seems
especially interested in the transcripts of the original mission formation.
:=)

 *** HOWEVER ***   I'm not sending them yet.  Please wait patiently
 and I'll keep you posted.

As Mark pointed out, I really should send them to him first, to verify
both that he has them, and that I don't accidentally let something slip;
presumably something about some aspect of the game that He and Mike have
chosen to keep.

So, I'm sending him the big chunks of stuff.  What passes muster will
get moved up to sunbane, and I'll let you know.  I'll try to break it up
into small chunks for people who need special overseas delivery.


Happy Ney Year.
- --
Richard Johnson      richard@agora.rain.com
The thing about the number 2, like pi and e, giving it such power is that
it is part of a small, conspiratorial, cabal of universal constants that
controls everything.

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

Bundle: 429
Archive-Message-Number: 5066
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 17:27:40 -0800
From: Corran J. Webster <cwebster@math.ucla.edu>
Subject: Re: A Computer Question...


I think that giving the IBM 704 as a Model 1 is overstating its
power. Firstly I think that the technology scale would be: TL 5 =
Vacuum Tubes (note the x100 volume mod for TL 5 on the computer
table), TL 6 = Transistors, TL 7+ = Silicon Chips. (Could someone with
the Ref's Companion check this?) This means that the 704 is using TL 5
technology and should get the x 100 volume mod.

The total volume given for the 704 in the article was 220 cu ft which
is approximately 8 cubic metres (= 8 kilolitres). A model 0 would take
up 0.5 x 100 = 50 kilolitres, so I think that the 704 is considerably
less powerful than even a model 0...

Even if you consider vacuum tubes to be TL 6, then a model 1 takes up
20 kilolitres, and a model 0 takes up 5 kilolitres, so it would be
closer to a model 0 (perhaps a model 0/bis?)

OK, so if that's the power of a 704, what would a model 0 be in
today's terms (assuming the first case for volume)...

Mutliplying the memory capacity by 5, we get 160, 36 bit words = 5760
bits = 720 K. IUm not sure how CPU complexity would be affected, but I
think that a model 0 on these lines would be approximately equivalent
to a 640K IBM PC, say based on an 8088? Or maybe an old 512K or 1 MB
Mac.

Does this seem reasonable?

See ya 'round.
Corran Webster

PS. Happy New Year!

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

Bundle: 429
Archive-Message-Number: 5067
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 22:41:09 EST
From: Seth 'the Lesser' <slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu>
Subject: Psi shields and deep meson gun sites

2G Scott and Rob Dean have been bandying about the notion of psi shields
covering deep meson gun sites.  I now offer my opinion.

In my games, nobody would ever put a psi shield on a deep meson gun (unless
they were ignorant of basic psionic theory, which seems reasonably possible
in the Imperial core, but not behind the claw).  See, a clairvoyant trying to
locate a deep meson gun site has to *search* for it.  That means sweeping the
entire crustal volume of the planet for hidden meson guns.  A psi-shield
would stick out like a sore thumb, making it easier for the devil Zhos to
find the site.  Although an unshielded site is vulnerable to attack by
teleportation, experience has shown that only colossal luck (or good
intelligence work) will give a Zhodani clairvoyant the location of the
defense guns.

It's not just a matter of "thinking about the location" unless you already
know the location, in which case why bother with psi when you can go ahead
and meson-blast the s*** out of it?

Seth "the Lesser"

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

Bundle: 429
Archive-Message-Number: 5068
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 93 11:19:25 EST
From: wildstar@moeng2.morgan.edu (Derek Wildstar)
Subject: Re: Computers


I'm replying to the computer thread here on TML (even though some of the o
original messages came over the pocket-empire relay) because this is more
than a little off-topic for the pocket empire discussions.

Steve Higginbotham writes:
> I think my pocket calculator has more power than a 704...
> Given the computing power indicated by the product of max CP input and
> CP multiplier, I suspect that all the first generation machines are
> close enough in performance that they can all be treated as model-0's
> (with possible a few model-0bis right at the end.

