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==========================
 491  5919 22-Aug-1993 Timothy Little   More moon shot stuff... << > p.s. How c
 491  5920 21-Aug-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Zhodani (sigh) << Sigh,
 491  5921 21-Aug-1993 RJR96326@VAX1.U  Psionix << NUCLEAR ROCKETS
 491  5922 22-Aug-1993 nosnhoJ enaD     Traveller Product List... <<
 491  5923 22-Aug-1993 John H Bogan     Re: Traveller Product List... << > Date
 491  5924 22-Aug-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Foreven (Ikar) sector << Ikar sector (F
 491  5925 23-Aug-1993 "DAVE HEIL"      Traveller Manuals? << Subject:        T
 491  5926 23-Aug-1993 "Lord Krieg"     Another gun design for TNE << Here's an
 491  5927 23-Aug-1993 James Kundert    Foreven Sector << Dane writes:
 491  5928 24-Aug-1993 Chris Bray       Wondering about DGP <<  Wandering throu
 491  5929 24-Aug-1993 Goldman of Chao  Getting started... << > Bundle: 491
 491  5930 24-Aug-1993 ANTHONY KAY BAG  New Member Here... <<   Hi, I'm new to
 491  5931 24-Aug-1993 Joe Heck         Re: TML nightly: Msgs 5927-5930 V60#9 <
 491  5932 24-Aug-1993 nosnhoJ enaD     Traveller: The Next Error << Anthony Ka
 491  5933 25-Aug-1993 Pauli            Re: TML nightly: Msgs 5927-5930 V60#9
 491  5934 25-Aug-1993 Steve Bonnevill  Re: Foreven Sector << James writes:
 491  5935 25-Aug-1993 Steve Bonnevill  Re: Imperial Lines << Scott writes:
 491  5936 25-Aug-1993 Goldman of Chao  TML nightly: Msgs 5927-5930 V60#9  << T
 491  5937 25-Aug-1993 James Kundert    Foreven Sector << Scott 2G Kellogg says

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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5919
From: Timothy Little <t_little@postoffice.utas.edu.au>
Subject: More moon shot stuff...
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 3:14:48 EST

> p.s. How come no one complains about psionics when it's just
> as much magic as 'thruster plates etc '? I always figured
> GDW threw it in originally because everyone "knew" you couldn't
> publish an rpg profitably w/o emulating TSR's 'magic' & 'wizards'
> in (A)D&D. Ergo psionics!

I think it's mainly because it's *obvious* magic.

Thruster plates are presented as scientific devices, which should therefore
follow a scientific basis.  No such basis is presented (for obvious reasons)
and so I feel a sense of dissatisfaction.  Furthermore, the existence of
such a device leads to various other technologies (such as a simple
energy-creating device) which are absent, with no explanation.

Psionics is presented simply as magic, studied scientifically but not based
upon scientific principles.  It claims no more 'legitimacy' than it actually
possesses.


- -*-*-*-*-*-

>>Getting high in the atmosphere does not mean that it will be any easier to get
>>into orbit.  There's still a slight problem of achieving 8 km/s.
>
> Yes, but its still easier to achieve 8km/s than 11km/s! (assuming a 1g planet)

If you want to get into orbit, you need a delta-V of 8 km/s.  If you want to
get to the moon, you need 11 km/s.  It doesn't really matter whether you're
at the bottom of the atmosphere or above it.  (Actual figures will vary for
different planets, but escape velocity is always sqrt(2) times orbit velocity.

Getting above the atmosphere is *not* the same thing as getting into orbit.
(You have less friction, but the strength of gravity is almost the same)


On a slightly different note, the surface gravity is not directly connected
with orbit speed.  Orbit speed is easily calculated as
  orbit speed = sqrt(surface gravity * planet radius).

(Make sure all quantities are measured in consistent units)

A 1g planet will not necessarily have the same escape velocity as Earth.
It would have to be the same radius.  On the plus side, many Earth-type
planets will have the same composition, so the size should be about the same
for the same surface gravity.

>>I'd be amazed if a simple alcohol rocket could get 1 km/s exhuast velocity,
>>and even so it would take 200 tons of fuel to get a single person into orbit.
>>Multiply by 20 to get to the moon.
>
> Hey, I never said it would be easy - the ref does have to be kind!

(As a note, this 4000 ton figure assumes the high 1km/s figure, and *only*
a 70 kg person - no spaceship, no suit, etc)

It would be easier if the planet was high-density or low-gravity, and the
moon in question was in a low orbit.  Still assuming 1km/s exhaust, but a
planet like Mars (half size, half gravity), and a moon (like Deimos) in
low orbit:
  Orbit speed is half that of Earth, ie. 4 km/s.  Fuel/payload ratio is
  ratio = exp(delta-V / exhaust) - 1
        = exp(4)-1,
  which is about 50 to 1.

Getting 1 ton (a group of people and hull) to the moon should take only about
50 tons of fuel.  Much easier than the case for Earth.  If the planet stats
haven't already been generated, it would be a reasonable act of ref kindness
to set up this sort of situation.

> Who said THIS moon had no atmosphere?

No-one ... but it's rather unlikely.  A moon would have to be very large to
retain an atmosphere.  I'm talking around Mars-sized.  That is, about 10
times heavier than our own Moon - which is generally considered especially
large.  (The orbital problems also become more difficult, and you need to
worry - a lot - about atmosphere entry to such a moon)

>>Overtaxing the vacc-suit computer would be less of a problem (*especially*
>>at TL15 - hand supercomputers are TL11 stuff), compared to the problem of
>>needing yet more fuel...
>
> The technology to build handheld computers may be there but why would you
> fit one into a vacc suit? All it has to do is control lifesupport, a
> supercomputer would be an unneeded waste of money.

I can think of a couple of reasons.

1) A computer that qualifies as 'super-' to us certainly would not to TL 15
  technology.  A model/1 (at least!) would probably be about as common as
  digital clocks are today.  (Glancing around, I see 6 such clocks in direct
  view.  I have another 2 in my pencil case.  All but 2 are parts of a
  device that has a different primary function)  If you don't like the clock
  analogy - I see 4 devices that serve as (at least) 4-function calculators.

2) Necessity.  A space-suit needs to be safe.  This means being immediately
  aware of any problems.  Air duration, suit integrity, probably also short-
  range comms, thrusters, and various other options.  Voice control is easy,
  and some sort of HUD (probably holoscreen) would probably be a standard
  part of the suit.  At this point, it would be extra effort to restrict
  the computer to the single purpose of suit/comm/thruster control.  If
  nothing else, the thruster control should include primitive navigation
  software (eg  at least equal to ancient TL 12 capability)

- -*-*-*-*-*-

> RE:Timothy Little
> ". . .I'd like to see someone plot a decaying orbit around the moon! No
> atmosphere to slow the guy down means little chance of orbital decay. . ."
>
> I was under the impression that orbital decay occured because of gravity,
> at least for objects short of geosychonous orbit.

There is a slight element of pure gravitational decay, but this is utterly
negligible for anything less than close binary stars, on the scale we are
talking about.  Tidal stress can actually cause objects to 'decay' outwards,
as the angular momentum contained in the spin of an object is transferred
to the orbit.  Gravitational radiation (as yet undetected) can be completely
ignored.

The reason satellites fall out of orbit is due to drag from the atmosphere.
There is no clear boundary that divides 'space' from 'atmosphere'.  Slight
drag from the almost-vacuum drops the object into a slightly lower orbit,
where the gas is a little thicker, exerting more drag, ...

> What about the contragrav units on the ship? Are they functional? The
> stuff on the ship can become very important. . .I doubt it's completely
> destroyed, since they seem to have landed safely.

Any contragrav unit which is repairable, is worth much more than its mass in
gold in this situation!  I'd much rather try to build a power supply for a
grav unit than try to reinvent extremely dangerous rocket technology, and
produce tons of fuel for the explosive contraption thus constructed.


- -*-*-*-*-*-

Here's a thought for the total munchkin powergamer terrorists among you:

It is easy to build a 6G unmanned spacecraft, for very little cost.  Now,
set this up about a parsec outside a star system, do a simple orbit
plot of some target object (say an unihabited planet in the same system as
a planet of 9 billion people), and start up the engines.  In just over a
year, it will hit your target at 99.88% of the speed of light, causing
extensive disruption of the planet.  The good part is, if the system
defence can spot an object at 1 billion km, they'll have just over 4 seconds
to react before it impacts.  Besides which, there's not really anything they
can do to deflect it.

 "The next one is aimed at *your* planet.  Accede to our demands, or ..."

- --
Tim Little

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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5920
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Zhodani (sigh)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 93 13:07:28 CDT

Sigh,

So now it's almost flames?  Aieee!  :-P

Phil is incorrect when he says that the Proles of the Zhodani Consulate
do not have basic minimal human rights.

It is similarly incorrect to say that the Consulate is a Utopia.

To quote the tome of Zhodani (alien module 4 p.12)
"It has been said that psionics has made the Zhodani Consulate the most
powerful, effective and absolute tyranny in human history - and also the
happiest and most stable.  Both statements are quite true."

Prole voting:
Proles can not vote, but they can lobby.  And as anyone who has lived
within spitting distance of Washington DC, Lobbying is VERY powerful.

Prole power:
Zhodani as a people tend to be ambitious.  This ambition is not
restricted to the voting classes.  Proles may indeed have large
ambitions.  Who is to say that there are not prole millionaires or
even billionaires in the Consulate?  Are there not millionaires and
billionaires in the Imperium who are not of the aristocracy?  And when
a prole billionaire starts lobbying for something...

As to weither the Proles are lacking in mental rights:  (p.14)
"Thought police monitor all of Zhodani society, conducting periodic
examinations of individuals in order to ensure that everyone's mental
health is at acceptable levels."

Note:  There is no mention of exception being made for voting citizens,
intendants, or "nobles" if you wish to call them that.  It specifically
states that ALL individuals are examined and EVERYONE'S mental health
is in question.  When I have run campaigns with Zhos in the consulate,
I once had to haul in the entire crew of a ship to undergo psionic
interrogation.  This means everyone.  Prole crewmembers, Intendent
crewmembers, and "Noble" crewmembers.  NO ONE has the right to mental
privacy in the Consulate.

The "right" of mental privacy is not a right that the nobles have.
Nobles are subject to the same laws as proles, and the laws deal more
harshly with nobles than they do with proles.  (p.13)

Thus, I submit that the Zhodani Consulate is neither as rosy as I tend
to make it appear, nor as dark and forbidding as Phil would have it,
but somewhere in between.  It *IS* a tyranny, and it *IS* a utopia at
the same time.  And if you have trouble reconciling that, realize that
it IS alien.

I might even point out that here in the good old US of A, there is NO
mention Whatsoever in the Constitution of a "Right to privacy".  I do
not feel my rights have been trampled on lately...
- --
Scott 2G Kellogg
"Kellogg is just plain nuts!"  -- H. Beam Piper

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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5921
Date:    Sat, 21 Aug 1993 14:15:34 -0500 (CDT)
From: RJR96326@VAX1.UTULSA.EDU
Subject: Psionix

NUCLEAR ROCKETS
This is really just a variation of Jules Verne's method for getting to the
moon. I thought of suggesting it earlier but I figured the acceleration would
have been too great. It would indeed require an exceedingly benevolent GM.

PSIONIC SOCIETY
This is really convoluted. I only have the basic MTraveller set, so I
don't know too many specifics of the Zhodani. However, I have given thought to
psionic societies for a GURPS campaign or two I ran.

First of all, I would assume that deceit would still be possible. It would
take on new forms and measures, but things like that will always be around.
Kind of like an arms race. Sure, there are thought police, but I'll bet the
average Zhodani is more adept at shielding his thought than a Solomani. In
fact, they would have to be, if privacy is important at all.

Consider intimate thoughts, or the little lies we tell when we want to avoid
hurting someone's feelings. What would you do if you were dating one of these
Thought Police guys, liked him (or her) as a friend but didn't want to get
too close? Things could turn ugly if there isn't some way of keeping some
thoughts private.

Also, the thought police are going to be limited by the constraints of their
own resources. What would prevent a noble from hiring a number of underlings,
retiring to a secret base, and plotting there, where no one could monitor him?

A lot of the arguments so far have assumed that either the power levels balance
out, or assume that the thought police are significantly more powerful than
the average person (the latter is not wholly unreasonable). I think that there
will always be a balance between the means of detecting and correcting deviant
behavior and the means for accomplishing criminal acts.

J Roberson

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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5922
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 13:52:02 -0700
From: dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov (nosnhoJ enaD)
Subject: Traveller Product List...


	Does anybody know if a complete Traveller product list has
been compiled?  I got to thinking about this when I, since I don't know who
has published the Foreven sector material.  Anybody know about either
the List list or Foreven?

Dane
traveller@llnl.gov
djohnson@willamette.edu
TNS Stringer ------------ Terra/Solomani Rim (1827 G867975-8)
"I'm not a real scientist, but I play one in an RPG."

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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5923
From: John H Bogan <jbogan@libserv1.ic.sunysb.edu>
Subject: Re: Traveller Product List...
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 21:47:49 EDT

> Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 13:52:02 -0700
> From: dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov (nosnhoJ enaD)
> Subject: Traveller Product List...

> 	Does anybody know if a complete Traveller product list has
> been compiled?  I got to thinking about this when I, since I don't know who
> has published the Foreven sector material.  Anybody know about either
> the List list or Foreven?


Editor problems Dane? ^_^

GDW published as much of Foreven as they are going to publish
in Imperiallines #1. That gives a sector map with only system LOCATIONS
give, NO UWP's except for 3 (4?) systems of note.

It's being kept as a "GM's Preserve", so folks can detail it on their own
without having to worry about future GDW products mucking up their
continuity.

Cheers

John


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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5924
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Foreven (Ikar) sector
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 21:07:26 CDT

Ikar sector (Foreven to you Imperials) is supposedly a blank spot
on the Trav map.  Check out the ImperialLines #1 (or 2?)

Speaking of ImperialLines, has it been dropped from GDW's line up?
I got a subscription till issue #7, and I haven't even seen #3.

Scott 2G Kellogg


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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5925
Date: 23 Aug 1993 10:31:23 U
From: "DAVE HEIL" <heild@mugu.navy.mil>
Subject: Traveller Manuals?

Subject:        Traveller Manuals?
I played traveller once about 7 years ago.  I did enjoy it and would like to
play it again.  Can someone out there tell me what manuals I would need to play
and eventually run games?  Also can someone recommend any good modules (if
there are modules, I can never find anything like that for sale).  Please
include some idea of what each of these items costs.  Thanks in advance.

Dave



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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5926
Date: 23 Aug 93 14:31:00 PST
From: "Lord Krieg" <CVADSAAV@CSUPomona.Edu>
Subject: Another gun design for TNE

Here's another gun design for use with TNE.

					Sidearm, Gauss, Police, Model 5622

Notes: The SGP-22 was designed and produced by the Crestring Arms Company
of NeuBerlin. This pistol normally fires an explosive charge, although
iron slugs are available for target practice. The explosive round cannot
penetrate armour, but does considerable damage to unprotected targets. The
SGP-22 is a popular weapon for private purchase by members of Neubayern's
ruling class, although Navy and Marine personnel aren't allowed to carry
explosive rounds aboard ship. The SGP-22 is widely (and unofficially) known
as the "Police Blaster."

Ammo: 7x21mm explosive charge
Wt: 1.8 kg
Mag: 15 box
Cost: Cr810

Weapon		ROF     Dam     Pen     Blk     Mag     SS      Brst	Rng
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SGP-22 HE	SA	6	Nil	1	15	2	--	12
Iron Slug	SA	2	1-Nil	1	15	3	--	12

Additional Notes: Like all small arms made by Neubayern companies, the
SGP-22 has a built-in laser sight. The magazine stores enough power to
fire 16 shots rather than 15. This is because police officers (and
civilians, for that matter) routinely carry defensive sidearms with a
full magazine and a round in the chamber.

                            Kenneth G. Hagler

**********************************************************************
*   Internet: cvadsaav@csupomona.edu    *   My insurance company     *
*   Phone: (909) 865-7751               *     is Beretta U.S.A.      *
*   PGP 2.3 key available on request    *                            *
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
*   ...study of the military arts will make one who is naturally     *
*   clever more so and one who is born somewhat dull rather less     *
*   so.                                                              *
*            --Daidoji Yuzan Shigesuke, _Budo Shoshinshu_            *
**********************************************************************


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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5927
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 93 18:39:42 PDT
From: James Kundert <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>
Subject: Foreven Sector

Dane writes:
<Does anybody know if a complete Traveller product list has
<been compiled?  I got to thinking about this, since I don't know who
<has published the Foreven sector material.  Anybody know about either
<the list or Foreven?

  Foreven was declared a "Blank Land" by GDW.  Anyone can do what they
like with it, but nothing will be published for it beyond what already
exists in Classic Traveller materials.  The dot map with the half-dozen
officially placed worlds appears in Imperial Lines #1, the "official"
Traveller newsletter published by GDW (and currently stalled between
issues 2 and 3).  All official information on Foreven is there.


James Kundert <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>

There was a young lady named Bright,
Whose speed was much faster, much faster than Light.
She departed one day in a relative way,
And returned on the previous Night.
   --Albert & the Heart of Gold

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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5928
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 13:14:34 +1000 (EST)
From: Chris Bray <cs576112@lux.latrobe.edu.au>
Subject: Wondering about DGP

 Wandering through my local gaming shop today I happened to spy
the MTJ issues #'s 3,4.  I guess these are pretty old, but the copies
looked in good condition.

  What I really want to know is if DGP ever published their game AI, and
if so what is it like, and what has happened to it.

thanks

Chris


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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5929
Subject: Getting started...
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 8:57:37 CDT
From: goldman@orac.cray.com (Goldman of Chaos -- postmaster CRI-US)
Reply-To: goldman@orac.cray.com

> Bundle: 491
> Archive-Message-Number: 5925
> Date: 23 Aug 1993 10:31:23 U
> From: "DAVE HEIL" <heild@mugu.navy.mil>
> Subject: Traveller Manuals?
>
> Subject:        Traveller Manuals?
> I played traveller once about 7 years ago.  I did enjoy it and would like to
> play it again.  Can someone out there tell me what manuals I would need to play
> and eventually run games?  Also can someone recommend any good modules (if
> there are modules, I can never find anything like that for sale).  Please
> include some idea of what each of these items costs.  Thanks in advance.

The Traveller Book has just about everything you need to get started.
I managed to find a copy a few weeks ago for about $7.00; however,
I've seen it priced up to $20.00.  The module that I liked best was...
Shoot, I'm having trouble remembering the name.  The ***** Gambit.  I
still have not found my Traveller stuff after our house fire or I'd
check on it tonight.  The Traveller books go for anywhere from $1.00
to as high as $5.00.  You'll need to look around since the silly
people at GDW stopped printing them.

Matt

P.S. anyone remember off hand when copyrights run out?

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

My day today? Nothing major, just Xenon base gone, Scorpio gone,
Tarrant dead, Tarrant alive and then I found out Blake sold us out.

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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5930
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 15:35:07 BST
From: ANTHONY KAY BAGGALEY <MCDAPAB@cms.manchester-computing-centre.ac.uk>
Subject: New Member Here...

  Hi, I'm new to the TML but I wonder if someone out there can help me: I
 need to find the cheapest way to get the Chile between the 16th of September
 and...    just kidding.

  I'm an enthusiastic Traveller reader (and occasionally Ref or Player) and
 have been for about ten years. (End of Biography)  I've been getting the list
 for a month and reading the archives, and it's nice to see some people have
 wasted as much memory on it as I have.
  Anyway, I got Traveller- The Non-Event as soon as it came out, saw that it
 was as bad as everyone had feared (but it's bad points have been covered here
 enough) and placed it on a shelf till TTA comes out (it's Fire Fusion and
 Steel now isn't it? sounds better for the SpaceOrk geeks I suppose).
  I think that's as far as I'll go in releasing the    months of frustration
 and despair over TNE before I get carried away.

 Now, this message was just to say hello and stop me feeling like a voyeur,
 but I've thought of one thing to say-  since the dust cleared/blood dried
 over the Fusion Engine arguement, mention of TNE has been rather light, ie.
 no discusion on the Arses or Regency, and most interest has been in non-TNE
 subjects ( notice how people got stuck into the Zhodani thread- who are the
 least changed area in TNE).

 So, do people really consider "The Non-Event" as part of the Traveller
 Universe we played in for years, or just as a new SFRPG. I mean, with a new
 rules system and a new background, is it any more Traveller than 2300?,(and
 that game had the Traveller name to start with, and PGMPs) even the Technology
 has changed from Classic/MT.

 I was just wondering how many people have actually changed over to the TNE
 rules (or even background) or plan to do so when TTA comes out?

 I suspect TTA will decide the issue. It sounds brilliant, and if even half
 decent (ie. less than 20 naff pictures, less than 10 pages of errata, binding
 lasts at least a fortnight) it might be worth changing over to the new rules.

 I've wasted enough bandwidth so I'll sign off before I think of something
 useful to say
                   Glad to be aboard
                          Anthony Baggaley (who is not as bitter as he
                                                               sounds)
 no .sig
 no spelling checker
 no copy command
 no.... hang on, a valve's just blown.

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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5931
Date:         Tue, 24 Aug 93 20:31:20 CDT
From: Joe Heck <CCJOE@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu>
Subject:      Re: TML nightly: Msgs 5927-5930 V60#9

On Tue, 24 Aug 93 20:30:03 EDT you said:
>From: ANTHONY KAY BAGGALEY <MCDAPAB@cms.manchester-computing-centre.ac.uk>
> I was just wondering how many people have actually changed over to the TNE
> rules (or even background) or plan to do so when TTA comes out?

Well, as much as I dislike the sweeping hand of the virus, I have gone ahead
and moulded my traveller world to the new scenarios and rules. I'm looking
forward to the new architecture guide, but that's more a toy for me than a
necessary game aid for my players. Granted, I ripped out the section on the
virus and left it impressively destructive, but made if a little more
realistic for my own suspension of disbelief. The game has been going quite
well - two "old timers" from cold storage awaken into a world having been
rescued from a cometary orbit by a planet just reaching through Tech 8 and
climbing out into space. Plenty of good role playing and the new rules
haven't changed the game that much for us. The biggest gripe my players have
is the lack of rules for aliens - they enjoyed playing Aslan and
particularly Vargr (my own personal favorite as well).

So at least one of us has gone on ahead and followed GDW to see where it
goes...

 joe                          University of Missouri - Columbia
 ccjoe@mizzou1.missouri.edu   (314) 882-5000

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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5932
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1993 19:39:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: nosnhoJ enaD <dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov>
Subject: Traveller: The Next Error


Anthony Kay Baggaley:

 >Now, this message was just to say hello and stop me feeling like a voyeur,
 >but I've thought of one thing to say-  since the dust cleared/blood dried
 >over the Fusion Engine arguement, mention of TNE has been rather light, ie.
 >no discusion on the Arses or Regency, and most interest has been in non-TNE
 >subjects ( notice how people got stuck into the Zhodani thread- who are the
 >least changed area in TNE).

 >So, do people really consider "The Non-Event" as part of the Traveller
 >Universe we played in for years, or just as a new SFRPG. I mean, with a new
 >rules system and a new background, is it any more Traveller than 2300?,(and
 >that game had the Traveller name to start with, and PGMPs) even the Technology
 >has changed from Classic/MT.

 >I was just wondering how many people have actually changed over to the TNE
 >rules (or even background) or plan to do so when TTA comes out?

Having finally dug myself out of the editor problem I was having (sorry about
all those '^H's...), I feel a great need to vent my spleen on this topic...

(Hi, Anthony!)

I've played with the new rules and find them fairly easy to pick up and quite
adaptable.  There seem to be some small, easily correctible imbalances between
weapon damage vs. armor available.  I'm *eager* for both the TAM and Brilliant
Lances...So I, for one, am switching to the new rules.

HOWEVER

I'm hanging out circa 1111 Imperial and totally ignoring both the rebellion and
the Virus...<Shudder>  Actually, the Rebellion is okay, but I've just decided
that I don't want to game during it.  When and if I game up and through that
point, I'll be ignoring the Virus altogether...

On a more practical note, not only are the skill tables and section way too far
from the character generation system, but there's all the stupid guff about "Two
Syllable Code names for use during combat" and an overall anti-technological
feel to the whole rulebook, even in the sections on the Regency (they've turned
away from massive automation and most robots have been deactivated, that sort of
thing).  The NPCs are defined in terms of combat ability only...Why not make an
"Experienced NPC" have an X in his *primary skill*, not just in his combat skill?

Is it just me, or do the Hivers seem to be acting somewhat out of character?
Why haven't they absorbed the RCES and "converted" everybody to the Hiver
"nonviolence" ideal like they did with the minor human races on their Spinward
border back in the Imperial Era?

I guess I'm pretty much in the "Accept the Rules, Ignore the New Continuity"
category...I'm also trying to complete (or at least flesh-out) my collection of
Classic supplements :)

traveller@llnl.gov
djohnson@willamette.edu
TNS Stringer ------------ Terra/Solomani Rim (1827 G867975-8)
"I'm not a real scientist, but I play one in an RPG."


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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5933
Subject: Re: TML nightly: Msgs 5927-5930 V60#9
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 93 15:19:49 +1000
From: Pauli <grue@cs.uq.oz.au>

Matt Goldman writes:

>I've seen it priced up to $20.00.  The module that I liked best was...
>Shoot, I'm having trouble remembering the name.  The ***** Gambit.  I
>still have not found my Traveller stuff after our house fire or I'd
>check on it tonight.

The Argon Gambit, half of double adventure three.


>P.S. anyone remember off hand when copyrights run out?

50 years after the death of the author seems to ring a bell with me.
(but I am in a different country which has different copyright laws)


Anthony Baggaley writes:

>  Hi, I'm new to the TML but I wonder if someone out there can help me: I
> need to find the cheapest way to get the Chile between the 16th of September
> and...    just kidding.

Ever try walking? :-)


>  I think that's as far as I'll go in releasing the    months of frustration
> and despair over TNE before I get carried away.
I didn't think it was all that bad.  There is too much in the way of errata
though :-(  (Did the published errata notice the forgotton tab stops in the
world generation tables --- the TL DMs to be specific??)


> Now, this message was just to say hello and stop me feeling like a voyeur,
Welcome aboard, live long and prosper and whatever you do don't stop the
messages coming :-)


> I suspect TTA will decide the issue. It sounds brilliant, and if even half
> decent (ie. less than 20 naff pictures, less than 10 pages of errata, binding
> lasts at least a fortnight) it might be worth changing over to the new rules.

I am hoping that it will be good.  At least it had better be less error prone
that MegaTraveller's equivalent pieces!




        						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: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5934
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 01:44:18 -0500
From: bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu (Steve Bonneville)
Subject: Re: Foreven Sector


James writes:
>Dane writes:
>>Does anybody know if a complete Traveller product list has
>>been compiled?  I got to thinking about this, since I don't know who
>>has published the Foreven sector material.  Anybody know about either
>>There are 114 lines left (37%). Press <space> for more, or 'i' to return.
>>the list or Foreven?
>
>  Foreven was declared a "Blank Land" by GDW.  Anyone can do what they
>like with it, but nothing will be published for it beyond what already
>exists in Classic Traveller materials.  The dot map with the half-dozen
>officially placed worlds appears in Imperial Lines #1, the "official"
>Traveller newsletter published by GDW (and currently stalled between
>issues 2 and 3).  All official information on Foreven is there.

A few other (now non-"canon") references were made to Foreven sector that
weren't mentioned in the Imperial Lines issue.
   *  As Scott mentioned, Foreven is marked as "Iakr" on Zhodani-centric
      maps.  The world "Parthinia", C694655-C, with an aboriginal minor
      human race, the Issugur, was located in Iakr according to an old
      Traveller product, "Alien Realms".  (Yeah, I admit to having a
      copy.  It was REAL cheap.)  It wasn't located.
   *  One of the companies in "Book 7: Merchant Prince" was headquartered
      on a world which was located in Foreven somewhere that was not on
      the "official list".  I don't have a copy, or I'd check it out.
Both references were in GDW products.

I have a question or two, too.  According to IL #1, Zdovesil/Anika
is the Zhodani provincial capital in Foreven.  I seem to recall
something about the Zhodani government not being organized at the
sector level.  Does this mean that Zdovesil is the capital of
"Iadr Nsobl" province, or just of Foreven   Since it is effectively
in the Zhodani "rear area", and is near the center of the province,
I'd lean toward the first, but it isn't clear in the article.

Do the Zhodani use sector grids anyway?  I thought that was supposed
to be a Vilani innovation that was mostly used by the Imperium, former
Imperial states (like the Solomani Confederation) and worlds influenced
by the Imperium.

- --Steve

- --------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNET: bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu
 "Back in the good old days of gaming, there were no rules --
  only a referee with a gun and a chair."    -- David L. Arneson
- --------------------------------------------------------------------


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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5935
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 01:50:57 -0500
From: bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu (Steve Bonneville)
Subject: Re: Imperial Lines

Scott writes:
>Speaking of ImperialLines, has it been dropped from GDW's line up?
>I got a subscription till issue #7, and I haven't even seen #3.

Yeah -- inquiring minds want to know! :)  If it has been dropped, can we
get our money back?  Can we anyway?  If it hasn't, when will we see it?

- --Steve


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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5936
Subject: TML nightly: Msgs 5927-5930 V60#9
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 93 9:16:39 CDT
From: goldman@orac.cray.com (Goldman of Chaos -- postmaster CRI-US)
Reply-To: goldman@orac.cray.com

TML Admin said the following:

> Bundle: 491
> Archive-Message-Number: 5927
> Date: Mon, 23 Aug 93 18:39:42 PDT
> From: James Kundert <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>
> Subject: Foreven Sector
>
> Dane writes:
> <Does anybody know if a complete Traveller product list has
> <been compiled?  I got to thinking about this, since I don't know who
> <has published the Foreven sector material.  Anybody know about either
> <the list or Foreven?

	I have a complete list of Traveller products somewhere;
	however, since my gaming stuff was the first stuff extracted
	from the ruins of our old apartment I don't know where most
	stuff is yet.

> ------------------------------
>
> Bundle: 491
> Archive-Message-Number: 5930
> Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 15:35:07 BST
> From: ANTHONY KAY BAGGALEY <MCDAPAB@cms.manchester-computing-centre.ac.uk>
> Subject: New Member Here...
>
>  Now, this message was just to say hello and stop me feeling like a voyeur,
>  but I've thought of one thing to say-  since the dust cleared/blood dried
>  over the Fusion Engine arguement, mention of TNE has been rather light, ie.
>  no discusion on the Arses or Regency, and most interest has been in non-TNE
>  subjects ( notice how people got stuck into the Zhodani thread- who are the
>  least changed area in TNE).
>
>  So, do people really consider "The Non-Event" as part of the Traveller
>  Universe we played in for years, or just as a new SFRPG. I mean, with a new
>  rules system and a new background, is it any more Traveller than 2300?,(and
>  that game had the Traveller name to start with, and PGMPs) even the Technology
>  has changed from Classic/MT.

I look at the TNE as a seperate game.  I bought a used copy
at the same time as I picked up Cadillacs & Dinosaurs, another
really unique game from GDW.

	TNE:  The universe as we know it has been destroyed and it is
	many years later.  We have to rebuild/survive.

	C&D:  The Earth as we know it has been destroyed and it is
	many years later.  We have to rebuild/survive.

	T2000: The Earth as we know it has been destroyed and it is
	many years later.  We have to rebuild/survive.

	Any other GDW game:  The <place> as we know it has been
	destroyed.  We have to rebuild/survive.

That really gets old after a while.
>
>  I was just wondering how many people have actually changed over to the TNE
>  rules (or even background) or plan to do so when TTA comes out?

	I don't really see the need to switch over to TNE.  I'll more
	than likely pick up the various components as they hit the
	used game market.  I can't very well complain about the game
	if I haven't read through it.

>  I've wasted enough bandwidth so I'll sign off before I think of something
>  useful to say
>                    Glad to be aboard
>                           Anthony Baggaley (who is not as bitter as he
>                                                                sounds)

Ditto.

Matt

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

My day today? Nothing major, just Xenon base gone, Scorpio gone,
Tarrant dead, Tarrant alive and then I found out Blake sold us out.

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

Bundle: 491
Archive-Message-Number: 5937
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 93 10:58:03 PDT
From: James Kundert <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>
Subject: Foreven Sector

Scott 2G Kellogg says:

>Subject: Foreven (Ikar) sector
>Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 21:07:26 CDT
>
>Ikar sector (Foreven to you Imperials) is supposedly a blank spot
>on the Trav map.  Check out the ImperialLines #1 (or 2?)

 Once again, proof is presented to the world at large that even the
Zhodani nuts can't spell the language.
 The Zhodani designation for Foreven is IAKR (ee-Yak-ur).

 Don't worry, Scott, you aren't alone in this affliction.
James Kundert <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>

There was a young lady named Bright,
Whose speed was much faster, much faster than Light.
She departed one day in a relative way,
And returned on the previous Night.
   --Albert & the Heart of Gold

------------------------------
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==========================
 492  5938 26-Aug-1993 Bertil Jonell    IL #3 << > From: bonnevil@mermaid.micro
 492  5939 28-Aug-1993 Bertil Jonell    Equipment <<   I've placed an old equip
 492  5940 30-Aug-1993 l.wiseman1@geni  <<  Cheerio!
 492  5941 30-Aug-1993 Derek Wildstar   Re:  Wildstar is back! :-) << Hello!  I
 492  5942 31-Aug-1993 Steven Gott      STAR CRUISER << Is it just me or is STA
 492  5943 31-Aug-1993 kirsch@rhea.inf  TNE Psionics << Hello Travellers,
 492  5944 31-Aug-1993 Eric Neilsen x8  some 2300AD stuff << All-
 492  5945 31-Aug-1993 nosnhoJ enaD     Letterman... << I don't know about the
 492  5946 31-Aug-1993 Muir Macpherson  STAR CRUISER <<  I agree that Star Crui
 492  5947 01-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  RE: Acceleration & G's... << Dave Johns
 492  5948 01-Sep-1993 RJR96326@VAX1.U  GURPS 2300AD << I  was also quite impre
 492  5949 01-Sep-1993 Goldman of Chao  my various postings << I think that I m
 492  5950 01-Sep-1993 Joe Heck         Droyne << the little lizards have been
 492  5951 01-Sep-1993 Gregg Giles      Need information on the following peopl
 492  5952 02-Sep-1993 Timothy Little   Space Combat << > Subject: STAR CRUISER
 492  5953 02-Sep-1993 Steven Gott      Brilliant Lances  << I picked up a copy
 492  5954 02-Sep-1993 Adrian Hurt      Cereals and Vargr << Scott Muesli - sor
 492  5955 02-Sep-1993 Adrian Hurt      Re: Droyne << Joe Heck <CCJOE@MIZZOU1.m
 492  5956 02-Sep-1993 RJR96326@VAX1.U  Droyne Architecture << I have no idea w

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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5938
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: IL #3
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 12:13:40 +0200 (MET DST)

> From: bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu (Steve Bonneville)
> Subject: Re: Imperial Lines
>
> Scott writes:
> >Speaking of ImperialLines, has it been dropped from GDW's line up?
> >I got a subscription till issue #7, and I haven't even seen #3.
>
> Yeah -- inquiring minds want to know! :)  If it has been dropped, can we
> get our money back?  Can we anyway?  If it hasn't, when will we see it?

  According to Mike Mikesh (around the end of last month) they were working
hard to get it ready by 'mid august' so that it could be included as promo
in the TNE box.

> - --Steve

- -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: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5939
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Equipment
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1993 20:59:13 +0200 (MET DST)

  I've placed an old equipment list that I made around two years ago
on sunbane under the filename equip.utx. It's based on the MegaT and
old Traveller lists with several additions (intermediate TL versions
mostly).
  Originally it was a pagemaker document with pictures of selected equipmen
but the version on sunbane is ascii.

- -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: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5940
From: l.wiseman1@genie.geis.com
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 93 02:49:00 BST
Subject:

 Cheerio!

 I (and the rest of GDW) have spent the last two weeks
 in "convention mode," and the next few days in "recovering
 from convention mode" and the last couple of days in
 "catching up." This is a large message to take care of
 a lot of comments.

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

 FLASH!

 Brilliant Lances is out! $30.00 plus $3 P&H (overseas
 postage will be more).

 The design booklet can be had as a replacement component
 for $6 plus $1 P&H (overseas postage will be more), but
 bear in mind that it was not intended to be a stand-alone
 product, and will be a little confusing if you haven't
 seen the combat rules).

 The first six of the RAFM starship miniatures for use
 with BL are also out. They come in packages of two and are
 priced between $5 and $6. Check the miniatures dealer near you.

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

 To Anthony Neal:
 Could you resend your land mail address to me? I have
 lost it. To make up for this, I propose to send the photocopies
 to you at no charge.

 ------------------------------
 Zhodani:
 All I will say about the Zhodani discussion is that we
 intended for the Joes to be complex, multi-faceted
 characters, not cardboard cutout villains that twisted
 their mustaches and cackled maniacally. I have not read
 Scott's 4.5th Frontier War stuff, so I cannot comment on
 how closely he reflects our thinking on the Zhodani.

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

 I have nothing to add to the "Low-Tech moonshot" discussion.

 ------------------------------
 > Bruce (pihlab@hhcs.gov.au):

 A few answers to your post "a few questions to GDW" (Note:
 these answers represent a rare posting by David Nilsen.
 LKW's comments (if any) are set off _Thusly_):

 > 1.  Do you have the future history of TNE universe
 > mapped out for the next 50-200 years?

 We are not running a master game, no. We have some concepts,
goals, and ideas of where we're going, but the details and
 timing are always negotiable.

 >2.  Do you have specific psychological models for the
 > currently unpublished alien societies?  ie how individuals
 > in the societies behave to each other and to outsiders; how
 > the government and traders relate to external groups,
 > empires, consortiums, etc.

 Do you mean currently unpublished in TNE or are you referring
 more to minor races, e.g. Vegans, that have never been
 published? If former, depends upon how much detail you're
 talking about. What are the Aslan up to in general, we know
 that. How do the Aslan feel about Letterman going to CBS? We
 don't know yet.

 >3.  Have you justified logicly to youselves the various
 social and military interactions of the various alien
 societies in your universe.  Why 5 wars with the Zhodani
 > and now suddenly peace?  Why hasn't the Imperium trashed
 > the SWORD WORLDS and gotten rid of that annoying group.

 This seems like a loaded question. Our answer is yes, but
 you don't seem to agree. With regards to the Zhodani issue,
 I don't see any problem. Why don't you like the poor Sword
 Worlders?

 > 4.  Are we (the GMs and players of TNE) being treated as
 > if we were simply moving through a planned TNE timeline
 > and we're only being fed information like "this
 > is the news today" and that's really all we should
 > know.  If this is the case then give us some more news!

 No, and/but we will.

 > 5.  Are there groups around the world who are privy to the
 > details of the TNE future history and possibly helping to
 > design it.

  Yes, and the illuminati tri-lateral commission is going
 to get you for blabbing. : )

 Beyond GDW, there is no such official master cabal HIWG
 group, but everyone who writes a TNE adventure is helping
 design the future history.

 > 6.  What's on the otherside of the empires surrounding
 the Imperium?

 Star systems, people, aliens, lots of stuff.
 > Have you mapped these regions out?  In great detail or
 > just 'other empire' borders or is it unplayable so it's
 >  treated as not being there?

 We've mapped some of the areas, but I would not say most of
 it. If the campaign starts heading in those directions,
 we'll detail them, but we already have plenty of area to
 cover without doing so.

 > 7.  While I'm not keen on rolling lots of dice in combat
 > I find the armour penetration rules a bit too black and
 > white.  Oh you've got that gun and I've got this armour so
 > you can't hurt me.  In a lot of cases I would like to
 > do away with the straight subtraction of damage dice and
 > simply roll them all and have the defender roll what dice
 > would have been subtracted and then subtract the two sums.
 >  There are cases where you will inflict damage where
 > previously it was impossible.  How do you feel about
 > this variation?

 I kind of like that variation, but the House System is
 pretty set the way it is, so we will not be able to
 consider such a change.  _ Blunt Trauma can be significant
 in some cases, even where a weapon does not penetrate. _

 > 8.  I find it very difficult to get exceptional
 > successes with most average characters unless they are
 > 'super' at a skill and the 10 point range is a very
 > large single step.  Have you looked at 5 point steps
 with 5-9 giving a 1 point defenders armour reduction,
 > 10-14 giving the 5-9 bonus plus double damage, 15-19
 > giving the double damage bonus plus a 2
 > point reduction in the defenders armour rating?

 No we have not, and that system would only apply to
 combat. We prefer a simpler system with fewer exceptions
 and special cases that works for all task resolutions,
 combat and non-combat. You are free to do what you please
 with your games, however.

 > 9.  The fact that TNE combat does very little damage
 > can mean that combats run on for long periods. In the
 > case of the head and chest rule of saving throws
 > for death by NPCs it goes to the other extreme with
 > one shot kills for NPCs but players dragging on until
 > all their blood has drained away.  There must be
 > some middle ground where realism can at least share
 > the lime light with playability.  What combat mods
 > are people implementing along these lines?

 If you feel that characters have too many hit points,
 we suggest rolling 1D10 for damage instead of 1D6. This
 is the simplest system for speeding up killing, and we
 suggest it for those groups who want that change. This
 is not, however, a system change or errata. Its just a
 recommended variant for people who don't like heroic-style
 combat and don't mind creating new PCs all the time.

 > 10. We converted our characters to TNE and found
 > the 'feel' of the game to have been totally changed.
 > Preferred weapons now don't penetrate and don't have
 > anywhere near the knock down ability they had before.
 >  To fix the laser weapon fall from grace our GM simply
 > added "1-" to them and the universe has shifted part
 > way back again.  There seems to be a number of misprints
 > in the weapons tables  .... do you have an errata for
 > them yet?

 Yes, there are some errata on the weapons table, and
 these have been posted, and we will post additions if
 and when they are necessary. However, the laser issue is
 not a misprint. The rules as written are the way we intend
 for lasers to work against metallic/ceramic armor. We suggest
 the following fix for laser damage: All non-metallic,
 non-ceramic armor, in other words, kevlar, ballistic cloth,
 ballistic weave, animal armor consisting of shells, scales,
 or thick hide, etc., is treated as no armor when hit by a
 laser. Armor consisting of metallic or ceramic plates
 uses the rules as they now read. This is an official
 fix, and will be published as such.
 _Email me a land address, and I will send a copy of the
 current errata sheet. _

 > 11. The move to T:2000 in-house game system is a good
 > rationalisation for GDW but I feel that the equipment
 > stats for HIGHER TECH equipment has been fudged rather
 > badly.  Sure, if I have a TL-10 pistol and we upgrade
 > it to TL-12 we don't JUST want a copy made. What you
 > need is a branching of capabilities not a straight
 line "this is now this". The TL-12 pistol would
 > have several variants.  One identical to the original
 > for direct sale to TL-10 worlds at cheaper than TL-10
 > can produce it, one with better range but with
 > less penetration, one with better penetration but
 > with less range, one with better penetration at close
 > range but worse penetration at longer ranges
 > but still has the longer range ability.  There
 > doesn't appear to be enough variation for players to role
 > play around ... "Damn he's just out of range,
 > should have bought the other model gun" OR "I always
 > carry two pistols, one for close in people stopping
 > and one for long range".  Do you have plans
 > for some trade manuals so we can "go shopping"?
 > It would be nice to front up at a shop and have the GM
 > say "Some binoculars?  Oh well if you look on page
 > 24 you find variants 1-5 and 11 which are available
 > over the counter and he can order in variants 19-24
 > in 2 weeks or a 25 will take a month.  What
 > would you like?".  Look around today, want to buy
 > a TV; how many variants can you get?
 There are only so many weapons and items of equipment
 that we could rate for the TNE book, and we certainly
 intended to make many more detailed variants available
 later on. Even God took six days. The Technical Architecture
 book (Fire, Fusion and Steel) which will release in November
 includes rules for designing (among other things) small arms
 of all kinds from the ground up. With this system Traveller
 players can create more weapons detail than perhaps anyone
 will ever need (or maybe even want), and we will publish
 many new, more detailed designs. This design system
 was not complete in time for it to be used to design the
 TNE weapons, so naturally we had to use less detailed "translations."
 _This ends the material written by Dave. All comments are now Loren's_
 ------------------------------
 Scott Kellogg
 (anybody remember the "Kay EE double Ell, owe Double Good"
slogan for Kellogg's cereal commercials? or does that reveal too
much about my age)
 > BTW, Loren?  Is GDW interested in people writing novels or
 > short stories for TNE?
 Perhaps. Send an outline and a sample chapter to David C.
 Nilsen, C/O GDW. We'll talk.

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

 > Anthony Neal <anthonyn@mercury.cs.mun.ca>
 > Equipment and alternatives

 See Dave's answers to Bruce, above..

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

 John H Bogan <jbogan@libserv1.ic.sunysb.edu>
 > Maybe they just wanted to make things a little more complex
 > than EVIL ZHO'S.

 Precisely!

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

 Dane (djohnson@willamette.edu)
 Subject: Mercenary Cruisers...

 The Jump 1/Man 1 Broadswords got into Mega somehow. That
 was a  mistake (but not _my_ mistake). When I translated
 the ships over for TNE, I didn't notice. That was a
 mistake (and _was_ my  mistake...Mea culpa).

 The J3 Man 3 ratings are corrected in Brilliant Lances
 (see announcement above).

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

  > Phil Pugliese:
  >How come no one complains about psionics when it's just as
 > much magic as 'thruster plates etc '? I always figured
 >  GDW threw it in originally because everyone "knew" you
 >  couldn't publish an rpg profitably w/o emulating
 > TSR's 'magic' & 'wizards' in (A)D&D. Ergo psionics!
 Actually, we included psi powers because they were a
 well-established concept in the body of of SF literature
 that Marc used as partial inspiration for the game.
 Personally, I think ESP/etc. is a load of bunk, but its
 addition makes for a better game, in my opinion. Besides,
 if we hadn't put Psi powers in, how could people argue
 for weeks over the Zhodani? : )

 We have published several RPGs without using 'magic' &
'wizards' as you put it.

 ------------------------------
 > Does anybody know if a complete Traveller product list
  > has been compiled?
 I believe Ed Edwards or Mike Mikesh of HIWG is in charge
 of such a list. All we keep track of is our own stuff.

 ------------------------------
  From: "DAVE HEIL" <heild@mugu.navy.mil>
  > Can someone out there tell me what manuals I would need
  >  to play and eventually run games?
 Dave,
 Matt's answer to you was incomplete. Matt does not
 consider the present incarnation of Traveller
 (Traveller : The New Era, also known on the TML as TNE,
 The new Error, and other epithets I won't go into) to
 be "real" Traveller, and the information he gave to you
 referred to the old, now-out of print Traveller books
 he prefers to the new edition.

 If you are interested in finding out about the newest
 edition of Traveller, call or write GDW (address and
 phone # included somewhere in this message) and ask for
 a catalog. Tell Lori I sent you.

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

 ------------------------------
  Chris Bray <cs576112@lux.latrobe.edu.au>:
  > What I really want to know is if DGP ever published
  >  their game AI:
  To the best of my knowledge, A.I. is not out yet. I have
 heard a rumor that DGP's Joe Fugate has had some
 non-business problems that are taking up most of his personal
 and financial energy, but I have no details.

 ------------------------------
  Matthew Goldman  E-mail: goldman@orac.cray.com Work:

 > You'll need to look around since the silly people at GDW
  > stopped printing them.
 We stopped printing them because people stopped buying
 them. Why does trying to stay in business make us silly, if I may ask?

  > P.S. anyone remember off hand when copyrights run out?

  I'm not well acquainted with copyright law (not being
 a law-critter), but I believe that they run 28 years with
 an option for a second 28 under certain conditions.

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

 ANTHONY KAY BAGGALEY
 > (it's Fire Fusion and Steel now isn't it? sounds better
 for the SpaceOrk geeks I suppose).

 Technical architecture was the working title. We made it
 FF&S because it sounded better to _US_

 > I was just wondering how many people have actually changed
 > over to the TNE rules (or even background)

 Judging from our mail and customer responses at the summer
conventions, a great many people are using the new rules
 with their present background.

 ------------------------------
 > joe    (ccjoe@mizzou1.missouri.edu):
 > So at least one of us has gone on ahead and followed
 > GDW to see where it goes...
 And you are not alone...
 ------------------------------
 For those who want /need our snail mail adress or phone
 numbers:

  GDW
  PO Box 1646
  Bloomington, IL 61702

  Voice: (309) 452-3632
  FAX: (309) 454-3127

 Loren K. Wiseman
  (and David C. Nilsen)
                for GDW, Inc.

  I don't use sigs, but if I did, I'd use this in one
 sometimes:

 "If a little knowledge is dangerous, where is the man
 who has so much as to be out of danger?"
                                   --- Thomas Huxley

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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5941
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 93 15:46:13 EDT
From: Derek Wildstar <wildstar@quark.qrc.com>
Subject: Re:  Wildstar is back! :-)


Hello!  I'm back on the net!  :-)  :-)  :-)

My new address is:  wildstar@quark.qrc.com

Please update your mail aliases, add me to the mailing lists, and
generally get me reconnected!

Thanks!

wildstar@quark.qrc.com
- -------------------------------------------------------------------
                           .signature file still under construction



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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5942
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1993 00:37:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Steven Gott <sgott@u.washington.edu>
Subject: STAR CRUISER


Is it just me or is STAR CRUISER one of the most confusing games ever
released by GDW?

Why do they have the Port/Starboard Bow/Stern Quarter firing arcs when the
range of the weapons is only 1 hex?

Confused in Seattle
S Gott


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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5943
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1993 10:13:15 EDT
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: TNE Psionics

Hello Travellers,

here is one of the usual simple question :) I have:

In the TNE-Rulebook the rules for psionic regeneration states:

"Though the psionics treats himself he has to overcome his own willpower rating
 to do so. The willpower rating is subconscious and can not be suspended by the
 psionic."
(not precisely, but I don't have the book with me)

Okay, nice statement, but willpower is a skill, and as such can be developed.
And development is not subconscious. So why can't I lower my willpower asset
by my willpower skill?

Example:
Dodo has a Willpower skill of 4 and Int 8 => Willpower asset=12
Dodo is a psionic using regeneration. Using the rules above, you have to
overcome a Willpower asset of 12.

Using my rule above, he has to overcome a willpower of 8, his Int rating,
which is indeed subconscious.

Waiting for suggestions,
Juergen

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de


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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5944
Subject: some 2300AD stuff
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1993 09:32:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Neilsen x8378 <neilsen@eta.pha.jhu.edu>

All-
	Has anybody out there run a 2300AD campaign using the GURPS rule
system? I got the 2300AD game several years ago, and was extremely impressed
with the setting itself- IMHO, it's by far the best setting created for a
RPG, and I was quite eager to run some games. When it came to running it,
though, my dislike of the rules system was sufficient to keep me from
continuing the campeign.
	I've played GURPS a few time, and been very impressed with the rule
system, and I was wondering if anyone has gone through and generated GURPS
stats for equipment, etc., or has tried anything similar. If I do some
conversions, is anyone out there interested in them?

		-Eric Neilsen
		 neilsen@eta.pha.jhu.edu

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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5945
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1993 15:17:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: nosnhoJ enaD <dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov>
Subject: Letterman...


I don't know about the rest of you, but Loren's revelation that they don't
know the Aslan's reaction to Dave's move to CBS shocked *me*.

Re:  Scott "2g" Kellogg

When I first saw posts from Scott I figured the "2g" referred to
acceleration.  One of my friends pointed out that *he* used to know a guy
named Kellogg, too, and people always dropped the second 'g'.  So, which
is it, Scott?  (And yes, Loren, I do remember K-E-Double L-Oh-Double good)
<And I, for one, am not a geezer>

ObTraveller:  Working out an adventure in Gvurrdon, I noticed a planet
with about 90 million Vargr which has a *Non-Charismatic Leader*.
Somebody want to explain that one? :)

<Actually, I figured that a formerly Charismatic leader croaked and either
a relative or an advisor has taken the reigns...Any other ideas?>

traveller@llnl.gov
djohnson@willamette.edu
TNS Stringer ------------ Terra/Solomani Rim (1827 G867975-8)
"I'm not a real scientist, but I play one in an RPG."


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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5946
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1993 19:55:04 -0700
From: Muir Macpherson <muirmac@ocf.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: STAR CRUISER

	I agree that Star Cruiser is one of the most confusing game put out
by GDW.  I assume that the firing arcs are for ships in adjacent hexes, but
that's not the only problem.  I think the biggest problem is that beam
weapons have such a short range.  Considering that most military ships can
move 7 hexes in a turn this turns space combat into a "knife fight."  It also
means that you can detect a hostile ship long before you can fire on it.
	The idea I think is that missles are supposed to be the main form
of combat, but when you're fighting a Delta Class Kafer battleship the thing
is going to close with you eventually. In my experience, all movement stops
at this point and the two players sit in the same hex, blasting away at each
other with their lasers.
	What I have done in my games is to make long range for beam weapons
3 hexes and short range one hex.  This helps keep ships from parking in
the same hex and plugging away at each other.
	I have also experimented with limiting a ships acceleration and
deceleration by saying that they from a dead stop they can only move half
speed the next turn.  Likewise they can only decelerate to half speed their
first turn and must wait until the following turn to come to a complete
stop.  Along with this, ships may only change facing by one hex side per
hex of forward movement.  This prevents ships from spinning in place and
doing 180's in space.
	The net effect is to make combat more swooping and graceful.  The
extended range of beam weapons and the limits on turning radius also make
the firing arcs that began this discussion all the more important.  :)

	Let me know what you think of these ideas.

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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5947
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: RE: Acceleration & G's...
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 93 7:08:17 CDT

Dave Johnson:
> Re:  Scott "2g" Kellogg
> When I first saw posts from Scott I figured the "2g" referred to
> acceleration.  One of my friends pointed out that *he* used to know a guy
> named Kellogg, too, and people always dropped the second 'g'.  So, which
> is it, Scott?  (And yes, Loren, I do remember K-E-Double L-Oh-Double good)
> <And I, for one, am not a geezer>

Well, it's both.  I get pretty tired of people spelling my last name as
`Kellog'.  I mean, think about it.  You see the spelling on your cereal
box *every* *damn* *morning*.  Just because my great grand uncle decided
to stop preaching and start selling breakfast cereal...!  :-P

There is also the fact that I tend to... react... rather quickly on
occasion.  Though, perhaps 9G would be appropriate if I were merely
dealing with acceleration.

However, I have noticed, that since I started signing things with "2G"
included, my name has been misspelled only two or three times.
(though how someone managed to write `Scott 2G Kelloggg' is beyond me.)

> ObTraveller:  Working out an adventure in Gvurrdon, I noticed a planet
> with about 90 million Vargr which has a *Non-Charismatic Leader*.
> Somebody want to explain that one? :)
>
> <Actually, I figured that a formerly Charismatic leader croaked and either
> a relative or an advisor has taken the reigns...Any other ideas?>

Quite correct, and imagine as the non-charismatic leader tries to secure
his power while more charismatic vargr come up behind him.  The planet
may be on the verge of civil war...  Vargr are fun.

BTW, you're only a geezer if you can remember Kellogg's Pep.  |->
- --
Scott 2G Kellogg
"Kellogg is just plain nuts!"  -- H. Beam Piper


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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5948
Date:    Wed, 1 Sep 1993 7:50:05 -0500 (CDT)
From: RJR96326@VAX1.UTULSA.EDU
Subject: GURPS 2300AD

I  was also quite impressed with 2300AD's background, if not the combat
system and character generation. I am VERY interested in whatever you do
to Gurpify that setting.