The only problem I have with this is that the Model-0, -0/bis, and -1
are *all* listed as TL-5 machines.  If the IBM 704 is a model-0, what's
a model-1?  And how much preventative maintainance does it take to keep
running?

> Given that scale I mentioned earlier, the model-2bis sits firmly at
> 300,000, and the model-1 sits at 50,000.  Are you really suggesting that
> the most powerful supercomputers on the drawing board only have six
> times the computing power of a fast discrete-transistor machine?  NAH!

No, I'm not.  However, are you trying to suggest that the most powerful
of the integrated circuit computers is only 1.3 times as powerful as the
best discrete transistor systems?  Or that the best modern supercomputer
is about twice as powerful as one of those integrated-circuit
mainframes?

I am suggesting that we chuck Max CP and CP Mux as a basis for comparing
the "power" of computer systems.  It certainly isn't a linear scale, and
I doubt that it has any relation to the real world.

This is one area of Traveller where we actually have a number of "real
world" data points to go on.  A -0, -0/bis, and -1 are at least possible
to build with vacuum tubes, relays, and magnetic cores and the like.  A
- -1/bis can't; it requires at least discrete transistor technology to
construct (presumably, vacuum tubes are too slow and unreliable for a
system of this complexity).  A -2 requires integrateed circuit
technology in order to be possible, and a -2/bis requires modern
high-speed, high-density technology.

Corran J. Webster writes:
> I think that giving the IBM 704 as a Model 1 is overstating its
> power. Firstly I think that the technology scale would be: TL 5 =
> Vacuum Tubes (note the x100 volume mod for TL 5 on the computer
> table), TL 6 = Transistors, TL 7+ = Silicon Chips.

Right.  And the Model-1 is listed as the best possible with TL-5 tech.

> The total volume given for the 704 in the article was 220 cu ft which
> is approximately 8 cubic metres (= 8 kilolitres). A model 0 would take
> up 0.5 x 100 = 50 kilolitres, so I think that the 704 is considerably
> less powerful than even a model 0...

The volumes given were *just* the CPU and core cabinets.  That doesn't
include the I/O devices (tape drives, magnetic drum, card reader, punch,
and online printer) which were easily twice this volume, judging from
the pictures in the article.  Nor does it include the power supplies and
cooling devices, which were not shown at all, or the amount of space
required for access (after all, you've got to crawl around inside the
machine replacing tubes every day).  In the pictures, the access space
is larger than the cabinets, although presumably you could arrange them
more efficiently.

> Mutliplying the memory capacity by 5, we get 160, 36 bit words = 5760
> bits = 720 K. IUm not sure how CPU complexity would be affected, but I
> think that a model 0 on these lines would be approximately equivalent
> to a 640K IBM PC, say based on an 8088? Or maybe an old 512K or 1 MB
> Mac.

Well, the 704 had two registers (an accumulator and the
multiplier-quotient register), and three index registers (A, B, and C),
so its CPU is relatively simple (sounds rather like a 36-bit wide verson
of one of the early microprocessors).  Increasing the memory capacity
through paging or segmentation might be a reasonable thing to do.
Several of the things FORTRAN programmers are familiar with were
developed from the 704 instruction set, like the funky 3-way branching
IF statement, the FORMAT statement, and the 72-column line length limit.

I should point out that while the 704 sounds extremely limited by
today's standards of multi-megabyte operating systems, multi-dozen
megabyte compilers, and gigabyte disk drives; the first high-level
programming language (FORTRAN) was developed and used quite productively
on machines like the 704.


Bertil writes:
> Hans Rancke-Madsen:
> > To resolve this seeming inconsistency: I suggest that a model 1/bis
> > computer is what you can build at TL 6 _with TL 15 knowledge_.
> Give the man a cigar! This is one of the most significant overlooked areas
> in Traveller: contrary to what the IISS (aka GDW:) would want us to belive
> the TL at which something is discovered is not equal to the TL at which
> something can be constructed.