J Roberson

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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5949
Subject: my various postings
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 93 9:02:15 CDT
From: goldman@orac.cray.com (Goldman of Chaos -- postmaster CRI-US)
Reply-To: goldman@orac.cray.com

I think that I may have left off a smiley face or two.

I understand that GDW has to make money, and that the
gaming market has gone off in a direction that I don't
consider fun; however, I don't buy enough gaming stuff
to support GDW or any other gaming company.

Sorry I came off as really out of contact with
the real world.

Matt

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

2034, the year that Classic Traveller returns!

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5950
Date:         Wed, 01 Sep 93 16:26:05 CDT
From: Joe Heck <CCJOE@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu>
Subject:      Droyne

the little lizards have been on my mind lately so...  some questions:

Has anyone thought much about what Droyne architecture is like? I figured
they probably worked off three dimension structures - spheres and crystals
came to mind (perhaps that's just my innate bias to the remains of the
ancients). Crystal atomic forms, large central spaces, and communal living
arrangements. Anyone else?

And would their starships (the few they build themselves) look similiar?  I
remember the old GDW droyne module, the ship isn't what I thought it would
look like. Has anyone worked much with Droyne npc's? (Other than Scouts?)

I know Scott 2G had some references in 4.5th Frontier War... Whatyall think?

 joe                          University of Missouri - Columbia
 ccjoe@mizzou1.missouri.edu   (314) 882-5000

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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5951
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1993 19:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gregg Giles <ggiles@cie-2.uoregon.edu>
Subject: Need information on the following people...


Greetings!

   I would like to hunt down and contact the following persons. You help
would be greatly appreciated. Please reply via Email, since I'd otherwise
have to wade through the mailing list packets (not fun).
   I'm trying to get email or realworld addresses and phone numbers from:

Magnus Abel (formerly of MAFS Limited, "Between Worlds" fanzine)
Mark "Geo" and Kate-Lebherz Gelinas ("Traveller Times" fanzine)
Ed Edwards (probably still in Norman, OK, I bet)
Mike Mikesh
Mike Jackson (of "Imperium Staple" fanzine)
David Dietrich (art god of many Traveller book covers)
Chuck Kallenbach II and Don Rapp (of "Paranoia Press" fame)
Perrin Tong
James King ("Jumpspace" fanzine)
Herb Petro ("Continuum" fanzine)

   ... and I'm sure there are others I've forgotten.
   Please, if you have *any* leads as to where they are now or where you
knew of them last, email me at ggiles@cie-2.uoregon.edu.

Gregg Giles
(former ed., "Security Leak")
3330 Kins Row 217, Eugene, OR 97401-8824
ggiles@cie-2.uoregon.edu



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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5952
From: Timothy Little <t_little@postoffice.utas.edu.au>
Subject: Space Combat
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 93 16:42:22 EST

> Subject: STAR CRUISER
>
> 	I agree that Star Cruiser is one of the most confusing game put out
> by GDW.  I assume that the firing arcs are for ships in adjacent hexes, but
> that's not the only problem.  I think the biggest problem is that beam
> weapons have such a short range.  Considering that most military ships can
> move 7 hexes in a turn this turns space combat into a "knife fight."  It also
> means that you can detect a hostile ship long before you can fire on it.

"Short range" is a relative term.  With each hex representing 600 Mm, it
means that the accuracy of each weapon is very good indeed.  The Star Wars
system is considered completely unworkable, and it only needed to deal with
targets at about 1/1000th the range, and 10000 times slower.

> 	The idea I think is that missles are supposed to be the main form
> of combat, but when you're fighting a Delta Class Kafer battleship the thing
> is going to close with you eventually. In my experience, all movement stops
> at this point and the two players sit in the same hex, blasting away at each
> other with their lasers.

In my experience, either the human ship runs out of missiles and dies, or
the Kafer dies.

In custom-designed games, the tactic of choice (after missiles, of course)
is to have rear-mount weapons and a fast drive.  Oh yeah, and lots of remote
armed drones.  (In fact, the remote drone situation got so bad that we had
to limit numbers to keep the game playable)

> 	What I have done in my games is to make long range for beam weapons
> 3 hexes and short range one he  This helps keep ships from parking in
> the same hex and plugging away at each other.

I think the main cause of 'plugging away' is not the weapon ranges, but
the lack of maneuverability of 2300AD ships.

> 	I have also experimented with limiting a ships acceleration and
> deceleration by saying that they from a dead stop they can only move half
> speed the next turn.  Likewise they can only decelerate to half speed their
> first turn and must wait until the following turn to come to a complete
> stop.  Along with this, ships may only change facing by one hex side per
> hex of forward movement.  This prevents ships from spinning in place and
> doing 180's in space.

What's wrong with that?  Do you have a problem with rotation?  I have
exactly the opposite view - they make rotation too difficult.  They only
justify it with some washy statement that the drives cause 'inertia'.

> 	The net effect is to make combat more swooping and graceful.  The
> extended range of beam weapons and the limits on turning radius also make
> the firing arcs that began this discussion all the more important.  :)

If you want swooping and 'graceful' combat, play a flight sim.  I don't
see any reason why space combat should share this property, and I dislike
games that artificially try to introduce it.



Other points:
Why do they include a 'star' counter and say that ships can move within one
hex of it?  They explicitly state that stutterwarps fail against a 'few
tenths of a G'.  By my calculations, the closest a stutterwarp-driven ship
can approach a star like our Sun is about 10 hexes.  If it gets any closer,
it can't get out (and will fall into the star in about 18 hours.


Why do 2300AD power plants supply such *abyssmal* power/weight ratios?
A current internal combustion engine can supply 1 kW/kg, yet the most
advanced 2300AD military MHD turbine supplies 10 times less.  Considering
that power/mass is a major design factor, why not use petrol engines?
Especially since the cost is about the same.  Worse than that, however, is
the fuel cell technology - it is exceeded by a factor of 3 in power/mass,
is more expensive, and consumes more fuel than current technology.

They ought to run the things on the same LMS batteries that power the laser
guns.  A 10 MW MHD costs at least 0.7 MLv and masses at least 100 tons.
10 MW of LMS batteries costs 1700 Lv (0.0017 MLv) and masses 330 kg (which
is 0.33 tons).  For the same price (0.7 MLv) you get 4200 MW of peak power
massing 140 tons.  Energy capacity is also good - 7 MJ/kg, halfway between
MHD and Fuel Cells.  So, *why not*?

- --
Tim Little

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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5953
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 00:20:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Steven Gott <sgott@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Brilliant Lances

I picked up a copy of Brilliant Lances today.  It was $30.00 as advertised
but there was no miniture included :(  It was a little overwhelming.
First, all ships are played from an 8 1/2 * 11 "Control Panel" that makes
NO SENSE until you read the rules.  Second, the counters are BIG, BRIGHT
and COLORFUL.  There are three HUGE map sheets and two rule books.  There
is also a page of Errata.  The rule book is 32 pages.  What I have read so
far is pretty clear and straitforward GDW takes you through their new
rules a little bit at a time.  The Technical Booklet with construction
rules and actual Ships is 48 pages.  It also seemed pretty clear.  Most of
the standard ships are there plus some Aslan, Vargar, Zhodani and a couple
of cobbled togater Rube Goldberg Death-Traps.  The artwork was pretty
good.  I didn't like the 1 inch square blocks of graphics in each corner
on each page.  It made each page a little too busy and made reading the rules
very hard my first time.  On the positive side once I read the rules I was
very impressed.  This is the best Space Combat game the folks at GDW have
ever put out.  Believe me, I own them all. :-)

Steve Gott

Seattle, Wa


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

Bundle: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5954
From: adrian@cee.hw.ac.uk (Adrian Hurt)
Subject: Cereals and Vargr
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 93 10:01:38 WET DST

Scott Muesli - sorry, skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg) writes:
>
>		I get pretty tired of people spelling my last name as
> `Kellog'.  I mean, think about it.  You see the spelling on your cereal
> box *every* *damn* *morning*.

That depends on what cereal you eat!  And asking people not to spell your name
with only one "g" is not going to help much when this appears at the start of
the message bundle:

>492  5947 01-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  RE: Acceleration & G's... << Dave Johns

HUGE amount of :-) needed here!

> > ObTraveller:  Working out an adventure in Gvurrdon, I noticed a planet
> > with about 90 million Vargr which has a *Non-Charismatic Leader*.
> > Somebody want to explain that one? :)
> >
> > <Actually, I figured that a formerly Charismatic leader croaked and either
> > a relative or an advisor has taken the reigns...Any other ideas?>
>
> Quite correct, and imagine as the non-charismatic leader tries to secure
> his power while more charismatic vargr come up behind him.  The planet
> may be on the verge of civil war...  Vargr are fun.

What's *really* fun is if your character is a high charisma Vargr and you
need or want to visit this planet, but don't want to stay there, either as
its new ruler or as the "guest" of the current one.  Other characters should
consider selecting one of the prospective new leaders, lending some sort of
support in the forthcoming conflict (either as mercenaries, gun-runners or
propaganda broadcasters, for example) and then using the planet as a base -
at least until the next change of leader. ;-)

- --
 "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: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5955
From: adrian@cee.hw.ac.uk (Adrian Hurt)
Subject: Re: Droyne
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 93 10:06:08 WET DST

Joe Heck <CCJOE@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu> writes:
>
> Has anyone thought much about what Droyne architecture is like? I figured
> they probably worked off three dimension structures - spheres and crystals
> came to mind (perhaps that's just my innate bias to the remains of the
> ancients). Crystal atomic forms, large central spaces, and communal living
> arrangements. Anyone else?

For one thing, they won't have staircases.  Real Droyne can fly.  You should
not be surprised to see an entrance to the building on the third floor.  They
probably have a ground floor entrance and an elevator for the wing-impaired,
though.

- --
 "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: 492
Archive-Message-Number: 5956
Date:    Thu, 2 Sep 1993 11:28:25 -0500 (CDT)
From: RJR96326@VAX1.UTULSA.EDU
Subject: Droyne Architecture

I have no idea what the architecture of the Droyne favors. Probably
functional, simple, and elegant (don't gag on the cliche). But I believe
just about everyone else uses 3D arcitecture. :)

J Roberson
The bigger they are, the harder they hit. . .especially with spinal mounts

------------------------------
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==========================
 493  5957 02-Sep-1993 C. Harald Koch   Re: STAR CRUISER << In message 5946, Mu
 493  5958 02-Sep-1993 Goldman of Chao  Zhodani Mind Benders again... << Hello
 493  5959 02-Sep-1993 George Yim       BL observations and errata << Just to n
 493  5960 02-Sep-1993 Joe Heck         Another question: << Six Lights    1216
 493  5961 03-Sep-1993 pihlab@cbr.hhcs  2300 combat << The 2300 ship combat sys
 493  5962 02-Sep-1993 "Pedro A.C. Tav  STAR CRUISER and GURPS<->2300AD << 1.
 493  5963 03-Sep-1993 "Matthew Thomas  << I'm new to the list, and I'm sure th
 493  5964 03-Sep-1993 ANTHONY KAY BAG  More Star Cruiser <<    Firstly, to Lor
 493  5965 02-Sep-1993 Leif Magnar Kj|  Re: 2300ad stuff << Aye, I'm rather int
 493  5966 03-Sep-1993 Timothy Little   2300AD Ship Combat << > In message 5946
 493  5967 03-Sep-1993 James T Perkins  TML mesg forwarded for your convenience
 493  5968 03-Sep-1993 Muir Macpherson  Star Cruiser << >> Subject: STAR CRUISE

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

Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5957
From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch)
Subject: Re: STAR CRUISER
Date: 	Thu, 2 Sep 1993 14:42:58 -0400

In message 5946, Muir Macpherson <muirmac@ocf.Berkeley.EDU> writes:

> I think the biggest problem is that beam
> weapons have such a short range.  Considering that most military ships can
> move 7 hexes in a turn this turns space combat into a "knife fight."  It also
> means that you can detect a hostile ship long before you can fire on it.

This may make for a strange game, but at least it's logically consistent
with StutterWarp physics.

Imagine tryig to hit a target from more than one Hex away, when that target
is travelling FTL using stutterwarp. *long* before the light from your laser
arrives in the same general vicinity, he'll have moved to a different
location.

Missiles work by getting as close as they can to the target vehicle; they
then *spray space* with as many laser beams as the missile can generate. If
the missile is lucky, *one* of those beams will actually intersect with the
target, causing damage. That's what a to-hit roll is actually calculating;
you're checking to see if one (out of many) laser beams actually passes
through the target's current location.

Making beam weapons have 3 hex range may make the game more playable to you,
but it's no longer realistic (according to the 2300AD universe).

>         I have also experimented with limiting a ships acceleration and
> deceleration by saying that they from a dead stop they can only move half
> speed the next turn.  Likewise they can only decelerate to half speed their
> first turn and must wait until the following turn to come to a complete
> stop.  Along with this, ships may only change facing by one hex side per
> hex of forward movement.  This prevents ships from spinning in place and
> doing 180's in space.

You really don't understand StutterWarp physics, do you? :-)

StutterWarping ships don't change their real-space vector in any way; they
simply "teleport" a short distance away, at a rapid cycle rate, giving
effective FTL travel. StutterWarp ships don't "accelerate" or "decellerate";
they simply start and stop moving. StutterWarp movement doesn't have
momentum or inertia; StutterWarp ships can move instantly and stop on a dime.
(This is why Traveller players objected so strongly to their introduction
into the TNE universe, btw).

As for changing facings: This is where things start to get nebulous...

First of all, we believe that this is currently done using real-space
thrusters. So, it should still be possible to do "180's in space"; you just
can't do them instantaneously.

Secondly, since StutterWarp doesn't change real-space vectors, we believe
that you should be able to warp in one direction while your ship is pointing
in a completly different direction. Of course, you can restrict this by
claiming that the StutterWarp field is aligned with the ships hull, so that
you can only travel "forward". We're still arguing that one... :-)

We've played lots of Star Cruiser combat. The 2300 physics do lead to some
common tactics; they just aren't like anything you've ever seen before... :-)

- --
C. Harald Koch, Network Analyst | Psychotic pigs make better bacon!
Alias Research Inc. Toronto, ON |
chk@alias.com                   | -Graffiti, on a wall near Queen & Beverly
chk@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca        |

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

Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5958
Subject: Zhodani Mind Benders again...
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 93 15:07:21 CDT
From: goldman@orac.cray.com (Goldman of Chaos -- postmaster CRI-US)
Reply-To: goldman@orac.cray.com

Hello all,

I'm not trying to get the discussion started again.  I'd like to pass
onto you a number of SF book titles that I read in the last few weeks
that can help you with ideas about the whole Zhodani vs. Imperial
conflict.  I must add that there is also some interesting material
for TNE.

In order to read (all by CJ Cherryh) although this is not the order
that I read them in.
	Downbelow Station
	40,000 in Gehenna
	RimRunners
	Cyteen: books 1-3

The books cover a long drawn out multi-star system war and the
aftermath of the battles.

Matt

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

My day today? Nothing major, just Xenon base gone, Scorpio gone,
Tarrant dead, Tarrant alive and then I found out Blake sold us out.

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

Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5959
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 93 16:41:27 -0400
From: George Yim <gyim@libserv1.ic.sunysb.edu>
Subject: BL observations and errata

Just to note, this is  John  Bogan sending  via a  friend.
Replies, flames, job offers should be sent to ANOTHER
friend (curtis@sbcs.sunysb.edu) and addressed to me.
- -----------------------------------------------------------

  I haven't had time to really play through Brilliant
Lances yet, but here's some notes and errata that came
to mind while reading  through:

It does NOT detail the Regency's  150-ton  "strech scout":P

It  DOES detail some of  my favorites  from FASA's "Adventure
Class  Ships"  series :) :)



The Aurora class clipper (Technical Booklet pg 44) is listed
as "tech level 12" construction. However, in  certain
configurations, it is said to be capable of up to Jump-5.
Maximum  jump for TL-12 is J-3. If they use salvaged
TL-14 J-drives, it should be stated explicitly.
If the J-drives are of TL-12 construction, it should be
stated that maximum jump is 3 parsecs, but fuel storage
allows (depending on configuration) for an additional
jump-2 without refueling.


Controls (Technical booklet pg 3): I can find no size or
tech level requirement for what controls should be used.
As it  stands, you can build a TL-15  ship with TL-5
controls with  no  penalty, and in fact the low-tech
controls cost less in both power and Credits, so under
the current rules  as stated, low-tech controls make
more sense.
  Suggested correction: factor in a control multiplier
for control type, similar to how computers have a control
modifier, in the calculation of crew  requirements.
I haven't had time to try out specific suggestions, but
this seems to be the easiest way to attack  the  problem.
All the ships published so far are from TL-12 to 15, so
would use either dynamic linked or holographic linked
controls, so the multiplier could be normalized (=1)
for either of these.

The "Lackland Sons" scenario (rules of play, pg 31)
takes place at Yaggoth in Reavers' Deep. If this is
Yaggoth/Urlaqqash (0110)/Reavers' Deep (2530), it is
a member of the Carrillian Assembly, a 20-world
subsector-sized polity wedged in between the Imperium
and the Solomani Confederation, not a member of the
Imperium/Daibei.
  Presumably, all references to the "Imperial" side/player
should be taken to mean the Carrillian side/player.
Also presumably, the Assembly had some of it's own problems
which prevent it's own heavy units from taking care
of the Aslan in short order.


Also included in BL is version 1.0 of the errata sheet.:/
I take it further versions will be out.


Rwouf  (Gvegh  for Hasta la  Vista),

John H Bogan

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

Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5960
Date:         Thu, 02 Sep 93 17:28:07 CDT
From: Joe Heck <CCJOE@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu>
Subject:      Another question:

Six Lights    1216 C663110-9  H D0 Lo Ni           812 Rv M1 V

This system is in the Corridor Sector, at the VERY edge of the rift, and I
didn't recognize two codes: the Naval/Scout base code of 'H' and the
allegiance code of 'Rv'. I thought I'd find it in Vargr&Vilani as this is
kinda the territory that covered, but according to DGP, the Vargr never
really got down that far (considered them worth raiding?) and it was listed
as allegiance "Na" in one of the older Traveller's Digests. MTJ#3 has it
listed as above. Any ideas?

 joe                          University of Missouri - Columbia
 ccjoe@mizzou1.missouri.edu   (314) 882-5000

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

Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5961
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 1993 13:57:34 +1000
From: pihlab@cbr.hhcs.gov.au
Subject: 2300 combat

The 2300 ship combat system is quite easy to play and can be
quite exciting and fun.  I've played in quite a few battles
and have enjoyed them immensely, when I survived.

However, as already stated by others, there are a lot of
inconsistencies.

1. Top of my list.  You control a missile using some sort of
   communication device which operates at light (or less) speed
   so when telling a missile that is 10 hexes away to target a
   ship you are facing the same (if not worse) time delay as
   if you were firing one of your energy weapons from the ship
   at the target from the 10 hex distance.

2. When 2 or more DETONATION missiles enter your hex you have the option
   of using your energy weapons to shoot them.  Assuming you miss
   and that the missile owner detonates only ONE of the missiles
   this phase you automaticly get a FREE point defence shot ONLY at
   the DETONATing missile.

3. A ship CAN DETECT a relay in a missile triggering and aim and fire
   all facing weapons at the target before the relay closes and the
   missile detonates.

4. DETONATION Missiles can fire at targets in ANY of the 7 hexes
   around or in the one they detonated in.  No facing restrictions
   for this baby.

5. A ship can go from 0 to 9 movement instantaneously and yet this speed
   and agility is not factored into the weapon targetting routines.  Hmm
   actually its been a while since I last looked at the rules, I may be
   wrong on this one.

6. Ships can't mask friendly ships from enemy fire in any way.  You park
   your Froggy Carrier (the one that blotts out half the sky) between your
   small freighter and that nasty enemy incoming fighter and you still
   can't prevent him from shooting the freighter to pieces.  It's like in
   HIGHGUARD where you park an imperial heavy fighter right next to your
   stationary ship (or in your cargo hold) and the computer difference
   alone (9 vs 0) makes it impossible for the little guy to hit your ship
   at all.  Ho hum.

The game is fine so long as you don't look too close at the reasonig
behind the mechanics.


Bruce...         pihlab@cbr.hhcs.gov.au

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

Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5962
Date: 	Thu, 2 Sep 1993 14:16:25 -0400
From: "Pedro A.C. Tavares" <ftavares%ptearn.bitnet@utcc.utoronto.ca>
Subject:      STAR CRUISER and GURPS<->2300AD

1.
Muir,
About your changes to starcruiser acceleration, decellaration and turning:
I don't know the game but as far as I know the propulsion system in use is
only (?) the stutter warp.  Since Stutter Warp does not involve moving in
in the classical sense (the ship jumps from one place to another) i don't see
how you can introduce (de)acceleration.  The warp drive is simply active or
inactive.  On rotation the effect will depend on one aspect of the stutter
drive I'm not familiar with:  Does changing direction of stutter movement
involve rotating the ship in the desired direction?

2.
The idea for converting the 2300 universe to GURPS seems interesting.
However I've been doing the opposite.  There are three reasons for this
choice: (a) the main problem with 2300 rules is that they are terribly
incomplete.  Using the task system it is very easy to adapt GURPS rules.
(b) I don't like many aspects of GURPS like character generation and combat
with fire weapons (I remember at least one instance where GURPS is quite
unbelivable: the target range/speed modifiers).  And (c) 2300ad as a few good
points like the task system which is much more elegant than the gurps system.
The combat system is also very effective for the kind of combat the I use most:
few people shooting at each other with handguns in the corridors of some space
station or ship.
Still I only played GURPS a couple of times so I may be wrong about its
shortcomings.  When you have tried your adaptations let me know the results.


- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro A.C. Tavares

Faculdade de Ciencias - Universidade de Lisboa

Email: ftavares@ptearn.bitnet
       ftavares@ptearn.fc.ul.pt
       pedro@eltn.utwente.nl
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5963
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1993 03:30:56 -0700 (MST)
From: "Matthew Thomas Kerwin" <15623@ef.gc.maricopa.edu>
Subject:

I'm new to the list, and I'm sure the subjects I'm going to bring up have
been worked to death already so if someone would like to respond to my
questions via e-mail I would not be at all offended... :-)

That was the disclaimer, now for the message. I played Classic and
MegaTraveller for a very long time, and I just recently purchased The New
Era but didn't have time to look at it too carefully. Last week I finally
perused it and it left me rather confused on the history.

WAS Strephon the real Strephon? Survival Margin seems to imply that he
was, but the Regency business seems to imply that he wasn't. What was
Project Longbow anyway, and who was the "new empress" he mentioned? Why
did he send his son(?) to the Domain and what became of him?

How did Norris die? Is he dead at all?

What the heck happened to Core Sector? It's a big black smear now.

Are any of the
"major players" of the Rebellion still around?

I ask these things because I tend to run far-ranging campaigns and sooner
or later players will want to know "Gee... is Margaret still alive? How
about her kids? Grandkids?" and so forth. Sooner or later they are going
to try to go to Core Sector. Has GDW put out another product (besides
Survival Margin and the basic rules) that answers any of these questions?

Thanks

*-------------------------------------------------------*
|Matthew Kerwin               15623@EF.GC.MARICOPA.EDU  |
| "I didn't do it.            Glendale Community College|
| Nobody saw me do it.             Glendale, AZ         |
| You can't prove anything."                            |
|  -Bart Simpson.                                       |
*-------------------------------------------------------*

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

Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5964
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 93 11:37:01 BST
From: ANTHONY KAY BAGGALEY <MCDAPAB@cms.manchester-computing-centre.ac.uk>
Subject: More Star Cruiser

   Firstly, to Loren concerning has message...
 >> (it's Fire Fusion and Steel now isn't it,sounds better for the SpaceOrk
     geeks I suppose).

 > Technical architecture was the working title. We made it FF&S because it
 > sounded better to _US_
              ---------------------------------

 ... I must admit that in my rabid state that possibility never occured to me.
   I picked up so much bad Karma from my original mail that I caught flu bad
   enough to keep me in bed for a week.
    It was well past the bounds of good taste to suggest that GDW might be
   moving into the SpaceOrk zone ( amongst the oldie - ie 20+ year olds- RPGers
   around here it's fighting talk to suggest they use Games Workshop products)
   but that was one of the big worries about TNE, that GDW might go down the
       path of GW. The guns get bigger, then the breasts (both sexes), clothes
   get more revealing, bad guys get uglier, then the next thing you know the
   melee weapons are motorised and the game boxes are too big to fit in a
   carrier bag, not that you buy them 'cos you're too embarassed by the art
   work and can't fight your way through the horde of 12 year olds in the shop
   talking about the correct paint for the Psyho Elf Leader With Nebula Cannon.
 ......ARRRGGHHHH.  Sorry, still feverish from the flu.
   OK, so I trust GDW not to add spikes to Regency Marine Battle Dress,
   (I think :)) it's just that having to live in GW country makes me suspect
   the worst when a company brings out a new, flashier version of a game. My
   problem, not yours.

    Anyway, while in bed I was (by coincidence) looking over 2300 and Star
   Cruiser, (I like most of the background AND rules) and noticed (another)
   suspect rule in Star Cruiser- the fuel consumtion for reaching orbit.
   I'm not talking about the fact that a smaller engine gets you there faster,
   it's simply the fuel consumption I'm unsure about- it requires 1/6th the
   ships mass in Liq. H/O, which seems a little too low for a system like that.

    Does anyone know what the max ISP could be for such an engine, and has
   anyone dealt with interface ships in more detail, ie. VTOL systems, HOTOL
   systems being unusable in some atmospheres?  The whole area is
   a bit bare for a game whose image a partly based on Dropships carrying
   troops too and from planet.

    Also on 2300, concerning GURPS, I've not done any conversions but I tried
   doing a 2300 Hovertank in GURPS Vehicles rules, and it is a reasonablely
   equivalent.  The use of that information depends on how you feel on using
   Hovercraft for such purposes (10 tons and turns like a whale in flight),
   it is probably more sensible to think of them as Vectored Thrust vehicles
   with a hovercraft option to save fuel.
    I've got some guidelines for 3G to 2300 conversion I worked out if anyone
   is interested (or I'm interested if anyone has a better version...)
   and, finally, I worked out that in Star Cruiser, a hex scale of 50 000Km
   gives about the correct ship speed for the .0001G limit, so why did they
   make the hexes 600 000Km? Why did I waste my time working this out? I blame
   Virus.
                   Hope Something in there made sense
                                            Anthony
   Still no .sig
    but how about    Villa- Why do I go, why not Avon?
                     Avon-  Because I am not expendable, I am not stupid....
                            and I am not going.
                                                   -Blakes7

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

Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5965
From: Leif Magnar Kj|nn|y <leifmk@lise.unit.no>
Subject: Re: 2300ad stuff
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 11:12:31 +0200 (MET DST)

Aye, I'm rather interested in 2300AD to GURPS conversion, I guess.  In fact,
I'm so interested that I already have a semi-complete conversion which I made
myself.  This includes conversions of all weapons listed in all the 2300ad
books I have (converted by partially redesigning them using BTRC's Guns, Guns,
Guns!), armor conversions, alien-race writeups, and more.  I'm also working
on an alternative character generation system for GURPS/2300AD which is
slightly inspired by good ol' Traveller (mostly based around first building
an 18-year-old on a combination of point expenditure and dice rolls, and then
optionally taking that 18-year-old through any of a variety of careers --
academic, military, ordinary civilian -- to gather experience); this subsystem
is now about two-thirds finished.

I intend to use this to run a Big Campaign starting some time during this
schoolyear (probably just after Christmas, since there's some stuff left to
be done as well as some external circumstances) -- a campaign with two separate
player groups (one being composed of military personnell fighting you-know-what
you-know-where; the other being a bunch of civilians who will probably end up
as freelance troubleshooters).  I've already got a number of interested
players.

Maybe we should all post our conversion ideas and compare notes?  I have lately
been thinking a bit over whether to use GURPS Vehicles in this campaign...

- -Leif.  (leifmk@lise.unit.no)


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

Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5966
From: Timothy Little <t_little@postoffice.utas.edu.au>
Subject: 2300AD Ship Combat
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 93 11:36:34 EST

> In message 5946, Muir Macpherson <muirmac@ocf.Berkeley.EDU> writes:
>
>>I think the biggest problem is that beam
>>weapons have such a short range.  Considering that most military ships can
>>move 7 hexes in a turn this turns space combat into a "knife fight."  It
>>also means that you can detect a hostile ship long before you can fire
>>on it.
>
> This may make for a strange game, but at least it's logically consistent
> with StutterWarp physics.
>
> Imagine tryig to hit a target from more than one Hex away, when that target
> is travelling FTL using stutterwarp. *long* before the light from your laser
> arrives in the same general vicinity, he'll have moved to a different
> location.

Not quite - the 2300AD combat rules seem to assume that the combats will be
played out inside a star system (where the stutterwarp speed drops below
light).  The drive numbers work out to 20 Mm/s for each warp efficiency.
You would need a very light ship indeed to get to lightspeed (300 Mm/s).

I think they just wimped out because they didn't want to handle the
special considerations of active FTL combat.  Just like they didn't want
to handle inertia, rotation or 3D.  Oh well - it's their game, and if they
want to keep it simplified, that's their business.

> Missiles work by getting as close as they can to the target vehicle; they
> then *spray space* with as many laser beams as the missile can generate.

Not according to my reading of the rules - more seriously, you couldn't get
enough power.  If you want an X in 10 chance of hitting something on the
order of 10s of metres across in a space 600,000,000 metres across, you'd
need a *lot* of lasers.  A few MW just *isn't* enough.

> If the missile is lucky, *one* of those beams will actually intersect with
> the target, causing damage. That's what a to-hit roll is actually
> calculating; you're checking to see if one (out of many) laser beams
> actually passes through the target's current location.

I think it represents exactly what it seems like - the chance that your
targetting systems correctly predicted the exact path of the target and
hit it with a single shot.  For beam weapons of such low power as found in
2300AD, it's better to put all the energy of a 1 minute turn into a single
shot, than to spray the target with negligible flashes.

[...]

> StutterWarping ships don't change their real-space vector in any way; they
> simply "teleport" a short distance away, at a rapid cycle rate, giving
> effective FTL travel. StutterWarp ships don't "accelerate" or "decellerate";
> they simply start and stop moving. StutterWarp movement doesn't have
> momentum or inertia; StutterWarp ships can move instantly and stop on a dime.

Yes, one of the best things about them, in my opinion.  I just wish I had
more information on the restrictions (like why you can't have 2 drives,
only one of which is active at any given time, and more about discharging
and maximum range, and ...).

> (This is why Traveller players objected so strongly to their introduction
> into the TNE universe, btw).
>
> As for changing facings: This is where things start to get nebulous...

You don't say, ...  :-)

> First of all, we beleive that this is currently done using real-space
> thrusters. So, it should still be possible to do "180's in space"; you just
> can't do them instantaneously.

If this is the case, why can't turning be done simultaneously with movement?
As it is, rotation takes away movement points.  The only reason I can see
is that rotation is impossible while the stutterwarp drive is running.
This seems unlikely, for exactly the reason that stutterwarp doesn't change
real-space vectors.

> Secondly, since StutterWarp doesn't change real-space vectors, we believe
> that you should be able to warp in one direction while your ship is pointing
> in a completly different direction. Of course, you can restrict this by
> claiming that the StutterWarp field is aligned with the ships hull, so that
> you can only travel "forward". We're still arguing that one... :-)

Why can't the stutterwarp drive be mounted largely inside a freely-rotating
sphere?  Then you rotate the sphere to warp in a different direction.  This
should be faster than using gas thrusters (or whatever) to turn the whole
ship.

> We've played lots of Star Cruiser combat. The 2300 physics do lead to some
> common tactics; they just aren't like anything you've ever seen before... :-)

You should try working out tactics for stutterwarp in interstellar space.
*Real* FTL.  :-)
(Talk about chasing shadows)

- --
Tim Little

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

Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5967
Subject: TML mesg forwarded for your convenience
Reply-To: traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Administrator)
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 93 10:30:56 PDT
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@sp-eug.com>

Seems you used the reply feature of your mailer, which (on purpose)
sends the message to me alone.  Watch your To: line on your next post.
Don't worry, everyone does this at least once, and I don't mind
forwarding it.

James


- ------- Forwarded Message

Resent: Fri, 03 Sep 93 09:35:29 PDT
Resent: traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Broadcast)
Return-Path: t_little@postoffice.utas.edu.au
Received: from engrg.uwo.ca (nova.engrg.uwo.ca) by sp-eug.com (4.1/3.1.012693-Spectra-Physics Scanning Systems);
        id AA04129 for jamesp; Thu, 2 Sep 93 18:35:32 PDT
Received: by bruny.cc.utas.edu.au id AA29496
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca); Fri, 3 Sep 1993 11:36:34 +1000
>From: Timothy Little <t_little@postoffice.utas.edu.au>
Message-Id: <199309030136.AA29496@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au>
Subject: 2300AD Ship Combat
To: traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 93 11:36:34 EST
In-Reply-To: <9309030033.AA07954@engrg.uwo.ca>; from "TML Admin" at Sep 2, 93 8:30 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]

> In message 5946, Muir Macpherson <muirmac@ocf.Berkeley.EDU> writes:
>
>>I think the biggest problem is that beam
>>weapons have such a short range.  Considering that most military ships can
>>move 7 hexes in a turn this turns space combat into a "knife fight."  It
>>also means that you can detect a hostile ship long before you can fire
>>on it.
>
> This may make for a strange game, but at least it's logically consistent
> with StutterWarp physics.
>
> Imagine tryig to hit a target from more than one Hex away, when that target
> is travelling FTL using stutterwarp. *long* before the light from your laser
> arrives in the same general vicinity, he'll have moved to a different
> location.

Not quite - the 2300AD combat rules seem to assume that the combats will be
played out inside a star system (where the stutterwarp speed drops below
light).  The drive numbers work out to 20 Mm/s for each warp efficiency.
You would need a very light ship indeed to get to lightspeed (300 Mm/s).

I think they just wimped out because they didn't want to handle the
special considerations of active FTL combat.  Just like they didn't want
to handle inertia, rotation or 3D.  Oh well - it's their game, and if they
want to keep it simplified, that's their business.

> Missiles work by getting as close as they can to the target vehicle; they
> then *spray space* with as many laser beams as the missile can generate.

Not according to my reading of the rules - more seriously, you couldn't get
enough power.  If you want an X in 10 chance of hitting something on the
order of 10s of metres across in a space 600,000,000 metres across, you'd
need a *lot* of lasers.  A few MW just *isn't* enough.

> If the missile is lucky, *one* of those beams will actually intersect with
> the target, causing damage. That's what a to-hit roll is actually
> calculating; you're checking to see if one (out of many) laser beams
> actually passes through the target's current location.

I think it represents exactly what it seems like - the chance that your
targetting systems correctly predicted the exact path of the target and
hit it with a single shot.  For beam weapons of such low power as found in
2300AD, it's better to put all the energy of a 1 minute turn into a single
shot, than to spray the target with negligible flashes.

[...]

> StutterWarping ships don't change their real-space vector in any way; they
> simply "teleport" a short distance away, at a rapid cycle rate, giving
> effective FTL travel. StutterWarp ships don't "accelerate" or "decellerate";
> they simply start and stop moving. StutterWarp movement doesn't have
> momentum or inertia; StutterWarp ships can move instantly and stop on a dime.

Yes, one of the best things about them, in my opinion.  I just wish I had
more information on the restrictions (like why you can't have 2 drives,
only one of which is active at any given time, and more about discharging
and maximum range, and ...).

> (This is why Traveller players objected so strongly to their introduction
> into the TNE universe, btw).
>
> As for changing facings: This is where things start to get nebulous...

You don't say, ...  :-)

> First of all, we beleive that this is currently done using real-space
> thrusters. So, it should still be possible to do "180's in space"; you just
> can't do them instantaneously.

If this is the case, why can't turning be done simultaneously with movement?
As it is, rotation takes away movement points.  The only reason I can see
is that rotation is impossible while the stutterwarp drive is running.
This seems unlikely, for exactly the reason that stutterwarp doesn't change
real-space vectors.

> Secondly, since StutterWarp doesn't change real-space vectors, we believe
> that you should be able to warp in one direction while your ship is pointing
> in a completly different direction. Of course, you can restrict this by
> claiming that the StutterWarp field is aligned with the ships hull, so that
> you can only travel "forward". We're still arguing that one... :-)

Why can't the stutterwarp drive be mounted largely inside a freely-rotating
sphere?  Then you rotate the sphere to warp in a different direction.  This
should be faster than using gas thrusters (or whatever) to turn the whole
ship.

> We've played lots of Star Cruiser combat. The 2300 physics do lead to some
> common tactics; they just aren't like anything you've ever seen before... :-)

You should try working out tactics for stutterwarp in interstellar space.
*Real* FTL.  :-)
(Talk about chasing shadows)

- - --
Tim Little

- ------- End of Forwarded Message

------------------------------
Bundle: 493
Archive-Message-Number: 5968
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1993 11:28:32 -0700
From: Muir Macpherson <muirmac@ocf.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: Star Cruiser



>> Subject: STAR CRUISER
>>
>> 	I agree that Star Cruiser is one of the most confusing game put out
>> by GDW.  I assume that the firing arcs are for ships in adjacent hexes, but
>> that's not the only problem.  I think the biggest problem is that beam
>> weapons have such a short range.  Considering that most military ships can
>> move 7 hexes in a turn this turns space combat into a "knife fight."  It also
>> means that you can detect a hostile ship long before you can fire on it.

In message number 5952 Timothy Little <t_little@postoffice.utas.edu.au>
said:

>"Short range" is a relative term.  With each hex representing 600 Mm, it
>means that the accuracy of each weapon is very good indeed.  The Star Wars
>system is considered completely unworkable, and it only needed to deal with
>targets at about 1/1000th the range, and 10000 times slower.

I don't dispute the difficulty of trying to hit something with a laser in
space, but the current system requires so much suspension of disbelief as
it is that I don't have a problem with adding a little more to make the
game more playable.

>> 	The idea I think is that missles are supposed to be the main form
>> of combat, but when you're fighting a Delta Class Kafer battleship the thing
>> is going to close with you eventually. In my experience, all movement stops
>> at this point and the two players sit in the same hex, blasting away at each
>> other with their lasers.

>In my experience, either the human ship runs out of missiles and dies, or
>the Kafer dies.

Very true.

>In custom-designed games, the tactic of choice (after missiles, of course)
>is to have rear-mount weapons and a fast drive.  Oh yeah, and lots of remote
>armed drones.  (In fact, the remote drone situation got so bad that we had
>to limit numbers to keep the game playable)

If you're willing to assign arbitrary limits to the numbers of missiles why
not arbitrarily extend the range of lasers?

>> 	What I have done in my games is to make long range for beam weapons
>> 3 hexes and short range one he  This helps keep ships from parking in
>> the same hex and plugging away at each other.

>I think the main cause of 'plugging away' is not the weapon ranges, but
>the lack of maneuverability of 2300AD ships.

My concern was mostly with small craft that only carry a few missiles and
usually finish the fight with an exchange of laser fire.  What I find
happens is that the two close to the same hex and then take turns rolling
for position and exchaning broadsides.  The problem is that the scale of
the game is so large and the range of lasers so short that when it comes to
the tactical maneuvering of exchaning laser fire the game resorts to
rolling dice for orientation.  Also, by limiting turn radiuss and
acceleration and deceleration it makes it more difficult for two ships, or
more often, two fighters to sit on top of each other.

>> 	I have also experimented with limiting a ships acceleration and
>> deceleration by saying that they from a dead stop they can only move half
>> speed the next turn.  Likewise they can only decelerate to half speed their
>> first turn and must wait until the following turn to come to a complete
>> stop.  Along with this, ships may only change facing by one hex side per
>> hex of forward movement.  This prevents ships from spinning in place and
>> doing 180's in space.

>What's wrong with that?  Do you have a problem with rotation?  I have
>exactly the opposite view - they make rotation too difficult.  They only
>justify it with some washy statement that the drives cause 'inertia'.

Actually I like the idea of "pseudo-inertia" and have chosen to place
greater emphasis on it, for the above reasons.  I, frankly, don't find it
any more absurd than the prospect of a stutterwarp drive itself.

>> 	The net effect is to make combat more swooping and graceful.  The
>> extended range of beam weapons and the limits on turning radius also make
>> the firing arcs that began this discussion all the more important.  :)

>If you want swooping and 'graceful' combat, play a flight sim.  I don't
>see any reason why space combat should share this property, and I dislike
>games that artificially try to introduce it.

This was probably the wrong way to say what I was trying to express.  My
feeling is that it is more interesting when the ships are actually maneuver-
ing to get a shot on each other than merely sitting one counter on top of
the other rolling for position and firing.  Wouldn't you rather see the
jockeying for position that roll represents?  I would.


>Other points:
>Why do they include a 'star' counter and say that ships can move within one
>hex of it?  They explicitly state that stutterwarps fail against a 'few
>tenths of a G'.  By my calculations, the closest a stutterwarp-driven ship
>can approach a star like our Sun is about 10 hexes.  If it gets any closer,
>it can't get out (and will fall into the star in about 18 hours.


>Why do 2300AD power plants supply such *abyssmal* power/weight ratios?
>A current internal combustion engine can supply 1 kW/kg, yet the most
>advanced 2300AD military MHD turbine supplies 10 times less.  Considering
>that power/mass is a major design factor, why not use petrol engines?
>Especially since the cost is about the same.  Worse than that, however, is
>the fuel cell technology - it is exceeded by a factor of 3 in power/mass,
>is more expensive, and consumes more fuel than current technology.

>They ought to run the things on the same LMS batteries that power the laser
>guns.  A 10 MW MHD costs at least 0.7 MLv and masses at least 100 tons.
>10 MW of LMS batteries costs 1700 Lv (0.0017 MLv) and masses 330 kg (which
>is 0.33 tons).  For the same price (0.7 MLv) you get 4200 MW of peak power
>massing 140 tons.  Energy capacity is also good - 7 MJ/kg, halfway between
>MHD and Fuel Cells.  So, *why not*?

>- --
>Tim Little

Maybe MHD turbines are inefficient because they are trying to reduce their
signature?  I don't know, all your points are quite good.  I believe some
- -one made a similar point about Traveller.  He found that it was more
cost and space efficient to use the batteries used with black globes than
to use a power plant.  Go figure.  As much as we try to make out games
_science_ fiction they still require an enormous suspension of disbelief.-

>In message 5946, Muir Macpherson <muirmac@ocf.Berkeley.EDU> writes:

>> I think the biggest problem is that beam
>> weapons have such a short range.  Considering that most military ships can
>> move 7 hexes in a turn this turns space combat into a "knife fight."  It also
>> means that you can detect a hostile ship long before you can fire on it.

In message 5957, C. Harald Koch <chk@alias.com> writes:
>This may make for a strange game, but at least it's logically consistent
>with StutterWarp physics.

>Imagine tryig to hit a target from more than one Hex away, when that target
>is travelling FTL using stutterwarp. *long* before the light from your laser
>arrives in the same general vicinity, he'll have moved to a different
>location.

<stuff about missles deleted>

First of all, stutterwarp combat takes place inside starsystems where
the stutterwarp drive is limited to less than "FTL."  Secondly, your point
about light lag is true of *any* space combat system, not just Star Cruiser.
The common justification is that it is possible to compute the limited number
of possible locations for the ship because of the limits of the ships drive
and the constraints of inertia.

>Making beam weapons have 3 hex range may make the game more playable to you,
>but it's no longer realistic (according to the 2300AD universe).

I do think that my changes make the game more playable, but I disagree about
the lack of realism.

>>         I have also experimented with limiting a ships acceleration and
>> deceleration by saying that they from a dead stop they can only move half
>> speed the next turn.  Likewise they can only decelerate to half speed their
>> first turn and must wait until the following turn to come to a complete
>> stop.  Along with this, ships may only change facing by one hex side per
>> hex of forward movement.  This prevents ships from spinning in place and
>> doing 180's in space.

>You really don't understand StutterWarp physics, do you? :-)

>StutterWarping ships don't change their real-space vector in any way; they
>simply "teleport" a short distance away, at a rapid cycle rate, giving
>effective FTL travel. StutterWarp ships don't "accelerate" or "decellerate";
>they simply start and stop moving. StutterWarp movement doesn't have
>momentum or inertia; StutterWarp ships can move instantly and stop on a dime.

Actually, I think I do understand StutterWarp physics :-)  According to
_The Science of Star Cruiser_ section Star Cruiser: "The activity of the drive
itself at high cyclic rates produces a gyroscopic effect that is referred to
as pseudo-momentum.  It is not true momentum in the Newtonian sense, but
limits the magnitude of immediate changes in direction and velocity."  This
is why stutterwarp ships cannont make infinite changes of facing during
a combat turn.  I have chosen to make this effect more pronounced because
I think it keeps combat more mobile

As to the realism of extending the range, I think by limiting stutterwarp
mobility, and and therefore the possible locations of an enemy ship we can
justify extending the range of lasers.  While we're discussing the limits of
lasers, however, I have to point out that missles are under some pretty
serious restrictions of the same kind.  A missle has to detect a ship, send
this data to the mother ship, wait for the remote pilot to respond, wait
for the message to make it back to the missle, and _then_ fire!  By whick
time the enemy ship is nowhere near where it was when the missile first
detected it.  I suppose we could justify this because missiles "spray space
with lasers" as Harald put it, but I think we have to recognize that
space combat games, or at least Star Cruiser, are only "realistic" as long
as we are willing to suspend disbelief on a number of points.  Since this
is what rpg's are ultimately about, this shouldn't be a problem :-).

Muir Macpherson		muirmac@ocf.berkeley.edu

------------------------------
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==========================
 494  5969 03-Sep-1993 Anthony Neal     Alternative Equipment << Hello all:
 494  5970 03-Sep-1993 Joe Heck         An interesting note from Brilliant Lanc
 494  5971 03-Sep-1993 colin roald      Star Cruiser scale << > As to the reali
 494  5972 04-Sep-1993 Steve Gibbons    RE: Star Cruiser << #Maybe MHD turbines
 494  5973 04-Sep-1993 nosnhoJ enaD     Missiles and Brilliant Lances... << Wel
 494  5974 04-Sep-1993 Bertil Jonell    2300 missiles << > From: Timothy Little
 494  5975 04-Sep-1993 Bertil Jonell    Guns << >   How exactly do the Fail num
 494  5976 04-Sep-1993 RJR96326@VAX1.U  GURPS 2300AD << I concur with other lis
 494  5977 04-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Alien Designs in Trav << Joe asked abou
 494  5978 04-Sep-1993 Bertil Jonell    Lotech Moonshot <<   After thinking abo
 494  5979 04-Sep-1993 Jeff Zeitlin     Droyne Architecture <<   Actually, I wo
 494  5980 05-Sep-1993 Corran J. Webst  Brilliant Lances - Jump Drives << I got
 494  5981 05-Sep-1993 Mark Urbin       Broadsword stats... << I just read in t
 494  5982 05-Sep-1993 nosnhoJ enaD     Ship Architecture & Brilliant Lances <<
 494  5983 06-Sep-1993 Anthony Neal     Striker Program << Hello out there:
 494  5984 06-Sep-1993 Mike Basinger    Three Questions << I have three questio
 494  5985 06-Sep-1993 "Pedro A.C. Tav  STAR CRUISER << A couple of days ago I
 494  5986 06-Sep-1993 "Pedro A.C. Tav  Star Cruiser missiles << I just finishe

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5969
Date: 	Fri, 3 Sep 1993 16:21:09 -0230
From: Anthony Neal <anthonyn@mercury.cs.mun.ca>
Subject: Alternative Equipment

Hello all:

	A little while ago, we were all grumbling about alternative weapons
designs and equipment. I remembered a little series put together by Bertil
called "Machinetools". There are some really neat alternative weapons in that
supplement with great detail. They were designed using 'Guns Guns Guns' design
rules (which I don't have, but the designs are standard!). For those interested
the series begins in bundle file 'bun228' if I remember correctly, and
continues up until bundle 'bun238'.

	And a question to Bertil:

	How exactly do the Fail numbers in that series work? Sounds like
	a really neat idea...

	Oh, and how many editions of Machinetools did you put out? I found
	up to Machinetools 2b, and that's it...

	Another neat design was Marc Alexandrovich Volovic's LGF-56 Laser Body
Pistol TL15, which can be found in the same series of bundles. It was Archive
Message Number 2998, if that helps.

	Ciao,
	Anthony

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5970
Date:         Fri, 03 Sep 93 19:56:00 CDT
From: Joe Heck <CCJOE@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu>
Subject:      An interesting note from Brilliant Lances

The ships are looking more and more like Classic Traveller (at least the way
I had envisioned them) with the removal of thruster plates and less reliance
on the computers, but the part that I thought was interesting:

On the "survey" form included in the box (which asks about both T:TNE and
Brilliant Lances), question no. 5 is

"What science fiction novels or motion pictures would you most like to see
Traveller campaign sourcebooks for?"

I thought it was fascinating, and it provoked a question. What exactly WERE
all the original sources for Traveller Classic?

 joe                          University of Missouri - Columbia
 ccjoe@mizzou1.missouri.edu   (314) 882-5000

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5971
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 93 23:04:35 EDT
From: colin roald <colin@callisto.pas.rochester.edu>
Subject: Star Cruiser scale

> As to the realism of extending the range, I think by limiting stutterwarp
> mobility, and and therefore the possible locations of an enemy ship we can
> justify extending the range of lasers.

It's been a long time since I've played Star Cruiser, but it seems to
me one way to justify limiting mobility and extending range would be
to make the hexes smaller and the turns shorter.  I can't think offhand
of anything else this would seriously break.

>  While we're discussing the limits of
> lasers, however, I have to point out that missles are under some pretty
> serious restrictions of the same kind.  A missle has to detect a ship, send
> this data to the mother ship, wait for the remote pilot to respond, wait
> for the message to make it back to the missle, and _then_ fire!  By whick
> time the enemy ship is nowhere near where it was when the missile first
> detected it.

"Remote Pilot" is a bit strained, really.  It seems clear that your
missile pretty much has to do its own targetting, with some
supplemental data from the mothership. "Firing it" should really
amount to saying yes when the missile brain asks permission to
explode.  Or arming it and saying, fire when ready.  [The targetting
computer on the mothership would serve to continuously extrapolate
out-of-date information up to "now", for tac-board display.]


- --
colin | to create, you must destroy--smash a glass and cry, too much joy!
roald |                                                 (too much joy)

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5972
Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1993 01:18:30 -700
From: Steve Gibbons <steve@aztech.com>
Subject: RE: Star Cruiser

#Maybe MHD turbines are inefficient because they are trying to reduce their
#signature?  I don't know, all your points are quite good.  I believe some
#- -one made a similar point about Traveller.  He found that it was more
                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
#cost and space efficient to use the batteries used with black globes than
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
#to use a power plant.  Go figure.  As much as we try to make out games
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

That would be me.  :)  Anyway, it's slightly more complicated than that...
Cost, space/volume, EM signature, and duration all have to be factored in to
the design.  (Aside from bending the rules.)  It's worth noting that for
"long-term" conflicts (those over the combat duration of battery/capacitor
equiped fighters) those same fighters that fared so well for the first 20-odd
turns will have a decided disadvantage...  (So bring LOTS of them!  [always a
good idea, anyway])

It all boils down to tactics, I guess.  (I happen to prefer the jump-tender
approach: blaze in (hide the jump-tender), kick butt, regroup, and split -
letting someone else mop-up.) Better yet is a defensive action - blow the
invading snots away with imbedded defenses that they can't attack.

ObTNEconcept: TCS style conflicts between TL 8+ pocket-empires.  I think it'd
be a blast, especially with relic technology involved (Can you imagine the
maintenance costs?  Can you imagine the benefits?)

Just thought...

- --
Steve@AZTech.COM

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5973
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 93 01:25:31 -0700
From: dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov (nosnhoJ enaD)
Subject: Missiles and Brilliant Lances...


Well, I've got it and I, for one, am impressed.

HOWEVER...

How come there aren't any rules for Missile bays?

What's the Mj per mass for a laser at TL X?  How come you can't put a
TL 15 laser system in a bay (and, presumabely, get thyself a 2500 Mj or 5000
Mj laser system?)

I never examined the starship rules carefully in the TNE rules, so the lack
of Fusion and Plasma guns as starship weapons didn't bother me.  Anybody
know why they've been yanked?  Ditto for Particle Accelerator Barbettes...

How come all the "variant" ship types (ie, a variant Beowulf *admittedly*
not as useful!)?

I had thought some of these questions would be answered by the ship
construction system, but I guess not.  Anybody know if the Technical
Architecture Manual is going to have design stuff that deals with the
Laser Bay-type questions?

Oh, yeah:  What's the *volume* of a missle?  It masses 7 tonnes and "...may
be carried in cargo spaces...", but I'm having no luck reverse engineering
it from the turret and barbette volumes...

Consider:

turret vol:42 kl. loaded mass 28.4 tonnes; 300000km Lasercom at TL8
is .110 kl and masses .22 tonnes.  One workstation: 7 kl and .2 tonnes
mass.  <Not weight, as the table on page 12 suggests :)>  So, left over
to contain the missiles is:  34.89 kl and 27.98 tonnes.  2 missiles take
up 14 tonnes mass, leaving 13.98 -> 14 tonnes left.  (ie, each missile,
and attendent handling equipment ends up massing 2x as much as one
missile)...And with a vol of 2.5 x missile mass in kl gives 2.5 x 7 x 2
= 35 kl.

All well and good...

Barbette vol:  84 kl loaded mass 70.4; 300000km Lasercom at TL 8
is .110 kl and masses .22 tonnes.  Terminal: 7 kl and .2 tonnes.
Missiles and attendent equip take 76.89 kl and 69.89 tonnes.  Assuming
the 5 missiles take up 2 x # missiles x mass, this gives us 5 x 7 x 2 = 70
tonnes (correct) and assuming vol is 2.5 x missile mass gives 2.5 x 5 x 7
 = 87.5 kl != 77 kl :/

BUT:  2.2 x 5 x 7 = 77 kl && 2.2 x 7 x 2 == 30.8 != 35kl

Even if one of those kludges had worked, Do we then assume that exactly
half of the computed volume is missile and half is "other equipment"?
(ie, 1.25 or 1.1 x the missile mass, resulting in 8.75 kl or 7.7 kl
missiles, respectively...)

And what if you put in a TL *15* turret, and thus use a 300000km
lasercom that only displaces .007 kl and masses .014 tonnes?

Anybody? Anybody?

Dane

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5974
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: 2300 missiles
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1993 13:42:21 +0200 (MET DST)

> From: Timothy Little <t_little@postoffice.utas.edu.au>
> Subject: 2300AD Ship Combat
>
> > In message 5946, Muir Macpherson <muirmac@ocf.Berkeley.EDU> writes:
> > Missiles work by getting as close as they can to the target vehicle; they
> > then *spray space* with as many laser beams as the missile can generate.
>
> Not according to my reading of the rules - more seriously, you couldn't get
> enough power.  If you want an X in 10 chance of hitting something on the
> order of 10s of metres across in a space 600,000,000 metres across, you'd
> need a *lot* of lasers.  A few MW just *isn't* enough.

  If the missiles work as in TNE they are powered by a nuke so the energy
will not be an issue. A 1kt charge can power 42000 100,000,000 joule beams
(although this could be reduced to one tenth or less because all energy won't
 impact the xray rods)

- -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: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5975
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Guns
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1993 14:15:29 +0200 (MET DST)

> 		How exactly do the Fail numbers in that series work? Sounds like
> 		a really neat idea...

  The fail number is taken directly from 3G 2nd ed and is the percentage
risk that a single shot will fail to fire for some reason. I was planning
to include a table on how to determine if it was a dud, jam, critical or
explosion, but never got that far.