I can agree with this.  What suprised me is that a Model-1 could be
built with vacuum tubes.  The 704 is one of the most power ful vacuum
tube machines that I know about; feel free to extrapolate.  However,
whatever we come up with will have to buildable with the technology, and
work about as often as not.

> The trouble is that the Traveller TL tables use both Discovery TL and
> Possibility TL as if they were one and the same. I suspect that all TL's up
> to TL8 should be treated as Discovery TL's, while the ones from TL9 to 13 or
> 14 are Possibility TL's. 15 and upwards are yet again Discovery TL's since
> this is the peak of Imperial technology.

Perhaps this is something that we should mention to GDW, and try to have
fixed for T:TNE.  Convert over to some sort of consistent system?


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


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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5059
Date:    Wed, 30 Dec 1992 22:55:57 -0600 (CST)
From: CS171308011@UTSA86.UTSA.EDU
Subject: Ossscar Sierrra Foxtrrot Fourrrr

Greetings all,

I hear a cry for more robot designs!  (Heh Heh Heh!)
Here's one I converted for MegaTrav a few months back & never got
a chance to post.  From 101 Robots:  The OSF-4 Hostile Environment
Surveyor Robot.  (Redone without permission)  I turned it into a
series of robots from TL 13-15.  PBEMers may recognize Tweel's
Ossscarr Sssierrrra Foxtrrrot Fourrr.  And since Tweel's history,
if you're *very* good little boys & girls, I *might* be persuaded
to post the stats for Trrriple Thrree & friend.

BTW, the stats as given in 101 Robots are *FULL* of misprints.

"When originally designed, this combination of warbot and survey
robot was greeted with skepticism by most Scouts but, as the OSF-4
Survey Commando proved itself over and over in the field, the
skepticism changed to gratitude for making the life of a Scout a
little easier and much more survivable."  -- 101 Robots: GDP

RobotID:  Hostile Environment Surveyor Robot OSF-3, TL13 Cr 767,595
Hull:     (2/4) Disp=1868Liter, Config=4SL, Armor=18F,
          Unload=2496 Kg, Load=2614 Kg
Power:    (1/1) Fusion=1Mw, Dur=11 Days
Loco:     (1/1) StdGrav=7t, MaxAccel=1.7G,
          NOE=170, Cruise=750, Top=1000
Sensors:  PassiveEMS=VDist*2, Audio=Dist*4, Magnetic=VDist*2,
          Visual(+IR, +Tele, +Active IR*4), Radiation=VDist*2,
          Densiometer=1Meter*4, Neutrino=1Mw*2, Headlight*4,
          Neural Activity Sensor=Medium*1, Touch Sensor=+Sensitive
Comm:     Radio=Cont*2, Maser=Cont, Voder,
          (Brain Interface to wire guided TAC missiles)
Off:      Laser Rifle
          Gauss Rifle*2 (200 rnds)
          RAM Auto Grenade Launcher*2 (200 rnds)
          (Racks installed for deployment of TAC missiles)
Def:      Military Grade Electronic Counter Counter Measures,
          Electronic Circuit Protection,
          Smoke*10, Prismatic Aerosol*10, SandCaster*10
Brain:    Lin=19, Par=13, Syn=3, StdStor=80, Program Interface
Programs: Survival-3, Survey-3, Recon-2, Prospecting-1,
          Grav-Vehicle-2, Forward Obs-2,  Weapon Handling-3
          High Autonomous, Full Command
Other:    Fuel=440 liter, Cargo=25 liter,
          Heavy Tentacles(retractable)*10
          Strength=193
          Dexerity=15
          Intelligence=8
          Education=8