  The thing that I hadn't solved was how to do this for bursts (other than to
roll for each round fired...) but in a d20 system it is possible to recompute
a straight chance for each length of burst.

> 	Oh, and how many editions of Machinetools did you put out? I found
> 		up to Machinetools 2b, and that's it...

  Checking my files I have 5 files about (in order revolvers, pistols, rifles,
brinn weapons and one named 'extra') and that's it. The chain of events as
I remember it was that the first series I put out gave birth to mumblings
about that the weapons were too heavy, so I had to remake all of them, and
in the middle of this Guns! Guns! Guns! 3rd edition came out, and after I
made the change people started to talk about that MegaT was on the way out.

  The trouble when doing this is that you have one weapon at several TL's
that uses several different type of ammunitions, and each type of ammo will
have a different performance on each TL.

> 	Ciao,
> 	Anthony

- -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: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5976
Date:    Sat, 4 Sep 1993 11:14:22 -0500 (CDT)
From: RJR96326@VAX1.UTULSA.EDU
Subject: GURPS 2300AD

I concur with other list members who have mentioned it, that GURPS Vehicles
as an excellent and complete set of vehicle design rules that is pretty
realistic. You can sesign anything from Battlesuits to Star Cruisers
(though I haven't reality-checked those yeat :-)

I rather like the Range mods in GURPS. Yes, they shoot up and down very
quickly, but the Guns skill is easy to improve, and if you take into account
the various technical items that can compensate, as well as correctingoma
automatic fire. . .I agree, it's not elegant and the number crunching gets
out of hand at higher levels of destruction, but I still like it.

J Roberson

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5977
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Alien Designs in Trav
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 93 14:06:30 CDT

Joe asked about the Droyne ships.  So, here's some ideas I've been
collecting on alien designs.  Some of it has appeared in the TML
before, but I've rewritten bits of it.  Copyright 1993 Scott
Kellogg

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

FLIGHT CONTROLS

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

VILANI
     Vilani controls are a bit more automated.  Auto pilots tend
to be a bit more sophisticated (and are heavily relied on)  The
control lay out is on the clumsy side.  Design engineers opted for
a single design to ease training of pilots and to avoid their
having to study their ship to understand what is going on.  Thus
the same control panel exists on the Vilani Fat Trader as exists
on their most sophisticated fighters.  This greatly reduces stress
on pilots as the panel they learn to fly with in Dad's Air/Raft is
identical to the one they might fly in the Imperial VF-102 Rippers
Advanced Fighter Wing.  The compromise design is a good one, but
any compromise in engineering tends to lessen performance.
     Vilani pilots are generally seated to the right of the copilot
allowing the copilot the use of his or her right hand for central
control panels common to pilot and copilot thus freeing the pilot
of some of the awkward control spacings during critical maneuvers.
     Vilani attitude controls look like a cross between a control
yoke and motorcycle handle bars.  Rudder pedals are not present as
they are in Solomani designs, and yaw control is linked to the
handle bars.  The bars control yaw in a similar manner to
motorcycle bars.  (This makes a cross controlled 'slip' maneuver
somewhat more difficult in Vilani aircraft)  But it simplifies the
controls for most normal flights.  The throttle is mounted on the
left handle bar as if it were a motorcycle.
     All Vilani aircraft have cross control landing gear.  While
advanced controls would allow for high speed taxiing, Vilani Air
and Starports are simply not built to allow high speed taxiing.
Strict ground speed limits are vigorously enforced by Port
Authority at Vilani ports as offenders will often roll off the
tight curves and narrow tarmac and sink into soft ground.


IMPERIAL
     Imperial designs tend to vary from region to region, but tend
to be a fusion of Vilani and Solomani designs.  The actual design
used seems to be a function of proximity to Terra or Vland, but
that is not the only factor as many regions were settled far from
their point of origin.  Example:  The Spinward Marches, though far
from Terra, has a high percentage of Solomani racial and cultural
stock and tends to follow Solomani design patterns.


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


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


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


DROYNE
     Droyne controls are one of the most unusual.  A wide variety
of psionic controls are also encompassed under Droyne designs, but
primary flight control input is taken from the pilots wings.
Attitude controls are mounted beside the pilot.  At Tech Level 8
and above, they are low level infra-red sensors that sense the
position of the pilot's wings and tail.  Though the Droyne
generally have great difficulty in flying, they do still possess
the equipment for rudimentary flight, and the instincts to do
so(though buried).  To raise the nose of the ship, the pilot would
increase the angle of attack of his wings.  The sensors see the
change in wing angle and perform the maneuver.  If the pilot raises
his right wing, the ship will bank left, and so on.
     Below Tech Level 8 controls consist of mechanical linkages
which are stapped to the pilot's wings and tail.
     Throttle controls are more conventional:  a lever mounted in
the center of the panel.
     The Ael Yael, while unable to build their own ships will
commonly adapt control panels to this type of configuration.
     While Dolphin crewed ships are uncommon, flight control
systems have been built to their specifications using these type of
body position sensors for control of attitude and propulsion
systems.


HIVER
     The Hiver controls are balls mounted with control studs.
This is the form best suited 'ergonomically` to their limbs.
Hiver controls are very difficult for anyone but a hiver to
operate.  Thus, many of their ships employ dual control panels,
to allow for a member race to use them.  The Federation Member
control panels are similar to Aslan designs, though the
indentation in the control globes is not so deep as the Aslan
half gloves.  This arrangement allows the hiver better control
than he would mangage with a Solomani design.

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

     Human ship designs (above Tech Level 9) tend to evoke the
image of ocean going ships.  Relatively few decks exist, but those
decks tend to be large and flat, parallel to the direction of
travel, making the image of a ocean liner travelling though space.
This design, while comfortable for human living, is inefficient in
terms of energy.  It requires that the ship must maintain both
internal gravity and inertial compensation during engine burns.
Zhodani designs tend to disdain the use of staircases due to the
fact that their taller build make stair climbing more
uncomfortable.  However, gravitic lifts adequately compensate for
this.
     At Tech Level 9, inertial compensation and artificial gravity
are not available.  Thus, the ship tends to resemble a skyscraper
with many floors all perpendicular to the direction of travel.  In
this manner, the engine thrust provides the `artificial gravity'.
     Large military ships (including Zhodani), and designs that do
not land, take advantage of this towerlike structure.  Thus, such
a ship may divert power from the gravitic and inertial compensation
systems in an emergency without disrupting operations overmuch.
(Example:  Azhanti High Lighting).
     Droyne ships all tend to follow the towerlike structure.
Droyne are far more comfortable with the more three dimensional
layout of the tower.  A common design feature on Droyne vessels are
long low gravity tubes which run the length of the ship.  These are
not lift tubes per se, but flight tubes.  The lower gravity of the
tubes allows even those incapable of flight the ability to fly
easily but they are not so disoriented by the total lack of
gravity.  Also of note is the fact that Droyne maintain the
internal gravity of their ships at about half that of a Human ship,
as that is one of their "G's".

BTW, whoever designed the Type M Subsidized Liner's deck plans
clearly gave no thought to this.  The ship never lands, and has
maneuver drives of only 1 G of acceleration.  Yet, the layout
requires inertial compensation AND internal gravity.  If he'd
rotated the deck plans 90 degrees, both problems would have been
simplified.  (sigh)

Scott 2G Kellogg
BTW, Congratulations to Mrs. Doctor Metlay on recieving her PhD.
Hip!  Hip!  Hooray!  :-)

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5978
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Lotech Moonshot
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1993 23:21:26 +0200 (MET DST)

  After thinking about it some more I'll put my money on the nuclear
detonation method. The advantages of it is that the coarseness and
excessive weight of the lowtech system can be offset by the brute force.

  The disadvantage of it is that you need a number of nukes and I'm not sure
about the minimum tech requirements for nukes. I suspect however that you
need nitrated explosives of some form, and the extraction of 235 will
be a *real* bitch.

  They are bound to have to conscript the locals for labour, probably
by posing as gods, but this carries with it its own special problems:
Different priests might worship different characters and any hint of
differences in opinion between the PC's might lead to religious wars.
It is also possible that the priests of one faction will try to assassinate
the gods that they percieve are enemies to their own god.
  (Not so far fetched as it might sound: in many polytheistic religions
the gods wern't immortal, infallible and infinitly mightier than humans)

  And humans are smart and adaptible. Sooner or later technology will start
to leak out and then all bets are off.

- -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: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5979
Subject: Droyne Architecture
From: jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Date: Sat,  4 Sep 93 18:00:00 -0500

  Actually, I would tend to think that Droyne architecture would
  tend to triangles and hexagons in the plane (such as in the jump
  grid on their starships), and geodesic domes and icosahedra in
  threespace (the ships themselves, buildings, and so on).
  Structurally, this kind of construction minimizes material while
  maximizing strength and area/volume.  There is also the example
  of their own "rib" structure; I've read suggestions that body
  structure will have a large influence on the way that a species
  would "design" its environment.  Notice, for example, that the
  human rib cage is a series of arches, with the sternum as the
  "keystone" of the arch.

  Just flinging out random ideas...
==========================================================================
Jeff Zeitlin                                      jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com
- ---
 ~ QMPro 1.50 41-4533 ~ OK, I'm weird! But I'm saving up to be eccentric.


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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5980
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 93 10:57:50 PDT
From: Corran J. Webster <cwebster@math.ucla.edu>
Subject: Brilliant Lances - Jump Drives

I got hold of Brilliant Lances on Friday, and was reading the ship design
sequence, and I noticed the comment:

Important note: The smallest jump drive possible, at any tech level, is
2 cubic metres in volume.

Now the way that the volume of a jump drive is calculated is (1 + jump)%
of the volume of the hull. This implies that you can fit a jump-1 drive
into an 8 ton hull (ie. 112 cubic metres) and you can fit a jump-6 into
a 3 ton hull.

This is:

a) A mistake - should it perhaps read 2 tons (28 cubic metres)?

b) A _major_ retcon.

Even if it should read 2 tons, this means that ships under 100 tons
displacement can be jump capable - a 30 displacement ton ship can hold
a jump 6 drive.

Can anyone at GDW clarify?

On the other hand, the game itself seems quite good - I haven't yet got
to play it, but it is well-presented, the rules are fairly clear, the
ship design sequence is welcome (although why the 18 pages couldn't have
been squeezed into the TNE rulebook, I don't know).

There are a couple of other minor quibbles - for instance in the design
sequence there tends to be very little description of equipment and materials.
This is OK for veterans who know what Dynamic Linked controls, Bonded
Superdense etc. are, but it could be confusing for a new player.


See ya 'round
Corran

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5981
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 93 15:51:59 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@interlan.interlan.com>
Subject: Broadsword stats...


I just read in the GDW post that the Broadsword class Mercenary Cruiser
should have J3/M3 stats.  The J1/M1 listing in the TNE source book was in
error and that it would be corrected in Brilliant Lances.
  I picked up my copy of Brilliant Lances today and on page 30, the Broadsword
Class Merc Cruiser is listed at J3/M2.
  Is the M2 really right or is this the first bit of Brilliant Lances errata?

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Urbin  Racal-Interlan   Boxborough, MA  These opinions are mine.
"Constitutional rights may not be infringed simply because the majority of
the people choose that they be." -U.S. Supreme Court in Westbrook v. Mihaly
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5982
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1993 19:39:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: nosnhoJ enaD <dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov>
Subject: Ship Architecture & Brilliant Lances


On the subject of Errata, Page 12, the Crew Positions/Seats has a column
labeled "Wt" -- Short, of course, for "Weight". :/  <Yes, this is a nit>


Re: Imperial and (general) human ship architecture...

What about the whole "holo-dynamic" concept, where the controls are
entirely computerized and, therefore, configurable.  The general sense of
MegaTrav (realistic or not :) was that every modern ship had such systems.
Certainly such systems are nearly in our reach now (although whether we'd
trust such a system built with today's technology is another question
entirely...)...Of course, ours wouldn't be holographic :/

Oh, yeah:  Although the "position sensing" idea is neat, wouldn't the
Dolphins use their neural jacks?


Re: Source material for Traveller:

_The Mote in God's Eye_, Niven & Pournelle

_Foundation_, et al, Isaac Asimov

Everything H. Beam Piper wrote, specifically _Space Viking_, the Fuzzy
   stuff, _Uller Uprising_, and _The Cosmic Computer_, plus short stories.

_Ensign Flandry_ and sequels, Poul Anderson

Those would be my first guesses.  Anybody else?

Dane

traveller@llnl.gov
djohnson@willamette.edu
TNS Stringer ------------ Terra/Solomani Rim (1827 G867975-8)
"I'm not a real scientist, but I play one in an RPG."


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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5983
Date: 	Mon, 6 Sep 1993 05:39:25 -0230
From: Anthony Neal <anthonyn@mercury.cs.mun.ca>
Subject: Striker Program

Hello out there:

	I have been fiddling around with the program called 'Striker'. I have
been trying to re-create MT laser weapons with the program and have had little
luck. In particular, I have no idea if a hand laser is PULSE or BEAM in good
ol' MT. Anyone got an idea? BEAM seems ludicrous to me, but it seems to work
better than the PULSE rules.

    Also, is the power pack for a TL13 Laser Pistol supposed to cost Cr350?
seems awfully cheap to me in comparison to the other weapons. It seems that as
ammo weight goes down by a factor of 2 in other laser weapons, the price goes
up by a factor of two. Should TL13 Laser Pistol ammo pack read 'Cr3500' maybe?

	Anyhow, Thanks to Bertil for his response to the Machinetools question.
I've got all parts of it, and I'm putting it together in WP for my group
( don't worry, your name is mentioned prominently throughout, so as to
guarrantee your credit ;-) ) as a source.

    Ciao,
	Anthony

	(anthonyn@mercury.cs.mun.ca)

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5984
From: Mike Basinger <dbasinge@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Three Questions
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 08:43:11 -0500 (EST)

I have three question about Traveller:TNE and the Traveller Universe
in general.

1. Races: Is it possible for players to play races other than human.
The only rules I can find for the different races is for NPC.

2. Cybernetics: Has any one made rules cybernetics for Traveller:TNE.
No, I do not want Traveller to become a cheap Cyberpunk clone, but
some cybernetic may be interesting in the game.

3. Star Map and Sectors: Where can I find a more detailed Star Map of
the Traveller Universe. Also, are any of the old Sector Books still in
print?

Thanks,
Mike

- --
D. Michael Basinger: 	Not speaking for Indiana University
			dbasinge@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu
			dbasinge@arapahoe.ucs.indiana.edu (NeXT Mail)

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5985
Date: 	Mon, 6 Sep 1993 12:39:16 -0400
From: "Pedro A.C. Tavares" <ftavares%ptearn.bitnet@utcc.utoronto.ca>
Subject:      STAR CRUISER


A couple of days ago I supported that stutter warp should not be limited by
conventional inertia rules (ie (de)acceleration).  But after lookong at the
dogmatic fashion people are supporting this idea I would like to point out
that stutter warp is a completelly imaginary device.  there is not a single
experiment or even theory (at least that I know of) that deals with the concept
of ftl travel.
What this means is that it is equally valid to say that a stutter warp ship
can go to full warp instantly as it is valid to say that it has to
accelerate to get there.  there may be some kind of resistence imposed by
the 'warp medium' or whatever.


- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro A.C. Tavares

Faculdade de Ciencias - Universidade de Lisboa

Email: ftavares@ptearn.bitnet
       ftavares@ptearn.fc.ul.pt
       pedro@eltn.utwente.nl
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Bundle: 494
Archive-Message-Number: 5986
Date: 	Mon, 6 Sep 1993 14:17:30 -0400
From: "Pedro A.C. Tavares" <ftavares%ptearn.bitnet@utcc.utoronto.ca>
Subject:      Star Cruiser missiles


I just finished reading the latest tml messages and would like to make a
comment on the use of detonation missiles:
As far as I understood the standard procedure for using a missile consists in
sending it to the target, receiving the info relayed by the missile and then
telling it to fire.
Since distances are pretty big the missile would have to work on his own,
following the target between relaying the information and receiving the order
to detonate.
Another problem this procedure posses is that when relaying information to
the remote pilot (operator seems more convinient) the missile becomes quite
visible to the enemy.  Using of very tight beam doesn't improve this for 2
reasons: (i) again because of the large distances involved the remote
operator's ship will move between the moment the missile relays the message and
the moment the ship receives it.  therefore the beam couldn't be all that
tight.  And (ii) since the missile is suppose to infiltrate enemy 'territory'
the message could easilly be picked up by a ship (other than the target).

It seems that a better (safer) use of missiles would be to rely on
preprograming and expert systems that locally control the missile's actions.
The missile could still receive new orders but it would never transmit (unless
ordered to).  Tasks like identification of targets would be left to other
probes (note: these probes could tell the missiles where to fire at).

What do you think of this?

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro A.C. Tavares

Faculdade de Ciencias - Universidade de Lisboa

Email: ftavares@ptearn.bitnet
       ftavares@ptearn.fc.ul.pt
       pedro@eltn.utwente.nl
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------
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==========================
 495  5987 06-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Droyne Architecture << Jeff Zeitlin sag
 495  5988 06-Sep-1993 Mark Urbin       Technical question on Brilliant Lances.
 495  5989 07-Sep-1993 pihlab@cbr.hhcs  RE: Star Cruiser missiles << "Pedro A.C
 495  5990 07-Sep-1993 pihlab@cbr.hhcs  JUMP Torpedoes << skellogg@lonestar.uts
 495  5991 07-Sep-1993 Yngve Larsson    2300AD Space travel & combat << Star Cr
 495  5992 07-Sep-1993 Joe Heck         Jump Drives & TNE << Corran:
 495  5993 07-Sep-1993 gwh@lurnix.COM   Re: Droyne Architecture << Scott Kellog
 495  5994 07-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  RE: Ship architecture << > From: nosnho
 495  5995 07-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Traveller Inspirations << What were the
 495  5996 07-Sep-1993 Dave K. (603     TNE & Brilliant Lances << I spent a lit
 495  5997 07-Sep-1993 nosnhoJ enaD     Far Frontiers... << Does anybody know i
 495  5998 07-Sep-1993 Kelly St.Clair   Re: Traveller Inspirations << Scott (2G
 495  5999 08-Sep-1993 RJR96326@VAX1.U  I know what I know << OK, I just want t
 495  6000 08-Sep-1993 Bob Simpson      Re: Traveller Inspirations << > What we
 495  6001 08-Sep-1993 kirsch@rhea.inf  Brilliant Lances << I've got Brilliant
 495  6002 08-Sep-1993 ANTHONY KAY BAG  StarCruiser Scales <<   I always liked
 495  6003 08-Sep-1993 Steve Deemer     Re: Traveller Inspirations << E.C. Tubb
 495  6004 08-Sep-1993 staats@Athena.M  Request for Reviews << Greetings!

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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5987
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Droyne Architecture
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 93 12:06:52 CDT

Jeff Zeitlin sagt:
>   Actually, I would tend to think that Droyne architecture would
>   tend to triangles and hexagons in the plane (such as in the jump
>   grid on their starships), and geodesic domes and icosahedra in
>   threespace (the ships themselves, buildings, and so on).
>   Structurally, this kind of construction minimizes material while
>   maximizing strength and area/volume.  There is also the example
>   of their own "rib" structure; I've read suggestions that body
>   structure will have a large influence on the way that a species
>   would "design" its environment.  Notice, for example, that the
>   human rib cage is a series of arches, with the sternum as the
>   "keystone" of the arch.

Hum.  I don't see much of human anatomy in something like say:  The
Space Shuttle.  Nor do I see it in a Saturn V.  Nor do I see it in a
Sapwood ICBM...  Ariane...  Mir... Skylab... Abrams MBT... F-14 Tomcat
Nimitz class carrier...  Los Angeles class fast attack sub...  MiG-29
Fulcrum...

The laws of engineering don't change, vertibrates need a good internal
structure, and so are governed by those laws.  But the things we build
are not constrained to only those solutions which have been solved by
evoloution.  Humans and other advanced alien societies do not adapt
themselves to fit their environment, they adapt their environment to fit
themselves.  (For the most part)  A space ship is not bound by evolution.

Cubic structure, most commonly found on earth, is nicely easy to build,
but I don't think that there is anything intrinsically cubic about human
beings.  (Though I Do know humans who are best described as squares...)

But yes, body structure Will have an influence on the design of
environment.  If you are only 1.5 meters tall, you don't need 2.6 meters
of head room on your decks.  If you have wings, you will design spaces
in such a way that flight is comfortable.  If you have a tail, you will
cartainly have a space for said tail designed into your chairs.  But
these differences will primarily be shown in how work stations and
floor plans will work out.

The only real descriptions we have to work from are the descriptions of
the Ancients stuff as found in, Twilight's Peak, Secret of the Ancients
and DGP's little thing on Antiquity.  Now the interesting thing about
those, I would say, is that the function of Ancient Artifacts should be
a lot more self evident to a Droyne than it would be to a human.  Think
about THAT.  Also, in Secret of the Ancients, we have a good descrption
of an Ancient's starship.  THAT is an example of Droyne Architecture.
So maybe Droyne Architecture IS completely weird from human (Imperial)
eyes.

I would suggest that the Zhodani seem to know a lot more about the
Droyne than the Imps do.  Their jump grids are similar.  Zhos use
triangles, while Droyne use hexagons.  The patterns are very similar.
Take 6 triangles, glue em together and you've got a Hexagonal Droyne
grid.  (Maybe theres something weird psionically about a hex or triagonal
grid).

Speaking of Jump drives, I haven't got Brilliant Lances yet, but I hope
that it was NOT a misprint about a 2 cubic meter jump drive being the
minimum rather than 2*(whatever a displacement ton is).  A 2 cubic meter
jump drive will now allow such a drive to be installed into the enlarged
TNE missiles, so we can now build Jump torpedoes again.
- --
Scott 2G Kellogg
"Kellogg is just plain nuts!"  -- H. Beam Piper


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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5988
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 93 22:15:57 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@interlan.interlan.com>
Subject: Technical question on Brilliant Lances...


On page 1 of Brilliant Lances, it states, "streamlined hulls may skim gas
giants but may not land on planetary surfaces with atmospheres greater
than Thin;"   On page 19, the hull configuration of the Scout/Courier is
given as "Wedge SL".  I read this as saying a Scout can not land on a planet
with a standard atmosphere (Earth for example).  Please point out to me
any mistakes I have made here.

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  \      oo    				Mark Urbin   Racal-Interlan
   \____|\mm   "Vouf, Vouf!"		These opinions are mine, no one
   // //\ \_\  				will claim them...
  /K-9/  \/_/  				urbin@interlan.com
 /___/_____\   				eclipse@world.std.com
 ----------- 	  Where am I going and what am I doing in this handbasket?
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5989
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 1993 13:38:28 +1000
From: pihlab@cbr.hhcs.gov.au
Subject: RE: Star Cruiser missiles


"Pedro A.C. Tavares" <ftavares%ptearn.bitnet@utcc.utoronto.ca> says:
>It seems that a better (safer) use of missiles would be to rely on
>preprograming and expert systems that locally control the missile's actions.
>The missile could still receive new orders but it would never transmit (unless
>ordered to).  Tasks like identification of targets would be left to other
>probes (note: these probes could tell the missiles where to fire at).
>
>What do you think of this?

It would be nice to plug the holes in the game BUT that's not how the
game works.  I believe that AI type missiles are mentioned in one of the
Mags for 2300AD and that they are WORSE than remote controlled ones at
hitting the target.

What ranges are we using in TNE for the TNE DETONATION missiles and how
come TNE can use lasers and energy weapons while 2300AD must go
toe-to-toe?

Bruce...      pihlab@cbr.hhcs.gov.au


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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5990
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 1993 13:43:07 +1000
From: pihlab@cbr.hhcs.gov.au
Subject: JUMP Torpedoes


skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg) says:
>Speaking of Jump drives, I haven't got Brilliant Lances yet, but I hope
>that it was NOT a misprint about a 2 cubic meter jump drive being the
>minimum rather than 2*(whatever a displacement ton is).  A 2 cubic meter
>jump drive will now allow such a drive to be installed into the enlarged
>TNE missiles, so we can now build Jump torpedoes again.

That would be nice ... or would it?

Oh NO!  Interstellar war from your lounge room.  Bombard the s**t out of
your enemy without even leaving the comfort of your own planet 8^}

Bruce...      pihlab@cbr.hhcs.gov.au


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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5991
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 93 11:02:27 +0200
From: yngve@softlab.se (Yngve Larsson)
Subject: 2300AD Space travel & combat

Star Cruiser/Spaceflight ponderings:

1 ly = 9.46E15 m, 1 AU = 1.50E11 m

warp 1 = 1 ly/day = 1.10E11 m/s = 110E6 km/s
	interstellar/deep space speed (1 MHz stutter => 110 km jumps)

warp 1 = 0.645 AU/day = 1.1E6 m/s = 1100 km/s
	interplanetary/near space speed (1 MHz stutter => 1.1 m jumps)

If warp 1 will move a ship 1 hex per 30 s turn, each hex is 33000 km
(NOT 600000 km as stated in the books). Also, one AU is 4500 hexes
(NOT 250 as stated in the books).

warp 1 will move	1 hex/turn
			2 hexes/minute
			120 hexes/hour
			2880 hexes/day (= 0.64 AU/day)

Sol's surface is at 700000 km = 21 hexes from Sol's core

Sol's 0.1 G gradient (maneuver efficiency cutoff) is at 11.6E6 km =
350 hexes

Sol's 0.1 mG gradient (FTL efficiency cutoff) is at 366E6 km = 11100
hexes = 2.47 AU (3.8 days travel at warp 1).

In effect, the 0.1 G gradient is at 3.16 times the 1.0 G gradient
and the 0.1 mG gradient is at 100 times the 1.0 G gradient.

Another star's cutoff radius is (Sol's radius * sqrt(Stellar_mass in Sol's))

Earth's surface is at 6380 km (within 1 hex)

Earth's 0.1 G gradient is at 20000 km (starships may not enter Earth's
hex)

Earth's 0.1 mG gradient is superceded by Sol's, but is at 638000 km =
11 hexes anyway

I.e. normal travel time to/from the FTL gradient and Earth is
2.29 days/warp = 55 h/warp

THUS, the scales given in STAR CRUISER are completely bogus.

THUS, we will not have the problem with long range missiles (since each
hex is only about 0.1 lightsecond, we can have reasonable control over
missiles at ranges of up to at least 50 hexes, i.e. a 5 second delay. Of
cause, I still think that missiles need considerable amounts of autonomy,
and remote piloting is more like assigning targets and pressing "fire enable")


On the subject of stutterdrive inertia, I feel that if you WANT to introduce
inertia, you could motivate it with:

1)	The stutterdrive frequency cannot be changed from 0 Hz to <n> MHz
	instantly - it must be gradually tuned over a period of time.

2)	Neither can the stutterdrive tunneling distance be changed from
	zilch to <whatever> with the flick of a switch.

This requires a Stutterdrive ship to 'accelerate' and 'decelerate' more or
less as in Newtonian maneuvers. Of cause, if you do NOT want this, you can
claim that the times involved are VERY small compared to the game scale.


As to the problem of ships doing 180's in space, consider this:

The Jerome drive propels a ship in a certain direction, usually along the
long axis of the ship (this is not stated anywhere, I just made it up, but
I think it seems reasonable). To change stutterwarp travel direction, you
have to rotate your ship. This is obviously easier for small ships than for
very large ships.

A quick-and-dirty rule for this is that any ship whose LARGEST profile is
positive must spend (move or not-move for inertialess universes) that number
of movement points between each facing change. Believe me, this makes a
battleship a LOT less agile than a fighter.


I have never considered Power Plant effectiveness compared to Real-world
systems, so I refrain from commenting on those.



	Yngve

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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5992
Date:         Tue, 07 Sep 93 13:05:28 CDT
From: Joe Heck <CCJOE@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu>
Subject:      Jump Drives & TNE

Corran:
Now the way that the volume of a jump drive is calculated is (1 + jump)%
of the volume of the hull. This implies that you can fit a jump-1 drive
into an 8 ton hull (ie. 112 cubic metres) and you can fit a jump-6 into
a 3 ton hull.

This is:

a) A mistake - should it perhaps read 2 tons (28 cubic metres)?

b) A _major_ retcon.

Scott2G:
Speaking of Jump drives, I haven't got Brilliant Lances yet, but I hope
that it was NOT a misprint about a 2 cubic meter jump drive being the
minimum rather than 2*(whatever a displacement ton is).  A 2 cubic meter
jump drive will now allow such a drive to be installed into the enlarged
TNE missiles, so we can now build Jump torpedoes again.

I don't think this is such a major retcon... If you look at the overall
picture of Brilliant Lances, it seems to be "classic traveller" stuck into a
hex pattern instead of using a milimeter scale. As for the Jump Drives...
it's going to change some things in traveller, but all _that_ much. The
leviathan merchant cruiser had those "jump Torpedoes" which I loved, and
missed in MegaTrav.  The Merchant cruiser is, of course, from Classic
Trav...

Seems to me like GDW is not doing too many retcons, but more going back to
what a lot of folks called "the good ole days" of Traveller. The combat
reflects it, the names reflect it, and the "guts" of the system seem to
reflect it. It's obviously not going to be the same, since megatrav and
especially DGP put the "flash" back into Traveller - so now we're expecting
that quality of writing again.

But hey, they're all just my opinions anyway.

 joe                          University of Missouri - Columbia
 ccjoe@mizzou1.missouri.edu   (314) 882-5000

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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5993
Subject: Re: Droyne Architecture
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 93 12:36:47 -0700
From: gwh@lurnix.COM


Scott Kellog writes:
>Hum.  I don't see much of human anatomy in something like say:  The
>Space Shuttle.  Nor do I see it in a Saturn V.  Nor do I see it in a
>Sapwood ICBM...  Ariane...  Mir... Skylab... Abrams MBT... F-14 Tomcat
>Nimitz class carrier...  Los Angeles class fast attack sub...  MiG-29
>Fulcrum...

Of those, the Saturn V, the Sapwood, and Arianne are the only ones
not significantly affected by human anatomy and anthropometrics.

The Space Shuttle has to be big enough for three things: Big cargos
due to DOD specifications, wings for crossrange capability in re-entry,
and a seven-man habitation space up front.  The hab space is very much
dependent on human size.

Mir was sized to be the minimum space two people can comfortably
live in for 6-9 months.  Skylab's interior was broken up into spaces
based on what human size could handle, in terms of operating machinery and
such.  The Abrams MBT is that size and shape muchly to fit the people
in... trust me, crew position is one of the hardest issues in armour
design...  The F-14 Tomcat was sized to carry three payload items to
Mach 2.4 off a carrier deck: a large radar, a bunch of big missiles,
and _two flight crew and their work stations_!  Of those, the crew
are arguably the largest item, and the canopy the crew are under is
quite a bit of total aircraft supersonic drag.

The Nimitz is that size because of the number of aircraft it needs to
carry and the size of those aircraft.   The size of those aircraft
to a large degree determines overall size.  The Los Angeles would
be a lot different if its crew were a lot smaller or larger; you need
a certain crew size to keep everything operational, and that drives
some pretty painful relationships as larger crew require more space
per crew which requires more machinery which requires more crew...

>The laws of engineering don't change, vertibrates need a good internal
>structure, and so are governed by those laws.  But the things we build
>are not constrained to only those solutions which have been solved by
>evoloution.  Humans and other advanced alien societies do not adapt
>themselves to fit their environment, they adapt their environment to fit
>themselves.  (For the most part)  A space ship is not bound by evolution.

Yes, and the rules on which advanced societies build things are carefully
and closely linked to things like size.  Try spending time in Japan for
instance; the average Japanese person is several inches shorter than
in the US, and they have smaller buildings (in all dimentions, and not
just a little) and vehicles than we do.  Lots smaller.

- -george william herbert



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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5994
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: RE: Ship architecture
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 93 15:57:17 CDT

> From: nosnhoJ enaD <dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov>
> Re: Imperial and (general) human ship architecture...
>
> What about the whole "holo-dynamic" concept, where the controls are
> entirely computerized and, therefore, configurable.  The general sense of
> MegaTrav (realistic or not :) was that every modern ship had such systems.
> Certainly such systems are nearly in our reach now (although whether we'd
> trust such a system built with today's technology is another question
> entirely...)...Of course, ours wouldn't be holographic :/

Well, there are control panels and control panels.  I was speaking mainly
of how different races would build their joystick controls.  Sure you can
have a holographic panel with reconfigurable positions for all the buttons,
but have you ever tried a flight simulator from a keyboard?  SURE you can
do it, but it is a LOT harder.  And a joystick is not something that can
be 'created' by a hologram.

> Oh, yeah:  Although the "position sensing" idea is neat, wouldn't the
> Dolphins use their neural jacks?

The only reference to neural jacks I've seen says they were TL 15.
(What does TNE say?  Anybody know?)
Dolphins (stuck in TL 14 Solomani space) may have to do without.
My idea came from the assumption that that is similar to the way that
the Type D Battledress and grav belts work (Though those would certainly
work with mechanical body postion sensors.)

Dolphins in Trav have fingers on their pectorals which is supposedly how
they operate their waldoes.  But the original contact article isn't very
specific & has no illustrations.  It makes no mention of neural jacks.
Actually, the way the original Contact article was written makes a Dolphin
starship crew Extremely unlikely.  They come off as intelligent animals
rather than people.  They are a long way from being on the level of
Brinn's _Startide Rising_.
- --
Scott 2G Kellogg
"Kellogg is just plain nuts!"  -- H. Beam Piper



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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5995
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Traveller Inspirations
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 93 16:13:22 CDT

What were the original inspirations for Traveller?

Poul Anderson would have been my first mention.  Here's the guy who
came up with the original stories for at least three alien races in
Traveller.  Vargr are cribbed from the Adziriho of _Hunters of the
Sky Cave_.  Virushi are cribbed from the Wodenites of the Van Rijn
Space Traders  (along with the Merchant Princes).  And the Ael Yael
are cribbed from the Yithri.

There are other things (like the Imperium from Flandry stories)
The Long Night... etc.

Dane gave a pretty good list, Niven, Asimov, H. Beam Piper,
I would emphisize Jerry Pournelle more, _West of Honor_, _King
David's Spaceship_.

James White's _Sector General_ stuff also seems to be inspriational to
Trav.  (Excellent stuff!)

Heinlein's _Starship Troopers_.

L.Ron Hubbard's _Ole Doc Methusela_.

Olaf Stapledon's _Sirius_.  (Heavily influence on Vargr phychology)

All of Stanley G. Weinbaum's short stories!  (Trrrweeeeerrrlll!  :-)

Frank Herbert's _Dune_.

While it was not an influence in the CREATION of Trav, I would have
to list Lois McMaster Bujold as a fantastic source of inspiration for
Refs.  I just started reading her stuff (thanks Rob & Colin)  All of
it has been very Travelleresque so far.  Good clean fun!

And I suppose while I'm at it I may as well list some excellent authors
who aren't very Trav, just cause I Like 'em.

Arthur C. Clarke.
James P. Hogan.
Clifford D. Simak.
Tom Clancy (I know, not SF, but great stuff anyway.  And he sure
influenced the 4.5th Frontier War.  :-)
- --
Scott 2G Kellogg
"Kellogg is just plain nuts!"  -- H. Beam Piper


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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5996
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1993 16:52:32 -0400
From: d_kennard@unhn.unh.edu (Dave K. (603) 862-2000)
Subject: TNE & Brilliant Lances

I spent a little time with TNE & Brilliant Lances (BL) over the weekend,
and had a few questions, comments and criticism. This isn't
comprehensive, especially since I haven't actually played the games
either for roleplaying or boardgaming. I just wanted to get this out and
get some feedback.

First, a major point: The design rules for BL say that only airframe
(AF) hulls can land on planets with atmosphere more than Thin;
streamlined (SL) hulls can only skim gas giants and land on
no-atmosphere planets. This would be fine, except that the sample
designs include a bunch of ships that historically have been
planetary-landing-capable but now show as SL. This includes launches and
other ship's boats. Thus, according to the rules: Scouts and Traders
(among others) neither land nor carry boats capable of landing. This
would sure put a damper on exploration and trading in an environment
where all the orbital ports have been trashed. There are two obvious
fixes. (1) Give rules for SL hulls landing and taking off slowly,
inefficiently, and with little maneuverability compared to AF hulls, or
(2) redo most of the common ships into AF designs. The first is
obviously better. There should be different flight characteristics for
SL and AF, but SL ships should be able to at least minimally function.
I'd still want airframe for any ship *my* character used, of course...

Second, also on the subject of sample designs: Designs that show up in
both the TNE book and in BL vary from one another, sometimes in fairly
significant ways. Make sure you're using the variant you think you are.

Third: Bays, turrets and ship weapons are presented in BL as a "small
sample" of possibilities. Will there be a more comprehensive list or
design process? Also on this subject is the interesting point that
spinal weapons (like jump drives) are not explicitly forbidden from
smaller vessels. The limit seems to be that if the weapon fits (some are
quite long) it can be used. I haven't yet tried to see how small a
vessel can carry such things.

Fourth, I would have liked to have seen a couple of "standard packages"
listed, e.g. a typical set of sensors and communications for typical
vessels and uses (trader, explorer, military). As it is, I need to know
more about the ship combat system than I want to for the RPG, and I'm
dependent on sample ships that have errata and design flaws.


I guess that's about enough for now except to say that overall, despite
the above comments (and plenty of other problems and features I don't
like), I do like quite a bit about both TNE and BL. My regular gaming
group pretty much wrote off the original Traveller in the late '70s as
hopelessly crippled -- we just didn't find much at all to like about it,
and this is a group that for many years stuck with FGU's Space Opera and
its errors, inconsistencies, silly bits, and FGU's usual abysmal
proofreading. MegaTraveller didn't win us back in the 80s (though I took
some stuff from it). TNE seems at least playable. I may end up primarily
using a homegrown system, but I'll be heavily influenced by TNE. If
Fire, Fusion & Steel is well enough done that I can model the technology
I want, and if some of the gaps in TNE and BL are filled, I might even
find myself running the game relatively straight -- though based on my
own history I have to doubt that.  :)


Dave Kennard
Dave@unh.edu

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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5997
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1993 14:48:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: nosnhoJ enaD <dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov>
Subject: Far Frontiers...


Does anybody know if FASA got around to publishing the Far Frontiers
sector?  And, sort of connected, does anybody know where 'Freedonia' is?

Dane

traveller@llnl.gov
djohnson@willamette.edu
TNS Stringer ------------ Terra/Solomani Rim (1827 G867975-8)
"I'm not a real scientist, but I play one in an RPG."


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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5998
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 93 19:32:25 PDT
From: kstclair@CSOS.ORST.EDU (Kelly St.Clair)
Subject: Re: Traveller Inspirations


Scott (2G) Kellogg claims that three of Traveller's aliens are drawn from
  the works of Poul Anderson - the Vargr, Virushi, and Ael Yael.  I've read
  very little Anderson, let alone those stories, so I can't confirm or deny.
  But I *have* read a lot of Larry Niven, another name on the source list,
  and I've always felt that another three species were inspired by him.

One thing to note is that none of these three is a direct copy:  there are
  a lot of differences.  But there are also similarities.

Pierson's Puppeteers, the cowardly, social herbivore with a very *alien*
  body structure (two heads, brain in the body, two front legs and a single
  back one) and a talent for grand/subtle manipulation, were split up among
  the Hivers and the K'Kree.  The Centaurs got the diet, the attitudes,
  the gregariousness (and the approach to building starships, to some
  extent) and the mostly-quadruped body, while the Hivers got what I think
  is the better part of the deal, the talent to shamelessly manipulate
  interstellar societies for their own ends.  Also the odd number of limbs
  and all that.

Any feline race tends to be written alike, so maybe the Aslan aren't *really*
  like the Kzin.  For one thing, in an interesting reversal, the females are
  not only sentient but sometimes more 'civilized' than the warrior males.
  Also, although the Ftierle came to blows with Humans in the past, they
  don't seem to show the same headlong 'scream-and-leap' agression-over-
  strategy that was the Kzinti trademark.  The evidence here is inconclusive.


If anyone can find better sources, let me know.

- -------------------------
Kelly St.Clair (Daydreamer)
kstclair@kira.csos.orst.edu

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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 5999
Date:    Wed, 8 Sep 1993 3:45:25 -0500 (CDT)
From: RJR96326@VAX1.UTULSA.EDU
Subject: I know what I know

OK, I just want to clarify how little I know about Traveller and get a
few terms straight, as well as confirm/deny some assumptions I've made.

I own Megatraveller and 2300AD (the revised, expanded version of the
ubiquitous Traveller:2300 that had little in common with its progenitor
other than name and company). I have never played Classic Traveller; I
have always assumed the only difference was no Rebellion. I have Knightfall,
Traveller:the Early Years, and a couple of 2300 sourcebooks.

I don't know any specifics about aliens outside of the base information
given in MT. BUT, it seems to me that since Solomani, Vilani, and Zhodani
are all Humaniti, the physiological constraints on ship design would be
similar. Even if one allows them to be of slightly different sizes, they
would be proportianately alike.

As for controls, I rather imagine that given the range of space, most
contact and conflict will occur outside visual range, leading control of
ships to be more akin to modern naval combat, as simulated by Harpoon and
Red Storm Rising (the latter being a computer game). Meaning that rather
than a joystick, dynamic controls for the display of information and
operation of multiple ship functions will be used.

Just my $.02
J Roberson

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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 6000
Subject: Re: Traveller Inspirations
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 93 01:55:35 -0700
From: Bob Simpson <simpson@netcom5.netcom.com>

> What were the original inspirations for Traveller?

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned 'Dumarent of Terra' by E.C. Tubb.

As a boy, our hero stows away on a Far Trader's ship. The old captain
has a soft spot and (instead of spacing him) takes him under his wing.
Many years later the captain dies. Dumarest is God-knows where in the
multi-cultural galaxy and decides to return to Earth, to which everyone
replies "Earth? Mythical Earth?  You're joking, right?"

He travels from from planet to planet in Low Passage (occasionally
High), and frequently must rely on his knowledge of Blade Combat to
survive.

Every book leads us to a new an strange world, with Dumarest trying to
find passage to the next world on his journey to Mythical Earth. Many
of the planets/cultures he encounters could be described in UWP codes
trivially.

Nearly every book of the 50? 60? could be a Traveller adventure
setting.  A number of the terms and situations are directly reproduced
in the Traveller rules.  Coincidence? You decide...

- --
Bob Simpson <simpson@netcom.com>
1182 W. Olive Ave.
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
(408)738-1359

Bon-vivant, man-about-town, tech writer for hire.

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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 6001
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1993 12:22:44 MET_DST
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: Brilliant Lances

I've got Brilliant Lance on monday this week. A big thanks to GDW that they
managed to send it to Germany at once. I would really enjoy it, when all the
other Traveller stuff find its way to germany equally fast.

My comments:
I like the combat rules, because they are very detailed. Best thing I see,
is the emphasis on Sensor tasks. I really welcome the new missile rules.
They are much more realistic, though the new missiles are similar to a
autopropelled mine. Place them somewhere, and when an enemy closes in,
start the missiles engine and kill him. (Especially usefull in szenarios
where you have to defend a limited area, i.e. Scenario 5)

I do like the new spinal weapons. I understand they could be fitted in every
hull, which can contain them, and which can support enough energy. Look at
the Chrysanthemum-Classer Destroyer Escort (p.37 Tech.Book). Two spinal
mounted Particle Accelerator. Boooaaaahh aaayyyee...Wow... BTW., I think
I have seen this design - at least deck plans of it - in the archives
on sunbane. Am I wrong ?

I don't like the limited TL ranges (compared to MEGATRAVELLER). No more
TL 17+ stuff like desintegrators or repulsors. I hope this will be fixed in
Fire, Fusion & Steel.

What I would like to see are more drones, missiles, probes etc. to use
with the ships. I think these things are treated a bit short. (Again F,F&F?)

Questions:
- - Okay, I've skipped the comments about streamlined hulls very fast. The
  only thing a SL hull can't do, and an AF can is to land aerodynamically
  without using the contra-grav lifters. My opinion is: All ships using
  contra-grav lifters can indeed land on planet surfaces. Perhaps not AF
  hull need some more time, because athmospheric speed is limited.
  Yeah, it's true, I will allow USL ships using contra-grav to land on
  planets. The difference is, they will need 3 combat turns (1.5 hours)
  to land.
- - Nuc Damper in turrets can be used again one missile. Where are the old
  Nuc Damper screens, who work against all missiles?
- - Can someone clarify the rules about workstations to me? What's the difference
  between a bridge and a simple workstation? Does an auxiliar bridge consist
  of bridge workstations? How many workstations do I need to form a bridge?
  For every command crew member one bridge workstation? For every other operator
  a workstation? Are seats included in the workstations?
- - Where are the Air Locks gone to? I don't find them in the design sequence.
- - Why are Densitometer and Neutrino Sensors so weak. In MEGATRAVELLER they are
  the state-of-the-art passive sensors. In the Brilliant Lances rule, they
  can be used only to evaluate suns and planets, not ships.
- - Is HRT (p.7 Tech Book) part of the EMS Passive array?
- - Can a couple of minor hits be summed up to a major hit? If I got that right,
  when a system is hit, which can only sustain one minor hit, it is destroyed.
  You only need 10 damage points to do this. If you have a damage of 40 you
  would score a major hit. Because the system only need a minor hit to be
  destroyed, you have 30 damage points left, to use otherwhere. So no problem
  if the damage is to big. But what to do, if the damage is to small. Assume
  the Power Plant can sustain 2 major hits. If the power plant gets a minor hit,
  there is a 50% chance of a system reset or a performance degrade. Okay, but
  what happens on the next minor hit?
  In short: Can I destroy the power plant by minor hits?

That's all for the moment,

Juergen

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de


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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 6002
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 93 10:40:42 BST
From: ANTHONY KAY BAGGALEY <MCDAPAB@cms.manchester-computing-centre.ac.uk>
Subject: StarCruiser Scales

  I always liked the idea of changing the hex-scale in SC to make it match
 2300AD ( sorry about suggesting the value of 50,000km per hex- that comes
 from my use of 1 AU/day/warp for insystem travel, not multiplying by 0.645
 was my blow for 'Sensible Numbers in Role-Playing').
  I'd just like to mention that GDW knew that the SC scale was wrong, I
 remember it being mentioned (in Challenge?) as an example of a game that
 messed up the scale deliberately. I think 'just to have reasonable length
 turns' was the implied excuse, but they why they picked 600,000km may never
 be known...
  I far as I can tell Yngve Larsson was the first person to mention the real
 pain in 2300AD space travel- calculating Interstellar Travel times accurately.
  ie. since In-system travel is so much slower it can add several days to an
  interstellar trip, and to work out HOW long you need to know the mass of the
  star and the orbit of the destination planet. If PCs ever do large amounts
  of interstellar travel you soon ignore it (like almost all written material
  did) or use an average value and realise why Traveller Jump Drive was such a
  good idea.


  NOT 2300AD
    Concerning Neural Interface and Dolphins, I seem to remember the old JTAS
   article allowed Neural Interface to the Waldos at TL13. The Neural Interface
   certainly stuck in my mind, because it was the first time I'd seen such a
   thing in Trav, but I may well be completely wrong (AGAIN).

                            Thanks for the time.
                                    Anthony
  Desperately Seeking .sig

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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 6003
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 93 09:18:18 MDT
From: stedee@stedee.Auto-trol.COM (Steve Deemer)
Subject: Re: Traveller Inspirations


E.C. Tubb's Dumarest of Terra series was THE original inspiration
for the original three-book, black-boxed Traveller game. Lots and
lots of the detail in those first three books came from the Dumarest
series, including the concept of a "traveller", an adventurer who
made his way from planet to planet, looking for enough credits to
buy passage off planet on the next free trader.

Traveller borrowed directly high, middle, and low passage, slow drug,
fast drug, mesh armor, free traders, subsidized traders, psionics (and
it's underground status), and all kinds of other details, using the
exact names and descriptions given in the Dumarest books. I first read
the Dumarest books after I'd had Traveller for some years, and I thought
I was reading a rather blatent, uncredited ripoff of the Traveller rules
and concepts.

As Traveller developed, it picked up other detail from other sources.
Poul Anderson has already been mentioned as the inspiration for many
of the alien races that developed later (although GDW did change the
names and some detail. I suppose someone had had them look up the definition
of "plagery" by then ;^) ).

Steve Deemer
stedee@auto-trol.com

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

Bundle: 495
Archive-Message-Number: 6004
From: staats@Athena.MIT.EDU
Subject: Request for Reviews
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 93 09:44:25 EDT

Greetings!

	Now that the smoke has cleared a bit on the new line of Traveller
products, what are the *recommended* sourcebooks and supplements to buy?  (Like
many of the folks on the net, I started playing Traveller when it was the series
of black books.)  A better question might be . . . which products would you
absolutely *not* get if you knew at the time of purchase what you know now?

	Thank you in advance!

	Rich

------------------------------
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==========================
 496  6005 08-Sep-1993 helm@geology.uc  Re: Droyne Architecture << ...Scott Kel
 496  6006 08-Sep-1993 Grant Sinclair   FarFrontiers << Hi, this is a submissio
 496  6007 08-Sep-1993 Mark Urbin       more Brilliant Lances stuff and a Trave
 496  6008 08-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Anatomy vs. Architecture << George sez:
 496  6009 08-Sep-1993 nosnhoJ enaD     Even More Brilliant Lances :/ << Re:  S
 496  6010 08-Sep-1993 James Kundert    Streamlining problem... << My take on t
 496  6011 09-Sep-1993 RJR96326@VAX1.U  Quick Questions << 1)What is the "4.5th
 496  6012 09-Sep-1993 Adrian Hurt      Re: Anatomy vs. Architecture << skellog
 496  6013 09-Sep-1993 kirsch@rhea.inf  RE: Brilliant Lances << Well, at first
 496  6014 09-Sep-1993 Mark Urbin       Brilliant Lances stuff yet again... <<
 496  6015 09-Sep-1993 "Ed Sharpe"      Re: Traveller Inspirations << >Scott (2
 496  6016 09-Sep-1993 gwh@lurnix.COM   Re: Anatomy vs. Architecture << Scott w
 496  6018 09-Sep-1993 S_DMOODY@pstcc.  Achitecture, Anantomy, Aslani, and Varg
 496  6019 09-Sep-1993 Brian Makens     The horror..the horror << Well, I thoug
 496  6020 09-Sep-1993 Curtis Peer      Brilliant Lances control fix << Hello,
 496  6021 09-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Starship Design << J Roberson sez:
 496  6022 09-Sep-1993 Dave K. (603     sources... << _Starwolf_, classic space
 496  6023 09-Sep-1993 nosnhoJ enaD     Bwaps... << Perusing the old JTAS artic
 496  6024 10-Sep-1993 RJR96326@VAX1.U  Controls << One more note on control la

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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6005
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1993 13:48:28 -0800
From: helm@geology.ucdavis.edu
Subject: Re: Droyne Architecture


 ...Scott Kellog wrote:
>>Hum.  I don't see much of human anatomy in something like say:  The
>>Space Shuttle.  Nor do I see it in a Saturn V.  Nor do I see it in a
>>Sapwood ICBM...  Ariane...  Mir... Skylab... Abrams MBT... F-14 Tomcat
>>Nimitz class carrier...  Los Angeles class fast attack sub...  MiG-29
>>Fulcrum...

 ...and George Herbert replied:
>Of those, the Saturn V, the Sapwood, and Arianne are the only ones
>not significantly affected by human anatomy and anthropometrics.
> <Rest of text deleted for brevity's sake>

First, I believe the original comment was (to paraphrase): there is a
correlation between architecture and anatomy.  However, none of the
items that Scott listed are architecture in the classical sense, but
vehicles.  I think the original comment was specifically referring to
buildings, not to vehicles...

Second, the examples that George used to rebut Scott were all based
on ergonomics.  I certainly won't argue that form must/should/does
follow function (to quote a famous deceased architect), because I
agree.  But I believe that the original comment of
        <building arch> = <human arch/torsal structure>
was _not_ making the connection between form and function.
Instead, I viewed it as a simple connection between shapes;
the point made was that a species' architecture would be based on
some structural aspect of that species' shape.

        Myself, I think that the connection between building arch and
human arch is stretching it a bit.  It's only one example, and there
don't seem to be any more (not that I can think of, but hey, I'm just
a brain dead grad student...).  Not only that, but the sum total of
human architecture is extremely diverse.  Zulu and Mongols built
round "houses" with conical tops.  Iraquois built the origianl "quonset
huts," which we so copiously copied during WWII here in the States.
Plains Indians built Teepees, which are conical.  Egyptians, Aztecs
and Incas built pyramids.  It seems that most simple geometric shapes
get used by humans.  The examples are more numerous than I want to
put in a post...
        So I will stir the pot some more...  ;->  ;->  ;->  I would argue
that architectural shape of buildings has far more to do with the
building materials available than anything else.  Think about it:
the original quonset huts are half cylinders bacause that's the shape
you get when you bend a bunch of saplings and cover them with birch.
When you live in places where trees are abundant (and the culture has
advanced past the bronze age) you get square houses (with peaked roofs
in areas where it snows) - like most of Europe.  The arch is found
whenever people are building with stone, because it solves the problem
of tension failure in rocks - it's a shaped based on the property of the
material, no more, no less. Let's skip the rest of the examples, as I'm
sure everyone can figure them out for themselves.  :->

        I'm not going to touch vehicular design with a ten foot pole.    ;->
Besides, I agree essentially with George.

ttfn!
Catie, brain dead grad student
Catie Helm
Stable Isotope Lab, Geology Dept, UC Davis
helm@geology.ucdavis.edu


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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6006
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1993 20:40:27 +0930
From: Grant Sinclair <grant@cleese.apana.org.au>
Subject: FarFrontiers

Hi, this is a submission for TML.

"nosnhoJ enaD" asks if Far Frontiers was ever published. The rimward 8
subsectors of Far Frontiers were published in Ares magazine, Special
Edition 2, in a 9 page article.  I believe that the work of FASA was
set only in this half-sector, so the missing coreward half should not matter
(the missing half is all, or virtually all, part of the Zhodani Consulate).

The author was Dale L. Kemper and the article copyright is 1984. I do not have
an original copy, so I cannot supply much further information.

The article includes parts of some states (particularly the Trelyn Domain)
which are the work of Chuck Kallenbach III in the original Paranoia Press
version of the Vanguard Reaches sector.  That version of the Vanguard
Reaches has now been superseded, so that alone makes part of the Far
Frontiers article out of date. If you are a member of HIWG, you should be
able to get the latest version of his docs, which include some material
related to Far Frontiers.

There is also a HIWG analyst working on this sector. He does not have
Internet access, but I can e-mail you (or anyone else) his address if you
wish to correspond with him. Note that he, like me, lives in Australia.
(What are we supposed to call "real" postal addresses these days? I have
seen "land mail", which is inaccurate if you live overseas, and "hard mail"
which I don't like).

Freedonia is Far Frontiers 1827, according to this article.

- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grant Sinclair                         "Women... you can't live with them...
grant@cleese.apana.org.au               Pass the beer nuts"   Norm, "Cheers"
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------


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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6007
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 93 17:26:37 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@interlan.interlan.com>
Subject: more Brilliant Lances stuff and a Traveller source



  A few more nits about Brilliant Lances.

  1.  Page 48, You can't build the Military boat or the Rampart Fighter.  They
	both use the 144-Mj `Laser Lance'.  No stats on the Vol or Mass of
	those puppies.  It's not listed with the other ship mounted weapons.

  2.  Page 35 The Fiery Class Escort is an Airframe design.  It can land on
	planets with an atmosphere greater than thin.  It's External grapple is
        only streamlined rated, as is the 30 ton Military Gig that is
        supposed to dock there.  According to the rules, the gig would have
        to be detached and left in orbit before the mother ship could enter
        the atmosphere.