RobotID:  Hostile Environment Surveyor Robot OSF-4, TL14 Cr 770,595
Hull:     (2/4) Disp=1868Liter, Config=4SL, Armor=18G,
          Unload=2374 Kg, Load=2492 Kg
Power:    (1/1) Fusion=1Mw, Dur=11 Days
Loco:     (1/1) StdGrav=7t, MaxAccel=1.8G,
          NOE=180, Cruise=750, Top=1000
Sensors:  PassiveEMS=VDist*2, Audio=Dist*4, Magnetic=VDist*2,
          Visual(+IR, +Tele, +Active IR*4), Radiation=VDist*2,
          Densiometer=1Meter*4, Neutrino=100Kw*2, Headlight*4,
          Neural Activity Sensor=Long*1, Touch Sensor=+Sensitive
Comm:     Radio=Cont*2, Maser=Cont, Voder,
          (Brain Interface to wire guided TAC missiles)
Off:      Laser Rifle
          Gauss Rifle*2 (200 rnds)
          RAM Auto Grenade Launcher*2 (200 rnds)
          (Racks installed for deployment of TAC missiles)
Def:      Military Grade Electronic Counter Counter Measures,
          Electronic Circuit Protection,
          Smoke*10, Prismatic Aerosol*10, SandCaster*10
Brain:    Lin=19, Par=13, Syn=3, StdStor=80, Program Interface
Programs: Survival-3, Survey-3, Recon-2, Prospecting-2,
          Grav-Vehicle-2, Forward Obs-2,  Weapon Handling-3
          High Autonomous, Full Command
Other:    Fuel=440 liter, Cargo=25 liter,
          Heavy Tentacles(retractable)*10
          Strength=193
          Dexerity=15
          Intelligence=9
          Education=8

RobotID:  Hostile Environment Surveyor Robot OSF-5, TL15 Cr 767,595
Hull:     (2/4) Disp=1868Liter, Config=4SL, Armor=18G,
          Unload=1370 Kg, Load=1488 Kg
Power:    (1/1) Fusion=1Mw, Dur=11 Days
Loco:     (1/1) StdGrav=7t, MaxAccel=3.7G,
          NOE=190, Cruise=750, Top=1000
Sensors:  PassiveEMS=VDist*2, Audio=Dist*4, Magnetic=VDist*2,
          Visual(+IR, +Tele, +Active IR*4), Radiation=VDist*2,
          Densiometer=50Meter*4, Neutrino=10Kw*2, Headlight*4,
          Neural Activity Sensor=VLong*1, Touch Sensor=+Sensitive
Comm:     Radio=Cont*2, Maser=Cont, Voder,
          (Brain Interface to wire guided TAC missiles)
Off:      Laser Rifle
          Gauss Rifle*2 (200 rnds)
          RAM Auto Grenade Launcher*2 (200 rnds)
          (Racks installed for deployment of TAC missiles)
Def:      Military Grade Electronic Counter Counter Measures,
          Electronic Circuit Protection,
          Smoke*10, Prismatic Aerosol*10, SandCaster*10
Brain:    Lin=19, Par=13, Syn=3, StdStor=80, Program Interface
Programs: Survival-3, Survey-3, Recon-2, Prospecting-3,
          Grav-Vehicle-2, Forward Obs-2,  Weapon Handling-3
          High Autonomous, Full Command
Other:    Fuel=440 liter, Cargo=192 liter,
          Heavy Tentacles(retractable)*10
          Strength=193
          Dexerity=15
          Intelligence=10
          Education=8

Scott 2G Kellogg

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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5062
Date:     Thu, 31 Dec 92 11:55:31 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@cbda8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  A Few Robots

Since there was some interest, I did a few robot designs.  If there are errors,
please forgive me--I've been pretty tired the last couple of days.

Note: To anyone fussing with Book 8 robot designs--_always_ design the
brain before worrying about anything else!

Rob Dean

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

Gluek Automation Robotic Brains

     The Gluek Automation Corporation of Bendor produces a variety of robots
based around the following TL12 standard brains, which are adapted for local
manufacture on Bendor from various Imperial Data Package designs.

Model 12-01

     The Model 12-01 is a low cost dumbot brain, intended for use in robots
of very limited function.