  3.  Page 9, weapons section.  Bays are mentioned, but that's about it.  No
	rules about them or what goes in them.

  4.  Page 10, weapons section.  No volume listing for missles.  This is
	needed to allocate space for spares when ship building.  It's also
	needed to recalculate the performance of the Rampart figher when
	carrying missles.  It has USL grapples for up to four missles.

  5.  The Broadsword class Merc Cruiser probably is limited to M2 given it's
	hull armor value of 28.

  Sources for Traveller:  H. Beam Piper comes to mind right off.
	Check out his book `Space Viking'.  The Sword Worlds come right from
	here.  This book is of extra value to those using the TNE setting.


- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  \      oo    				Mark Urbin   Racal-Interlan
   \____|\mm   "Vouf, Vouf!"		These opinions are mine, no one
   // //\ \_\  				will claim them...
  /K-9/  \/_/  				urbin@interlan.com
 /___/_____\   				eclipse@world.std.com
 ----------- 	  Where am I going and what am I doing in this handbasket?
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6008
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Anatomy vs. Architecture
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 93 17:04:43 CDT

George sez:
> Scott Kellog writes:
            ^^^
GRR!  Didn't I just have a fit about this last time!  Scott 2G Kellogg!
;-)

[Analysis of size of crew affecting design deleted]

I agree.  Size of crew is definitely a factor, that's why all of the
Mercury Astronauts were under 6' tall.  But that was not my point.
My point was that, one should not look to the anatomy of the race
building the ship to see how it will be laid out.  A Droyne ship will
not necessarily look like it was cribbed from an anatomy chart for
a Droyne any more than Human anatomy appears in the Space Shuttle,
Saturn V etc.  Just because the sternum of the human looks like the
keystone of an arch, that does not mean that all human doors will
look like arches.

Morphology however, will CERTAINLY have an effect on design layout.  You
don't need stairs if you have wings.  Or if you are a fish, you will
need a water filled ship.  The size and shape of your hands and eyes
affect the control inputs & displays you have.

> Yes, and the rules on which advanced societies build things are carefully
> and closely linked to things like size.  Try spending time in Japan for
> instance; the average Japanese person is several inches shorter than
> in the US, and they have smaller buildings (in all dimentions, and not
> just a little) and vehicles than we do.  Lots smaller.

HA!  You wanna see different scales of engineering?
Try living with a woman who's eight inches taller than you!  |->
I come in at 5'6".  My fiancee' (from Germany) comes in at 6'2".
Now, she's 5" shorter than the average Zhodani and a foot shorter than
the average Aslan.  I can only imagine what THEIR architecture would
be like!  WHEW!

However, Anthropometrics won't be so different for Human vs. Droyne
architecture.  Droyne vary in height from 1 to 2 meters depending on
caste and function.  Thus they'll be roughly on the same scale we are.

Furthermore, we are trying here to see what sort of major changes one
might see in Human vs. Droyne architecture.  Scale does not, in my
opinion make such a major change.  After all, a giant 1950's Buick
still looks an awful lot like a tiny 1990's Honda.  4 wheels,
2-4 doors, front engine, rear drive wheels...  And when you look back
in history, (when Japan had less of a meat diet and average height was
even smaller), The Yamato *looked* pretty dang similar to the Missouri.
Scale doesn't account for the changes we're looking for.

Oh yeah,
Dane sagt:
> And, sort of connected, does anybody know where 'Freedonia' is?

Wasn't that the planet ruled by the Marx Brothers?  :-)
- --
Scott 2G Kellogg
"Oh Freedonia!
 Now don't you cry for me!
 'Cause I'm comin' round the mountain
 With a banjo on my knee!"  -- Groucho & Chico



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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6009
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1993 15:57:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: nosnhoJ enaD <dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov>
Subject: Even More Brilliant Lances :/


Re:  Streamlined Hulls and Planetary landings....

Perhaps CG would allow such a ship to land fairly easily, while AF would
dispense with the necessity of such a "hi-tech" answer, providing an
actual lifting body...Whatever the answer, I think we ought to come up
with *some* suggestion, since it's a major problem:  Scout/Couriers,
Gazelle Close Escorts, Broadsword Merc Cruisers, and Far Traders are all
affected!

Re:  Weapons, Weapons and More Weapons...

Not only are the weapons "a small sample" of what there are, some of the
ships are designed with weapons not on the tables.  The Kinunur sports 700
Mj Laser Turrets, while the Armed Gig and Rampart Fighter are equiped with
fixed "144 Mj Laser Lances" (Perhaps the inspiration for the game's
name?)....I find this rather irritating...:/

As for spinal mounts and small ships:  the Chrysanthemum has *two* of 'em!
I wonder if GDW could be...prodded/asked to clarify the
spinal mount rules as given?


Overall, I think it's going to play fairly well, but I still feel like I
need more design info.  I agree with whomever was wondering why the *16*
page design sequence couldn't have been squeezed into the core TNE
rulebook.  Maybe they could have left out one (or both!) of the
Introductory Scenarios? <hint, hint>

Dane

traveller@llnl.gov
djohnson@willamette.edu
TNS Stringer ------------ Terra/Solomani Rim (1827 G867975-8)
"I'm not a real scientist, but I play one in an RPG."

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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6010
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 93 22:29:51 PDT
From: James Kundert <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>
Subject: Streamlining problem...

My take on the Streamlining problem:
The presence of CG Lifters improves a starship's streamlining by
one class for the purposes of landing and skimming.

 WITHOUT CG Lifters:
 Airframes may land/take-off in atmospheres.
 Streamlined hulls may skim from upper atmospheres, but may land only
  on worlds with minimal or no atmosphere.
 Unstreamlined hulls may not operate in atmospheres, or rather, may not
  attempt any operations across the "re-entry barrier".

 WITH CG Lifters:
 Airframes may land/take-off in atmospheres, joy-ride in gas giants, etc.
 Streamlined hulls may land/take-off in atmospheres, but may not
  perform in excess of Mach 1 (depending on atmospheric pressure).
 Unstreamlined hulls may skim from upper atmospheres, and may land on
  worlds with little or no atmosphere, assuming they have landing gear.

 Note that CG Lifters do not allow the higher class of operation to be
done at the same SPEED that the actual hull could do.  A Streamlined CG
landing will be a much more careful operation than an Airframe landing
(even without CG), and Unstreamlined skimming is not for the
faint-hearted at any time.

This "fix" is really the only reason CG is in the rules, IMO.  There
is little reason for its inclusion otherwise.  Such a system invented
solely for the ability to get a 1G ship off the ground is silly and
wasteful.

James Kundert <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>

There was a young lady named Bright,
Whose speed was much faster, much faster than Light.
She departed one day in a relative way,
And returned on the previous Night.
   --Albert & the Heart of Gold

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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6011
Date:    Thu, 9 Sep 1993 2:15:01 -0500 (CDT)
From: RJR96326@VAX1.UTULSA.EDU
Subject: Quick Questions

1)What is the "4.5th Frontier War" ? Is it related to the Nth interstellars?

2) What does HIWG stand for?

J Roberson

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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6012
From: adrian@cee.hw.ac.uk (Adrian Hurt)
Subject: Re: Anatomy vs. Architecture
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 93 9:27:01 WET DST

skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg) writes:
>
> George sez:
> > Scott Kellog writes:
>             ^^^
> GRR!  Didn't I just have a fit about this last time!  Scott 2G Kellogg!
> ;-)

As I mentioned in a rather facetious message before, one possible reason
for the above mistake is that the following line is what appears in the
header of the bundle:
>  496  6008 08-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Anatomy vs. Architecture << George sez:

If you threaten James Perkins with a tactical nuke, or bribe him with enough
money or alcohol, he might fix this problem.
;-)

> My point was that, one should not look to the anatomy of the race
> building the ship to see how it will be laid out.  A Droyne ship will
> not necessarily look like it was cribbed from an anatomy chart for
> a Droyne any more than Human anatomy appears in the Space Shuttle,
> Saturn V etc.

I believe a lot of aircraft and ships are built with a sort of rib-like
framework, with a "skin" covering it.  Nowadays, the "skin" is metal, but
the ribs are often still there.

My guess is that Droyne vehicles will be likely to have a geodesic framework.
Humans have tried this, and it works rather well - one example was the
Vickers Wellington bomber of WW2.  For some reason, though, the rib-like
framework is still used.

And I have no idea what a Hiver spaceship will look like. :-)

- --
 "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: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6013
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1993 12:36:43 MET_DST
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: RE: Brilliant Lances

Well, at first some additions to my last message:
1. The additions for workstations are on the additional clarification and error
   correction paper (only one page!) it adds the comments I needed.

2. I finally found the Air Locks on p.15 TB under Environmental equipment.

3. A new question:I can't find the crew conditions on the player aids card. On
   page 26 of the Rule Book (RB) under "surprise" the rules state, that the crew
   readiness conditions tables can be found on this card. Anyone found them?

The following are my comments on the other messages to brilliant lances:

Mark Urbin <urbin@interlan.interlan.com> wrote:
> A few more nits about Brilliant Lances.

nits ? I think most of this points have to be discussed! :)

> 1. Page 48, You can't build the Military boat or the Rampart Fighter.  They
>    both use the 144-Mj `Laser Lance'.  No stats on the Vol or Mass of
>    those puppies.  It's not listed with the other ship mounted weapons.

Unfortunalty you are right. Hope for F,F&S.

> 2.  Page 35 The Fiery Class Escort is an Airframe design.  It can land on
>     planets with an atmosphere greater than thin.  It's External grapple is
>     only streamlined rated, as is the 30 ton Military Gig that is
>     supposed to dock there.  According to the rules, the gig would have
>     to be detached and left in orbit before the mother ship could enter
>     the atmosphere.

Interesting idea, never thought of it. Perhaps a solution: The AF is designed
that it encloses the Gig. It is not an airframe any more if the Gig is
detached?!

> 3.  Page 9, weapons section.  Bays are mentioned, but that's about it.  No
>     rules about them or what goes in them.

Oh there are two bays in the weapon section on page 10. A TL 9 100 tons
70 Mj bay and a TL 10 50 tons 450 Mj bay. I look forward to see 50 and 100
tons bays of TL 11 to 15 :).


Dane Johnson <djohnson@willamette.edu> wrote
> Re:  Weapons, Weapons and More Weapons...
>
> Not only are the weapons "a small sample" of what there are, some of the
> ships are designed with weapons not on the tables.  The Kinunur sports 700
> Mj Laser Turrets, while the Armed Gig and Rampart Fighter are equiped with
> fixed "144 Mj Laser Lances" (Perhaps the inspiration for the game's
> name?)....I find this rather irritating...:/

Well, the Kinunir class uses 700 Mj Laser BARBETTEs, but I must agree, they
are not in the technical sections as are the Laser Lances. I think the
inspiration for the name is mentioned in one of the booklets. It's the
beam of laser which they call a "Brilliant Lance".

> As for spinal mounts and small ships:  the Chrysanthemum has *two* of 'em!
> I wonder if GDW could be...prodded/asked to clarify the
> spinal mount rules as given?

I think there are no limitation about weapons, spinal or turrets. Only
limitation I see is the required power. BTW, if I git it right, you can
calculate the required MW for every weapon if you know its Mj rating.
Power requirements in MW * 36 = Output in Mj.



Juergen

- - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de


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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6014
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 93 09:00:22 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@interlan.interlan.com>
Subject: Brilliant Lances stuff yet again...



  In the ship design section of Brilliant Lances, I have a question on Life
support.  There is a set of numbers in a table, but no info on how to apply
them.  Is is per lifeform per 24 hour period or what?

  The Scout ship now is listed (in BL) as having 2 LARGE staterooms.  In the
TNE source book, it had 2 SMALL staterooms.  Some of the ships in BL are
listed as having QUAD occupancy large staterooms.  It looks like we are back
to the CT standard of allowing up to 8 on a Scout ship again.  Life support
ratings for the ship should have a controling factor over this, but as I
stated above, I can't figure out how to apply them.

  Freedonia.  Find a copy of the Marx Brothers Film `Duck Soup'.  Then find
some really old FASA products.  Some of their old Traveller deck plans will
do.  You find out FASA stands for `Freedonian AeroSpace Agency'.  Once you
find the planet Freedonia, it will have Giant Robots fighting each other...
or elves and trolls in decaying urban settings... :-) :-)

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  \      oo    				Mark Urbin   Racal-Interlan
   \____|\mm   "Vouf, Vouf!"		These opinions are mine, no one
   // //\ \_\  				will claim them...
  /K-9/  \/_/  				urbin@interlan.com
 /___/_____\   				eclipse@world.std.com
 ----------- 	  Where am I going and what am I doing in this handbasket?
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6015
From: "Ed Sharpe" <esharpe@hsc.usc.edu>
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 93 10:04:48 PDT
Subject: Re: Traveller Inspirations

>Scott (2G) Kellogg claims that three of Traveller's aliens are drawn from
>  the works of Poul Anderson - the Vargr, Virushi, and Ael Yael.  I've read
>  very little Anderson, let alone those stories, so I can't confirm or deny.

   I have always thought that Poul Anderson had (has?) an influnce on
Traveller.

>  But I *have* read a lot of Larry Niven, another name on the source list,
>  and I've always felt that another three species were inspired by him.
>
>Any feline race tends to be written alike, so maybe the Aslan aren't *really*
>  like the Kzin.

   I have never thought that the Aslan where realy "redesigned" Kzin.
However I would like to see (Maybe help with) a write up of the Kzin in
Travller terms. Another race I would like to see would be Poul Anderson's
Mersians (sp?).

>I don't like the limited TL ranges (compared to MEGATRAVELLER). No more
>TL 17+ stuff like desintegrators or repulsors.

Personally I never like any of the stuff above TL 16 and never used such in
my games, But each to his own.

>I suppose someone had had them look up the definition of "plagery" by
>then ;^) ).
 ( In an elderly porfessor like voice)
   No, no my boy, alway be sure to call it 'research'.  :-)
//
// esharpe@phad.hsc.usc.edu
//  You keep using that word.
//  I do not think it means what you think it means
//                           - Inigo Montoya

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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6016
Subject: Re: Anatomy vs. Architecture
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 93 10:40:32 -0700
From: gwh@lurnix.COM


Scott writes:
>George sez:
>> Scott Kellog writes:
>            ^^^
>GRR!  Didn't I just have a fit about this last time!  Scott 2G Kellogg!
>;-)

I can see I was on a roll that day... you should have seen my other
boo-boos 8-)

>HA!  You wanna see different scales of engineering?
>Try living with a woman who's eight inches taller than you!  |->
>I come in at 5'6".  My fiancee' (from Germany) comes in at 6'2".
>Now, she's 5" shorter than the average Zhodani and a foot shorter than
>the average Aslan.  I can only imagine what THEIR architecture would
>be like!  WHEW!

*laugh* My wife is 4'11" and I'm 6'5".  Eight inches taller gets no
sympathy, we have nearly a half-meter of difference ;-)

- -george william herbert



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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6017
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1993 14:02:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: S_DMOODY@pstcc.cc.tn.us
Subject: Anatomy and Artchitecture


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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6018
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1993 14:20:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: S_DMOODY@pstcc.cc.tn.us
Subject: Achitecture, Anantomy, Aslani, and Vargr (Woof!Woof!)


Mr. Kellogg writes:

>Morphology however, will CERTAINLY have an effect on design layout.  You
>don't need stairs if you have wings.  Or if you are a fish, you will
>need a water filled ship.  The size and shape of your hands and eyes
>affect the control inputs & displays you have.

	Agreed, which brings up a point that a Vargr friend of mine pointed out
to me.  The Cogs&Dogs books shows the inside of a bridge of a Vargr ship.  Why
do they have chairs like Humans?  The only seeming difference is the hole for a
tail.  From the original Vargr Aliens book, it doesnt seem that their leg
anatomy was changed that much from the Terran canine.  Are these chairs
comfortable to the Vargr, or would they prefer a more leaning-forward, almost
prone position?

	On a slightly related note, I have always assumed that the larger races
(ie Aslani) were cramped in the standard Human sized chairs and ship
staterooms. After some discussion with those in my gaming group, we multiplied
the vol, wgt, and price of all Aslani fittings (chairs, staterooms, airlocks,
low berths, etc) by 1.2 if installed on a ship designed for Aslani use.  We
assumed that Aslani could use normal human-sized fittings, but on their own
ship, they wanted to be more comfortable.  One of our players was an
accountant/lawyer on our ship (her Aslani name translated into standard as
'she who's claws are words') complained about her cramped stateroom.

	Could this also lead to a change in the MT design tables for other
equipment for other races?  Allow Hiver fittings to be smaller, or at least
shorter?

					-Vanya

PS-Ignore the empty post.  Its difficult to tell the difference between
<CNTL>Z and <CNTL>C in the near darkness of this lab.


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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6019
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 93 12:15:12 -0700
From: bjm@ares.dsc.com (Brian Makens)
Subject: The horror..the horror


Well, I thought just hit me about the worst effect of the Virus in the
Imperium..
	
	With the demise of the Xboat Service and computers ....

		USENET in the Imperium is gone..

	Imagine poor tvirrisiki@cleon.uvland.edu

	What do you mean I can't read alt.sex.aslan.bondage
	and rec.riding.kkree  ...arrrgh....sob...

All those billions of frustrated usenet readers on 110000 worlds.

Yes, I finally understand how the Virus collapsed the social order of the Imperium
				Brian Makens
				bjm@dsc.com

P.S also think of the effects of 70 years of frustrated Aslan ihatei who can't get
off planet to find new land.. The Shick Land Addiction Treatment Program is
probably doing a booming business




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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6020
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1993 16:06:24 -0400
From: curtis@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Curtis Peer)
Subject: Brilliant Lances control fix

Hello, this is John Bogan posting from a friend's account.



As it stands now in BL, controls have no actual effect other than the
cost and power requirements of workstations. They have no effect on
the actual crewing levels/number of workstations themselves.
This is a change from MegaT, and, I suspect an error, since it's
perfectly within the rules (as they stand) to build a TL-15 ship with
tech-5 controls. (imagine adjusting the throttle on the attitude
control thrusters with wires and pulleys connected directly to the
pilot's joystick :-).

  The fix that seems most apparent to me is to add an additional multiplier
in the crew requirements section wherever "Cp", the computer multiplier,
appears.

   I'm trying (but haven't had time to extensively test yet) a multiplier
that is :    1/(CP value in MegaT)

This gives multipliers of:

TL5 Basic Mechanical =  5
TL6 Enhanced Mechanic = 2.5
TL7 Electronic       =  2
TL8 Electronic Linked=  1.43
TL9 Computer Linked  =  1.25
TL10 Dynamic Linked  =  1
TL13 Holographic Link=   0.67


The rules already state that the controls may not be from a greater TL
than the computer, but controls from a lower TL would degrade the
ability to actually USE the computer's capacity, and require more
things to be done manually, thus higher crew requirements.
I'll test this out when I have more time to do so, but if anyone wants
to beat me to the punch, feel free.


Also, this brings up the difference in crewing requirements in pre- and
post-Virus ships, since post-Virus ships keep their systems isolated from
each other and use manual code input to prevent infections from
spreading.

What, if any over a 30-minute turn timeframe, effect does this have on
performance?

Should this be considered a crew quality issue, since for highly trained
and coordinated crews, this may not degrade performance noticeably, but
for poorer-grade crews, this could slow them down quite a bit, perhaps?

Also a bit of errata:
Rules book pg 31: Lackland Sons scenario under "Aslan Ihatei Squadron"

The _Ships_ line lists "Crews crack and at battlestations"
the _Vector_ line lists "Crews Line"

Since no other scenario has crew quality listed in the _Vector_ line,
I assume it is the one in error, and should be deleted.


John H Bogan

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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6021
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Starship Design
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 93 15:22:07 CDT

J Roberson sez:
> I don't know any specifics about aliens outside of the base information
> given in MT. BUT, it seems to me that since Solomani, Vilani, and Zhodani
> are all Humaniti, the physiological constraints on ship design would be
> similar. Even if one allows them to be of slightly different sizes, they
> would be proportianately alike.

Yeah, they will have similar internal environment.  The over all shape and
scale may vary, but they will all have chairs that look similar and controls
for human hands.

> As for controls, I rather imagine that given the range of space, most
> contact and conflict will occur outside visual range, leading control of
> ships to be more akin to modern naval combat, as simulated by Harpoon and
> Red Storm Rising (the latter being a computer game). Meaning that rather
> than a joystick, dynamic controls for the display of information and
> operation of multiple ship functions will be used.

Well, I would remind you that those ships won't always be in combat.  You
will be Beyond Visual Range in almost all space combat.  But, you still
will have to land that ship sometime.  Or if you can't land, you'll still
need to dock that ship.  You will need some form of attitude control.

I would also point out that while there might be some debate on what
"Beyond Visual Range" might mean to a submarine, (Red Storm Rising is
sub combat I think)  The more advanced submarines are starting to use
controls similar to aircraft:  Control yokes and joysticks.

Now, as I understand it, a Holodynamic control is a holographic equivalent
to a dynamic touch screen type set up.  The holographics allowing for a
3 dimensional array of controls.  Well, I've worked with dynamic 2D touch
screens and found them very nice.  But it was still about the same "Feel"
as a keyboard.  I would NOT want to use one for a computer game where a
joystick would do better.  And the idea of using a non-substantial
hologram of a joystick which I can not hold in my hand is about the same
as trying to play a musical instrument called a Theramin.  A Theramin
plays by putting your hand near (what amounts to) a proximity sensor, this
raises or lowers a note.  They make fun neat sounds, (all the sound effects
in _Forbidden Planet_ are Theramins, along with the electronic Theme for
the _Outer Limits_.)  but it is nigh on impossible to get a good solid note
out of one.  Even with perfect pitch, it is DAMN hard.  A holograph of a
joystick will NOT work.

Juergen sagt:
>- Okay, I've skipped the comments about streamlined hulls very fast. The
>only thing a SL hull can't do, and an AF can is to land aerodynamically
>without using the contra-grav lifters. My opinion is: All ships using
>contra-grav lifters can indeed land on planet surfaces. Perhaps not AF
>hull need some more time, because athmospheric speed is limited.
>Yeah, it's true, I will allow USL ships using contra-grav to land on
>planets. The difference is, they will need 3 combat turns (1.5 hours)
>to land.

Sounds good to me.  The idea that an AF hull can fly aerodynamically without
Grav is absolutely rediculous though.  Take a look at the weight of those
ships.  Then take a look at how big they are.  There is NO WAY that those
ships can fly without gravitic lift.  Not at all.  The scoutship weighs
680 tons, right?  Well, it has 1/3 LESS wing area than a 27 ton F-4
Phantom II.  And it Weighs more than TWICE what a fully loaded B-52
Stratofortress.  It will NEVER fly by aerodynamic lift.

Anthony scribe:
>Concerning Neural Interface and Dolphins, I seem to remember the old JTAS
>article allowed Neural Interface to the Waldos at TL13. The Neural Interface
>certainly stuck in my mind, because it was the first time I'd seen such a
>thing in Trav, but I may well be completely wrong (AGAIN).

Ah ha!  I checked a bit.  The JTAS article does not mention Neural Interfaces
at all.  The Travellers Digest article DOES.  I was basing my arguments on
the JTAS bit.  Dolphins DO have a neural interface at TL 12.
- --
Scott 2G Kellogg
"Kellogg is just plain nuts!"  -- H. Beam Piper


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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6022
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1993 16:25:46 -0400
From: d_kennard@unhn.unh.edu (Dave K. (603) 862-2000)
Subject: sources...

_Starwolf_, classic space opera by Edmund Hamilton, is partially about
an anarchic race of canine corsairs from a high gravity planet. Sound
familiar?

Dave K.
Dave@unh.edu

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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6023
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1993 17:40:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: nosnhoJ enaD <dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov>
Subject: Bwaps...


Perusing the old JTAS article, I noticed that the Bwap's homeworld was
given as "Marhaban in the Lentuli Subsector", with no Sector given.
Having no clue where Lentuli might be, I grepped my friendly neighborhood
sector data files (from sunbane)...This is what I got:

emptyq.sec:
Marhaban      0426 A4697AB-E                       801 Im K8 IV
lishun.sec:
Marhaban      3033 E31099B-C    Hi Na In           821 Li G4 V M1 D

All well and good, except that these are both awful candidates, in my
opinion...First of all, the Lishun site:  it's got nearly no atmosphere,
no water, and no starport, whereas the Bwap's are described as being
uncomfortable in anything less than 95% humidity and as having been given
Jump drive by the Vilani.  The impression I got (I haven't the article
with me) was that the Bwaps had a large presence in space and had been
contacted fairly early by the First Imperium.  Anyway, the Lishun
Marhaban, although "fairly" close to Vland, seems an awful prospect for
the Newt homeworld.

Empty Quarter's Marhaban is better, but seems a tad far away to have been
contacted "early" by the Vilani.  Anybody have any facts/insight into this?

On a slightly different note:

Most Traveller products, up till now, have left the Minor Races largely
ignored.  We've learned about them largely through articles in magazines.
I'd like to see GDW put out a Minor Race sourcebook at some point,
detailing some of the common, starfaring, non-major races, like the
Ithklur, the Bwaps, the Vegans, and so forth....

Dane

traveller@llnl.gov
djohnson@willamette.edu
TNS Stringer ------------ Terra/Solomani Rim (1827 G867975-8)
"I'm not a real scientist, but I play one in an RPG."


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

Bundle: 496
Archive-Message-Number: 6024
Date:    Fri, 10 Sep 1993 1:49:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: RJR96326@VAX1.UTULSA.EDU
Subject: Controls

One more note on control layout: While ship architecture may be based to
an extent on racial build, controls can still vary quite a bit. Look at
te difference between a helicopter and a hang glider, or a speedboat and the
Queen Mary. Differences in scale and function will also be a factor.

As for wingspan/weight ratios. . .I thought the purpose of an Air Frame
was to make the entire craft like a Lifting Body. Then again, I don't
have BL. . .

J Roberson

------------------------------
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==========================
------------------------------
 497  6025 10-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Several Replies << Hi all,
 497  6026 10-Sep-1993 Joe Heck         Brilliant Lances Errors (& Corrections)
 497  6027 10-Sep-1993 Derek Wildstar   Brilliant Lances and Traveller Inspirat
 497  6028 11-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Bwaps Go Home! << Woher kommt Bwaps?
 497  6029 11-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Traveller under the influence << We've
 497  6030 11-Sep-1993 c_hamilton%W036  Judges Guild, anyone? << A local games
 497  6031 11-Sep-1993 nosnhoJ enaD     Obvious In-Jokes... << Well, I'm afraid
 497  6032 12-Sep-1993 Bertil Jonell    Re: Traveller under the influence << >
 497  6033 12-Sep-1993 Corran J. Webst  Re: Traveller under the influence << Th
 497  6034 13-Sep-1993 kirsch@rhea.inf  TML nightly V61#4: RE: Brilliant Lances
 497  6035 13-Sep-1993 kirsch@rhea.inf  BL: TL 15 Far Trader Design << The foll
 497  6036 14-Sep-1993 Timothy Little   Orbits & stuff << > As for wingspan/wei

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

Bundle: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6025
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Several Replies
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 93 9:33:27 CDT

Hi all,

An ecomomy of replies here:

J Roberson asks:
> 1)What is the "4.5th Frontier War" ? Is it related to the Nth interstellars?

Ahem.  The 4.5th Frontier War is a series of stories about some conflicts
between the Imperium and the Zhodani Consulate in 1102, seven years
previous to the Fifth Frontier War.  Authored by me.  It has no relationship
what so ever to the Nth Interstellar Wars between the Vilini Empire and the
expanding Solomani.  It is NOT sanctioned by GDW or anybody.  But it IS
copyrighted by Me.

> 2) What does HIWG stand for?

History of the Imperium Working Group.  (shrug)
- -----------------------------
Adrian ecrire:
>>  496  6008 08-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Anatomy vs. Architecture
>If you threaten James Perkins with a tactical nuke, or bribe him with enough
>money or alcohol, he might fix this problem.  ;-)

James?  PLEASE?  :-)

>My guess is that Droyne vehicles will be likely to have a geodesic framework.
>Humans have tried this, and it works rather well - one example was the
>Vickers Wellington bomber of WW2.  For some reason, though, the rib-like
>framework is still used.