   Low Data fundamental logic                     Cr 400
Limited basic command program                     Cr 500
                5 linear CPUs  1.0l   0.5kg       Cr2500 (2 available)
    11 standard storage units  5.5l   1.1kg       Cr2750
                              ---------------------------
                               6.5l   1.6kg       Cr6150
Total applications program space available: 2 units.
Intelligence: 0
Education: 1

Model 12-11

     The Model 12-11 is a moderate cost dumbot brain, intended for use in
robots of limited function.

  High Data fundamental logic                     Cr 3000
        Basic command program                     Cr 1000
                9 linear CPUs  1.8l   0.9kg       Cr 4500 (2 available)
              5 parallel CPUs  2.5l   0.5kg       Cr50000
    14 standard storage units  7.0l   1.4kg       Cr 3500 (2 available)
                              ---------------------------
                              11.3l   2.8kg       Cr62000
Total applications program space available: 4 units.
Intelligence: 1
Education: 1

Model 12-23

     The Model 12-23 is a better dumbot brain, intended for use in robots of
capable of a limited variety of function.

Low Autonomous fundamental logic                     Cr  7000
           Basic command program                     Cr  1000
                  10 linear CPUs  2.0l   1.0kg       Cr  5000 (5 available)
                10 parallel CPUs  5.0l   1.0kg       Cr100000
                  1 synaptic CPU  0.1l   0.1kg       Cr 50000
       30 standard storage units 15.0l   3.0kg       Cr  3500 (3 available)
                                 ----------------------------
                                 22.1l   5.1kg       Cr170500
Total applications program space available: 8 units.
Intelligence: 2
Education: 3






Gluek Automation Gopher Assistant Steward Robot TL12

     The Gluek Gopher is built around the Gluek Automation Model 12-01 brain,
and is intended for light duty in restaurants and starships as a waiter or
assistant steward.

  RobotID: Gluek Gopher, TL12, Cr14,049
  Chassis: 1/2, Disp=10L, Conf=4USL, Armor=1F, Weight=7.2kg
    Power: 1/2, Batteries=1.85kw-h, Dur=30 minutes
     Loco: 1/2, Wheels=4, P/W=69
     Comm: none
  Sensors: 1*visual, 1*audio
  Devices: 1*very light arm
      Off: -
      Def: -
    Brain: CPU=5 Linear, Storage=11 Standard
  Program: Low Data, Limited Basic Command, Steward-1
    Other: Profile=0501
    Notes: Duration is based on full power usage of all components
           simultaneously.  Realistic duration would be greater, and the
           robot would typically be programmed to recharge itself when not in
           use.

[Game system note: Designed using Book 8 with no MegaTraveller vehicle system
enhancements, but typed in MegaTraveller format.]






Gluek Automation Ganger Engineering Robot TL12

     The Ganger is a fairly simple dumbot intended to serve as an assistant
engineer aboard a starship.  It use the standard Gluek Model 12-23 robot
brain.  The Ganger's grav modules supply enough lift to carry up to 450kg of
additional equipment.

  RobotID: Gluek Ganger, TL12, Cr204,625
  Chassis: 10/25, Disp=150L, Conf=3USL, Armor=1F, Weight=183kg
    Power: 1/2, FuelCells=40KW, Dur=6.3 days
     Loco: 1/2, HVGrav=800kg, Acc=3.38G, MaxSpeed=300kph, NOE=40kph
     Comm: Voder, Radio=Distant(5km)
  Sensors: 2 Visual, 2 Audio, 1 Olfactory, Radiation Sensor, Magnetic Sensor
  Devices: Zero-G maneuver, 2*medium arms, 2*light arms
      Off: -
      Def: -
    Brain: CPU=1 Synaptic, 10 Parallel, 10 Linear, Storage=30 Standard
  Program: Low Autonomous, Basic Command, Electronic-1, Engineering-1,
           Grav Vehicle-1
    Other: Fuel=37.8L, Profile=(57)F23

[Game system note: Designed using Book 8 with no MegaTraveller vehicle system
enhancements, but typed in MegaTraveller format.]







Gluek Automation Gunslinger Gunnery Robot TL12

     The Gunslinger is designed around a Gluek 12-11 robotic brain, and
provides a low cost gunnery capbility to a starship operator.  It is avail-
able with its program specialized for either lasers or missiles.
     The Gunslinger is an immobile box which is plugged into the appropriate
gunnery position on board a starship, usually in a location which would only
be accessible to members of the crew.  This makes it more difficult for a
hostile group aboard the vessel to disable the guns, which would be desirable
during a hijacking attempt, for example.  Communication with the bridge crew
is via the ship's computer network, and the robot uses the ship's sensors
(via the network) to engage targets designated by the bridge crew.

  RobotID: Gluek Gunslinger, TL12, Cr66,100
  Chassis: 1/2, Disp=20L, Conf=4USL, Armor=1F, Weight=6.8kg
    Power: none, Dur=indefinite
     Loco: none
     Comm: none
  Sensors: none
  Devices: Power interface, Brain interface
      Off: -
      Def: -
    Brain: CPU=9 Linear, 5 Parallel, Storage=14 Standard
  Program: High Data, Basic Command, Gunnery-2
    Other: Profile=0011

[Game system note: Designed using Book 8 with no MegaTraveller vehicle system
enhancements, but typed in MegaTraveller format.]






Gluek Automation Groom Steward Robot TL12

     The Groom is designed around the Gluek Model 12-23 brain, and is fully
capable of replacing a human steward aboard a starship. For additional flexi-
bility, a Groom can also exercise limited control over a group of Gluek
Gophers.

  RobotID: Gluek Groom, TL12, Cr214,950
  Chassis: 6/14, Disp=80L, Conf=3USL, Armor=1F, Weight=53.5kg
    Power: 1/2, FuelCells=10KW, Dur=14.5 days
     Loco: 1/2, LTGrav=100kg, Acc=0.95G, MaxSpeed=300kph, NOE=40kph
     Comm: Voder
  Sensors: 2 Visual, 2 Audio, 1 Olfactory, Radiation Sensor
  Devices: 2*light arms
      Off: -
      Def: -
    Brain: CPU=1 Synaptic, 10 Parallel, 10 Linear, Storage=30 Standard
  Program: Low Autonomous, Basic Command, Steward-3, Grav Vehicle-1
    Other: Fuel=34.9L, Profile=EF23

[Game system note: Designed using Book 8 with no MegaTraveller vehicle system
enhancements, but typed in MegaTraveller format.]


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

Bundle: 428
Archive-Message-Number: 5063
Date:     Thu, 31 Dec 92 14:04:26 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@cbda8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  A few more tidbits...

More stuff...

Rob


Red Star Class Free Trader (Type A) TL14

     The Red Star class is designed to meet minimal Type A standards.  Many
cost saving measures are included in the design, such as the use of a minimum
size fuel purification plant, an enhanced Model 0 computer, and provision for
carrying only 18 days worth of full power operating fuel for the power plant,
which allows additional cargo to carried.  No turrets are mounted on the ship
as built, but space has been reserved for later installation. Additional
controls would be required if weapons were installed.
     Most examples of the Red Star class were built in the Imperial core, and
survivors during the Rebellion Era are likely to have been extensively modi-
fied.

  CraftID: Red Star class Free Trader, TL14, MCr32.813 (26.25 discounted)
     Hull: 180/450, Disp=200t, Config=4SL, Armor=40G, Loaded=2171t,
           Unloaded=879t
    Power: 3/6, Fusion=351MW, Duration=18 days
     Loco: 2/4, Maneuver=1 (Thrusters=1300t), 2/4, Jump=1, Agility=0,
           TrueAcc=0.60G
     Comm: Radio=System*2
  Sensors: EMSActive(Planetary), EMSPAssive(Interplanetary), ActObjScan=Diff,
           ActObjPin=Diff, PassEnScan=Rout
      Off: Hardpoints=2
      Def: DefDM+1
  Control: Computer Mod0bis*3, 2*HeadsUpHoloDisplay
    Accom: Crew=4 (1 bridge, 1 engineer, 1 steward, 1 medic), Passengers=6,
           Staterooms=10, LowBerths=20, Env=basic env, basic ls, extended ls,
           grav plates, inertial comp
    Other: Fuel=355kl (1 jump-1+18 days), Cargo=1267kl, Fuel Purifier
           (9.7hr), ObjSize=Avg, EmLevel=Faint






Red Star Class Freighter (Modified Type A) TL14

     The Red Star class freighter is a variant of the Red Star free trader
design. The cost saving measures included in the original design, such as the
use of a minimum size fuel purification plant, an enhanced Model 0 computer,
and provision for carrying only 18 days worth of full power operating fuel
for the power plant, are carried over into the freighter variant. In addi-
tion, all accommodations beyond the bare minimum required for the basic two
man crew have been removed, increasing the cargo capacity by 702kl.  No
turrets are mounted on the ship as built, but space has been reserved for
later installation. Additional controls would be required if weapons were in-
stalled.

  CraftID: Red Star class Freighter, TL14, MCr28.613 (22.89 discounted)
     Hull: 180/450, Disp=200t, Config=4SL, Armor=40G, Loaded=2821t,
           Unloaded=827t
    Power: 3/6, Fusion=351MW, Duration=18 days
     Loco: 2/4, Maneuver=1 (Thrusters=1300t), 2/4, Jump=1, Agility=0,
           TrueAcc=0.46G
     Comm: Radio=System*2
  Sensors: EMSActive(Planetary), EMSPAssive(Interplanetary), ActObjScan=Diff,
           ActObjPin=Diff, PassEnScan=Rout
      Off: Hardpoints=2
      Def: DefDM+1
  Control: Computer Mod0bis*3, 2*HeadsUpHoloDisplay
    Accom: Crew=2 (1 bridge, 1 engineer), Staterooms=2, Env=basic env, basic
           ls, extended ls, grav plates, inertial comp
    Other: Fuel=355kl (1 jump-1+18 days), Cargo=1969kl, Fuel Purifier
           (9.7hr), ObjSize=Avg, EmLevel=Faint

Model 12-43

     The Model 12-43 is a capable brain, suitable for use in military and
security robots, and other general purpose applications requiring a variety
of skills.

Low Autonomous fundamental logic                     Cr  7000
            Full command program                     Cr  5000
                  20 linear CPUs  4.0l   2.0kg       Cr 10000 (13 available)
                10 parallel CPUs  5.0l   1.0kg       Cr100000
                  1 synaptic CPU  0.1l   0.1kg       Cr 50000
       30 standard storage units 15.0l   3.0kg       Cr  3500
                                 ----------------------------
                                 24.1l   6.1kg       Cr179500

Total applications program space available: 13 units.
Intelligence: 4
Education: 3

Gluek Automation Guide Navigation Robot TL12

     The Guide is designed around a Gluek 12-11 robotic brain, and provides a
low cost navigation capbility to a starship operator.
     The Guide is an immobile box which is plugged into the appropriate
navigation position on board a starship. Communication with the remainder of
the bridge crew is via the ship's computer network.

  RobotID: Gluek Guide, TL12, Cr65,800
  Chassis: 1/2, Disp=20L, Conf=4USL, Armor=1F, Weight=6.8kg
    Power: none, Dur=indefinite
     Loco: none
     Comm: none
  Sensors: none
  Devices: Power interface, Brain interface
      Off: -
      Def: -
    Brain: CPU=9 Linear, 5 Parallel, Storage=14 Standard
  Program: High Data, Basic Command, Navigation-1
    Other: Profile=0011

[Game system note: Designed using Book 8 with no MegaTraveller vehicle system
enhancements, but typed in MegaTraveller format.]

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