Cool!  Sounds rather more complicated to mass produce tho.  I take it this
was a stronger design?

> And I have no idea what a Hiver spaceship will look like. :-)

I rather doubt that it would look like a burrow in the ground...  :-)
- --------------------
Me:
>>HA!  You wanna see different scales of engineering?
>>Try living with a woman who's eight inches taller than you!  |->
>>I come in at 5'6".  My fiancee' (from Germany) comes in at 6'2".

George:
> *laugh* My wife is 4'11" and I'm 6'5".  Eight inches taller gets no
> sympathy, we have nearly a half-meter of difference ;-)

Dang!  I thought *I* had anthropometric problems!
Still, you're on the lucky side.  You don't have to jump when
your S.O. puts something on the top shelf of the cabinet.  But then
again, your knees will smack into the dashboard when she drives.  :-)
- ---------------------
Vanya sagt:
>The Cogs&Dogs books shows the inside of a bridge of a Vargr ship.  Why
>do they have chairs like Humans?  The only seeming difference is the hole for a
>tail.  From the original Vargr Aliens book, it doesnt seem that their leg
>anatomy was changed that much from the Terran canine.  Are these chairs
>comfortable to the Vargr, or would they prefer a more leaning-forward, almost
>prone position?

In Poul Anderson's _Hunters of the Sky Cave_ The Adziriho used a forward
leaning couch-saddle type arrangement.  (Much to Flandry's discomfort)
My guess would have been that that would be more comfortable, but we do
not really know much about the manipulations to the Vargr spine.  Perhaps
straight back chairs are more comfortable than it might seem.  We've seen
Vargr operate in human ships often enough without mentioning modifications.
It would make thing simpler.  (But what's more likely is the artist in
Cogs & Dogs didn't think about it.)
- ----------------
Brian sagt:
> 		USENET in the Imperium is gone..
>
> 	Imagine poor tvirrisiki@cleon.uvland.edu
>
> 	What do you mean I can't read alt.sex.aslan.bondage
> 	and rec.riding.kkree  ...arrrgh....sob...

And what about poor gdeerzorr@dzenko.gvurrdon.edu?
"I can't read alt.sex.bestiality.human anymore?  Arrroooooo!"
- --
Scott 2G Kellogg
"Kellogg is just plain nuts!"  -- H. Beam Piper

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

Bundle: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6026
Date:         Fri, 10 Sep 93 11:46:32 CDT
From: Joe Heck <CCJOE@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu>
Subject:      Brilliant Lances Errors (& Corrections)

The "base facing" after making a change of heading is technically not
correct. Where it talks about the base facing after changing the heading to
starboard, the base facing should be +4 instead of +3. Likewise to port:
- -4 instead of -3. This is kind of a nit, but if we're really doing vector
combat with all the thrust out the aft end of the ship...

The other nit is a bit more significant, if you're in combat near a Gas
Giant: The size of Jupiter is wrong.. it's radius is 4.76. It's diameter is
9.52 hexes. The effects of the gravity well are SEVERELY distorted. I hope
I'm not putting my foot in it here with lousy calculations, but what they
say is:                What I calc'd it to be:

1G Threshold           Threshold 1G    2G    3G    4G    5G  ... 10G
1.4 Hexes              Hexes     15.5  10.95 8.95  7.75  6.93    4.9

And with the size of the maps, this 1G threshold covers about one of the
maps, and since Jupiter is supposedly swinging about at .78 hexes per
turn...  It's going to make REALLY difficult for players (assuming they're
not using Jupe as a frame of reference).

Since I'm curious about orbit periods, can any of you physics wizards
suggest a calculation to determine orbit period around a planet given
distance and mass of central planet (or star?)

Here's the various & sundry of my calculations:

The determine the range of effect of Gx...

Gx band = sqrt(M/Gx) / 2.34375  where M is the mass of the central planet
                                in "earths" and Gx is the effect band.

PS: Oh yeah - I'm getting married tommorow, so I'll be gone for a couple of
    weeks on my honeymoon. See y'all soon (Don't worry Richard, mail's been
    covered at my end).

 joe                          University of Missouri - Columbia
 ccjoe@mizzou1.missouri.edu   (314) 882-5000

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

Bundle: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6027
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 93 17:50:12 -0400
From: Derek Wildstar <wildstar@quark.qrc.com>
Subject: Brilliant Lances and Traveller Inspiration

kstclair@CSOS.ORST.EDU (Kelly St.Clair) writes:
> [on k'kree and hivers being inspired by Niven's Puppeteers, and Fteirle
>  (Aslan) being inspired by Kzin]

I'm suprised that nobody mentioned C.J.Cherryh's Hani (or maybe I'm just
coming in late).  The Hani have several of the main attributes of the
Fteirle: males fight one another to settle political disputes and
females have exclusive control over business/trade/technology.

I frequently (and inaccurately, but what the hey) give the following
description of them to new players "Imagine a race that has the female
Hani (C.J. Cherryh) and male Kzinti (Larry Niven)".


RJR96326@VAX1.UTULSA.EDU (J Roberson) writes:
> I have never played Classic Traveller; I
> have always assumed the only difference was no Rebellion.

And lots of game mechanic differences, including
readable rules and a lack of errors ;-)

> As for controls, I rather imagine that given the range of space, most
> contact and conflict will occur outside visual range, leading control of
> ships to be more akin to modern naval combat, as simulated by Harpoon and
> Red Storm Rising (the latter being a computer game). Meaning that rather
> than a joystick, dynamic controls for the display of information and
> operation of multiple ship functions will be used.

Where's that piece written by Scott Kellogg (sometime a year or so ago?)
about flight controls for the different races?  Come to think of it,
where's that bit I wrote about how to fly a spaceship ... ?


kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de writes:
> Subject: Brilliant Lances

I've taken a look at it too, but haven't gotten a chance to play it yet.
My overall impression is pretty good.  Specifically, the game fits into
T:TNE in pretty much the same way that Mayday fit into Classic Traveller.
(Hm ... maybe we should call it "Mayday: The New Era")  But BL is a much
more complete and interesting boardgame than Mayday ever was.

Inside the box (which I saw at Dream Wizards here in Rockville, for $30)
you get 2 rulebooks, 2 sheets of color counters, 3 maps (really BIG hexes!),
2 player reference cards, 1 sheet of errata (avertising on the back), and
1 T:TNE comment form.

One rulebook is the rules of play (32 pages, including scenarios).  Good
solid boardgaming rules that should interface *very* well with T:TNE.  So
well in fact that if I were the suspicious type, I'd think that the rules in
T:TNE were an earlier version of this, with "hex" globally changed to "range
band". ;-)  The game uses the T:TNE task system to resole die rolls, so PC's
skills just drop in place of the "crew quality" assets.  There is a good
number of ships provided, more than with T:TNE (or MegaTraveller, or Classic
Traveller, for that matter).

The other book (48 pages) has the ship profiles for the ships to use in the
boardgame, as well as the ship design rules.  The design rules seem complete
but has some holes, which Mr. Kirsch did a good job of describing.

Brilliant Lances doesn't seem to be designed to be able to deal well with
ships bigger than a couple of thousand tons.  The biggest "spinal" mount
is a little under 200 dispacement tons (or about 1/5 the size of the smallest
High Guard/MegaTraveller spinal mount; the rest of the BL spinal mounts
would have been High Guard or MegaTraveller bay weapons; it might be
possible to cram a small BL spinal mount into a small craft).

A few interesting observations that long-time Traveller players might
want to take note of: There is no longer any lower limit on the size of a
starship.  There is a minimum size for a jump drive, but from off-the-cuff
calculations, I think you can get a 10-ton craft to jump with at least
enough left-over space for a crewman.  There also don't seem to be any
limits on the number of weapons you can cram into a ship, excepting of
course what will actually fit into and onto the hull.  Finally, there
isn't any limit on the accelleration of the craft, except what will
squash the crew (or at least leave them unable to function: gravity
compensation varies by Tech Level).  All in all, I don't mind these
changes, I think that the elimination of arbitrary restrictions (no
starships less than 100 tons, only 1 turret per hundred tons, etc) is
worth it.  And besides, we get to explore the utility of jump-capable
fighters, and other strange stuff.

Overall, the game is very nice, but it does have some rough edges.  A
page of errata is included, but that doesn't cover them all.  I get
the distinct impression that BL should have been kept back another
week and proofread one more time.

Summary and Recommendation: If you and your players like "boardgaming
out" spaceship encounters, get this game.  If you like playing SF
boardgames get this game, the vector movement is good.  If you want
ship construction rules for T:TNE, give this one a miss and wait for
the Technical Architecture book (Fire, Fusion and Steel) in November.

Call for Errata: If you have any Brilliant Lances errata, send it to me,
and I'll compile a list with suggested fixes, just like I did with T:TNE.
Send your errata to: wildstar@quark.qrc.com
Please put something like "BL Errata" in your subject line, so I can sort
them out of the rest of the mail.


staats@Athena.MIT.EDU (Rich) writes:
> Now that the smoke has cleared a bit on the new line of Traveller
> products, what are the *recommended* sourcebooks and supplements to buy?  (Like
> many of the folks on the net, I started playing Traveller when it was the series
> of black books.)

Well, now.  As far as I know, all that's available for T:TNE right now is the
massive Traveller: The New Era rules, and Brilliant Lances.

If you're still playing with the little black books, and are happy with them,
there's a lot to be said for not buying anything.  T:TNE is a different game
than Classic Traveller.  T:TNE is based on the Twilight:2000 (2nd ed) rules
system, and also re-writes the Traveller background (the best way to describe
it is that T:TNE does to the Imperium what Twilight:2000 does to the
present-day world).

Assuming that, like me, you are in the market for a new game, T:TNE has a
bunch of things going for it.  It's *NOT* overpriced; as a matter of fact
the thing is very reasonably priced.  The game system is pretty good, and
a lot of material is provided in the one book.  The only caveat I would give
is that if you can't stand the T2k2 system, T:TNE is the same system.

Recommendation: Buy (but see below)

The only other thing out is Brilliant Lances, and I just reviewed that above.

Coming in November is the Technical Architecture book, which will probably
also be a "buy".

According to the advertising in BL, T:TNE Deluxe Edition is coming out in
November.  This will include both T:TNE and the Technical Architecture book
in one box, and may be a better buy if you can wait for it.

Other items that were mentioned in the BL advertising are the T:TNE referee's
screen and several projects due next year.  I don't know anything about the
ref screen, and I think next year's products are a little far away to be
making purchasing decisions about.  Of course, don't forget Challenge.  There
should be a bunch of New Era material showing up in it Real Soon Now.  In
the past few years, I haven't found Challenge to have enough Traveller and/or
Space: 1889 material in it to be worth the price (to me, IMHO).  However, as
T:TNE material starts showing up I will be re-evaluating that ...

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

Bundle: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6028
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Bwaps Go Home!
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 93 13:19:27 CDT

Woher kommt Bwaps?

I recall reading a bit in Challenge that the Bwap homeworld is in Antares
Sector.

Hope that helps.

Scott 2G Kellogg

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

Bundle: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6029
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Traveller under the influence
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 93 13:59:17 CDT

We've been talking about the Influences on Traveller,

Here's a question for the Trav historians and pranksters of various
fields among us:

What are the in jokes in Traveller?

In science fiction there is ALWAYS room for private jokes.  The
little bits that the author finds terribly humorous but doesn't
expect anyone else to get.  I've been trying to collect these bits
of humor, partly to further my education of jokes from fields
different from mine, but mostly for fun.

Lessee:  We've learned that Mark Miller's mother's name is Margret.
:-)

Thanks to Rob Dean the TML has had one in joke published in GDW
materials:  The "Admiral Bertil" class Q-ship carrier :-) named
after our own Bertil Jonnell which appeared in _Assignment:
Vigilante_.  Rob once said that if he knew the ship was going to be
published he would have named it after himself!

Bertil Jonnell once told me of the "Bowman Belt" from the GDW
module _Beltstrike_.  Seems there was a Swedish politician named
Bowman.  In an effort to explain away some faltering in the Swedish
economy of the time he said that "We must tighten our belts" (Of
course he probably said it in Swedish :-) but the phrase (and the
economic downturn) came to be known as the "Bowman Belt".  :-)

To this list I will add one of the things I've noticed, the "P.F
Sloan" class escort.  As you may know, P.F. Sloan was a folk
singer/songwriter from the mid-late 60's.  He wrote such songs as
"Secret Agent Man"(Jonny Rivers) and "Eve of Destruction"(Barry
McGuire).

Now, what are the other ships in the class supposed to be named?
Bob Dylan?  John Lennon?  Paul Simon?  Steven Stills?
Hee! Hee! Hee!  |->

But my knowlege is limited, and we have a great store out there.
So what have YOU folks noticed along these lines?  :-)
- --
Scott 2G Kellogg
"Kellogg is just plain nuts!"  -- H. Beam Piper


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

Bundle: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6030
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 93 15:01:07 EDT
From: c_hamilton%W036_NW@mwmgate1.mitre.org
Subject: Judges Guild, anyone?

A local games store has a lot of old Judges Guild material for Classic
Traveller.  I'm not interested in this stuff, but if anybody else is,
just let me know, and I'll go back and copy down the exact titles they
had available.



Chuck Hamilton                                           clh@mitre.org

"Crew or frozen watch casualties are replaced free at any naval base."

                                     - Trillion Credit Squadron, p. 35


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

Bundle: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6031
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1993 18:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: nosnhoJ enaD <dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov>
Subject: Obvious In-Jokes...


Well, I'm afraid I haven't noticed any with quite the subtlety that Scott
has, but there are the names of about half the planets in the Solomani
Rim.  Most aren't too obscure and the sources will be readily apparent,
but many will not be obvious to the casual reader of SF, especially if he
isn't up on his Golden Age writers.  (Most modern readers aren't exposed
to E.E. Doc Smith, so Boskone and Arisia will simply be a couple more
Traveller planet names...)

I'm not sure this is quite what Scott had in mind, tho'...

Dane

traveller@llnl.gov
djohnson@willamette.edu
TNS Stringer ------------ Terra/Solomani Rim (1827 G867975-8)
"I'm not a real scientist, but I play one in an RPG."


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

Bundle: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6032
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Re: Traveller under the influence
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1993 11:54:35 +0200 (MET DST)

> Bertil Jonnell once told me of the "Bowman Belt" from the GDW
> module _Beltstrike_.  Seems there was a Swedish politician named
> Bowman.  In an effort to explain away some faltering in the Swedish
> economy of the time he said that "We must tighten our belts" (Of
> course he probably said it in Swedish :-) but the phrase (and the
> economic downturn) came to be known as the "Bowman Belt".  :-)
					      ^^^^^^
  'Bohman' actually but it's pronounced the same.

  I don't think GDW knew about this when they named the system thou.

> But my knowlege is limited, and we have a great store out there.
> So what have YOU folks noticed along these lines?  :-)

  There are systems named Mikesh (Corridor) and Vilardi (Massilia).

> Scott 2G Kellogg

- -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: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6033
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 93 22:25:02 PDT
From: Corran J. Webster <cwebster@math.ucla.edu>
Subject: Re: Traveller under the influence


The Brinn minor race from Divad (Travellers' Digest 12 or thereabouts...)
are an obvious reference to David Brin - but I don't know if there is
any more correspondence than the name (as I recall they were warlike
methane breathers, somewhat spider-like) - does anyone with a better
knowledge of David Brin's work know if they resemble any aliens he created?
(I've read a fair bit of his stuff, but by no means all...).

Tying in the other thread, I would classify David Brin as an influence for
some of the more recent additions to Traveller (ie. the DGP/Megatraveller
stuff, rather than Classic Traveller). The various terran species "uplifted"
like the dolphins, the various primates etc. by the Solomani match closely
with Brin's novels.

Can't remember any other in-jokes that I may have come across... the above
stuck in my mind because it was so obvious.

See ya 'round.
Corran

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

Bundle: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6034
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 10:23:28 MET_DST
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: TML nightly V61#4: RE: Brilliant Lances

Okay, before I send some ship designs and an idea how to locate damage locations
in Brilliant Lances, a short note to Scott:

Scott Kellogg (< HA! Got it :) ) wrote on my comment about streamlined hulls:
> Sounds good to me.  The idea that an AF hull can fly aerodynamically without
> Grav is absolutely rediculous though.  Take a look at the weight of those
> ships.  Then take a look at how big they are.  There is NO WAY that those
> ships can fly without gravitic lift.  Not at all.  The scoutship weighs
> 680 tons, right?  Well, it has 1/3 LESS wing area than a 27 ton F-4
> Phantom II.  And it Weighs more than TWICE what a fully loaded B-52
> Stratofortress.  It will NEVER fly by aerodynamic lift.

Well, a brick will fly if you give him enough power. The Scout mentioned above
will fly, at about 800 kph. That's no problem, but the landing would be a bit
rough, because if the ship gets slower than 800 kph, it will indeed behave like
a brick. But all in all you are right. AF Lift is to small for those super heavy
ships the Technical Booklet creates.

Juergen Kirsch

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de

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

Bundle: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6035
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 12:46:51 MET_DST
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: BL: TL 15 Far Trader Design

The following in a TL-15 Far Trader.

At first you will find the 132 column calculation sheet, later the 80 column
design evaluation and damage location sheet.

- ------------------------------- design follows --------------------------------

Marva-Class 200 tons Far Trader TL-15

                                Volume(in kl)       Weight(in t)        Power(in MW)        Price(in MCr)
free Volume: 200 tons           2,800.000
Hull:Wedge SL, 1cm Thick, Hull:    13.500             202.500              0.000                0.378
 Bonded SD, TL-15, AV: 28  IS:      0.500               7.500              0.000                0.014       Size: Small
Jump Drive: TL-15, Jump-2          84.000             168.000              0.000               25.200
  Fuel(1 Jump-1)                  420.000               0.000              0.000                0.000
Electronics:
Control Systems (TL-15)             2.800               0.280            ----   see workstations  ---
Computers: 3x TL-15 Std            21.000               4.200              1.650               18.000       Ooohhh...
Flight Avionics TL 8+               0.001               0.001              0.100                0.020
Radio (30,000km) TL 15              0.001               0.002              1.000                0.030       10m^2 Ant.
Maser (1000 AU) TL 15               0.030               0.060              0.600                0.180        1m^2 Ant.
Passiv EMS (90,000 km) TL-15        0.600               1.200              0.060                1.200
  Ant.: AA:0.8 m^2 AD:10m ?         0.080               0.080              0.000                0.080       fixed Array
0.8m^2
Active EMS (120,000 km) TL-15       1.800               3.600              9.000                3.600        3.6m^2 Ant.
2 turret Hardpoint sockets         84.000               0.000              0.000                0.010
Fuel Scoops                         0.000               0.000              0.000                0.210
Fuel Purification Plant (250kl/6h) 50.000             100.000              1.250                0.038       TL 15
minimal intern. Hangar(Air raft)   56.000              11.200              0.000                0.011
  Launch Port 16m^2 surface area    0.000               0.000              0.000                0.016
1 large Cargo Hatches (20m^2) +
2 small Cargo hatches (12m^2ea.)    0.000               0.000              0.000                0.044
Power Plant 162 MW TL-15           27.000              54.000           (162.000)               5.400
  Power Plant Fuel 1 year          16.200               1.134              0.000                0.000
Maneuver Drive 1g                  10.000              10.000            100.000                0.100       10m^2 Surfac
e
Contra Grav Lifters TL-15          60.000              40.000             20.000                6.000
Artivicial Grav/G Comp. TL-15 6g   28.000              56.000             14.000                1.400
Ext.Life Support                   22.400              22.400              0.560                1.400
2 Air Locks                         6.000               0.400              0.002                0.010
14 Small Staterooms               384.000              28.000              0.007                0.560
 3 Workstations                    21.000               0.600              0.600                1.200
Maneuver Fuel 54.4 g-turns        680.000               0.000              0.000                0.000
Cargo                             801.088               0.000              0.000                0.000
                                                    ----------         ----------            ---------
                                                      711.157 t          148.847 MW            65.101 MCr

loaded mass: 711.157 + 9.4 (enclosed Air raft) + 77.0 (Fuel) + 801.088 (Cargo) = 1598.645 t
To buy a full Fuel tank refined: 38500 Cr (according to p.14, Price of Fuel)
Crew: Engineering: 1, Maneuvering: 2, Stewards: 1
Fuel: 1100 kl + 16.2 kl Power Plant Fuel
Antenna area: 15.4 m^2, Cargo Hatches: 40 m^2, Launch Port: 16m^2, Maneuver Drive: 10m^2;
compared to 900 m^2, no problem.



Marva class Far Trader: TL-15 200t

General Data:
  Displacement: 200                         Hull Armor: 28
  Length: 43 meters                         Volume: 2800 kl
  Price: 65.101 MCr (without Air raft)      Target Size: S
  Configuration: Wedge SL                   Tech Level: 15
  Mass(Loaded/Empty): 1598.645/711.157

Engineering Data:
  Power Plant: 162 MW Fusion Power Plant(162 MW/hit), 1 year duration
  Jump Performance: 2 (420 kl fuel)
  G-Rating: 1G(100 MW/G), Contra-Grav lifters(20 MW)
  G-Turns: 54.4(88 using jump fuel), 12.5 kl fuel each
  Maint: 58 (24 without any Cargo but containing fuel)

Electronics:
  Computer: 3 TL-15 Model St (0.55 MW each)
  Commo: 30,000km radio(1 hex; 1 MW), 1000AU maser(unlimited; 0.6 MW)
  Avionics: TL-8+ Avionics
  Sensors: Passiv EMS fixed array  90,000km (3 hexes; 0.06 MW),
           Aktive EMS fixed array 120,000km (4 hexes; 9 MW)
  Controls: 3 Workstations (no bridge)

Armament:
  2 turret hardpoint sockets fitted (Loc: 8,9; Arcs: 1,2,3)

Accomodations:
  Life Support: Extended (0.56 MW), Gravitic Compensators (6G; 14 MW)
  Crew: 4 (2 Maneuver, 1 Engineering, 1 Steward/Air Raft Pilot)
  Crew Accomodations: 4 Small Staterooms (0.00005 MW each)
  Passenger Accommodations: 10 Small Staterooms (0.00005 MW each)
  Cargo: 801.088 kl, 1 large cargo hatch, 2 small cargo hatches
  Small Craft and Launch Facilities: Enclosed Air Raft with internal Hangar
    (minimal), 1 launch port
  Air Locks: 2

Notes:
  The Marva class Far Trader is the state-of-the-art construction within
the borders of the ....(Spinward Marches,Regency... insert as you like).
Though the ship costs about 8 MCr more than it's less sophisticated sister,
the Jayhawk class Far Trader. Based on the same hull, this design includes
more Cargo and sports much easier maintenance. The ship requires a crew of
4 for full operations.
  The ship's power plant has a reserve of more than 10 MW for the addition
of two 150 Mj Laser Turrets. Most of the ship's components are identical to
the Beowulf class Free Trader, which should lower maintenance costs
significantly.

The Fuel purification machinery(1.25 MW) can refine 250 kl each 6 hours.
The whole Fuel load (1100 kl) can be refined in 26 hours 24 minutes.


Calculating Damage Tables:

Elec: 400 * (  47.312/2800) =   7  ( 1.75%)
Hold: 400 * (1973.288/2800) = 282  (79.50%)
Qtrs: 400 * ( 454.400/2800) =  65  (16.25%)
Eng:  400 * ( 231.000/2800) =  34  ( 8.50%)
TS:   400 * (  84.000/2800) =  12  ( 3.00%)

Damage Tables:
Area        Surface Hits        Internal Explosion
- --------------------------------------------------------------
  1         1 Ant 2-7 CH        Hold
  2         1-2 Launch Port     1-7 Qtrs, 8-9 Elec, 10-20 Hold
  3         1-2 Launch Port     1-7 Qtrs, 8-20 Hold
  4         1-2 Ant 3-4 CH      1-15 Qtrs, 16-20 Hold
  5         1-2 Ant 3-4 CH      1-15 Qtrs, 16-20 Elec
 6- 7       1 Ant               1-8 Qtrs, 9-20 Hold
 8- 9       1 AL                1-6 TS 7-20 Hold
  10        1-3 Launch Port     Hold
11-15                           Hold
16-17                           1-3 Eng, 4-20 Hold
18-19                           1-4 Eng, 5-20 Hold
  20                            Eng

Systems:
JD-2H, PP-1H, FPP-1H, CG-1H, MD-(2h), SSR-(2h), LS-2H, ELS-1H,
AG-1H, Hangar-(2h), Cargo Space-8H (?), all others-(1h)

My assumptions for the ship:
I placed one large cargo hatch in the front, right between the nacelles
of the cockpit (to the right) and the owners cabin. It opens downward
as a ramp. The two small cargo hatches are on the left and right lower
side of the ship. The Launch Port for the Air raft is above the large
cargo hatch. Also the passenger accomodations are placed in the front
area of the ship.

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de

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

Bundle: 497
Archive-Message-Number: 6036
From: Timothy Little <t_little@postoffice.utas.edu.au>
Subject: Orbits & stuff
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 93 0:02:53 EST

> As for wingspan/weight ratios. . .I thought the purpose of an Air Frame
> was to make the entire craft like a Lifting Body. Then again, I don't
> have BL. . .

Regardless of exactly how it works, lift is roughly proportional to the area
of the lifting surface.  For a given shape, this increases with the square
of the size.  Mass (hence weight) goes up with the cube.  The lift/weight
ratio thus decreases with increasing size (for given speed).  That's why
large birds need disproportionately larger wings in order to fly.

- -*-*-*-

> The other nit is a bit more significant, if you're in combat near a Gas
> Giant: The size of Jupiter is wrong.. it's radius is 4.76. It's diameter is
> 9.52 hexes.

Jupiter is about 143 Mm across.  How big is a BL hex?  15 000 km?
This gives your figures.  I had the idea it was 60 Mm, though.

> The effects of the gravity well are SEVERELY distorted. I hope
> I'm not putting my foot in it here with lousy calculations, but what they
> say is:                What I calc'd it to be:
>
> 1G Threshold           Threshold 1G    2G    3G    4G    5G  ... 10G
> 1.4 Hexes              Hexes     15.5  10.95 8.95  7.75  6.93    4.9

Unfortunately, the 15 Mm hex size is inconsistent with these figures.
The 1G radius for Jupiter is 114 Mm from the centre.  That is, 1.6 times
its radius.  There is evidently something wrong, since the 'surface'
gravity of Jupiter is only 2.5 G, yet your figures show it to be about
10 G at the 'surface'.

If my faint notion of a 60 000 km hex size is correct, the 1G level should
be 1.9 hexes from the centre.

> And with the size of the maps, this 1G threshold covers about one of the
> maps, and since Jupiter is supposedly swinging about at .78 hexes per
> turn...  It's going to make REALLY difficult for players (assuming they're
> not using Jupe as a frame of reference).

Jupiter's orbital speed is 13 km/s.  This is consistent with a 60 Mm hex and
a 1 hour turn.  Just what are the real numbers, anyway?  I'll stick with
these because they sound nice enough.

I expect the player's *would* be using Jupiter as a reference - the Sun's
tidal effects are negligible at that distance.  Its gravity is small -
48 uHex/turn^2 - so it could be ignored anyway.

> Since I'm curious about orbit periods, can any of you physics wizards
> suggest a calculation to determine orbit period around a planet given
> distance and mass of central planet (or star?)

It depends on the distance from the planet - here's a derivation:
Circular orbit is achieved when the acceleration due to gravity is exactly
that required to keep the satellite in circular motion.

Gravity:  a = GM/r^2.
Circular: a = w^2 r.  w = 2pi/T.

G ~= 6.67e-11 SI units (kg^-1 m^3 s^-2 for anyone who cares), the
  gravitational constant.
M is the mass of the planet.  Jupiter's M ~= 1.90e27 kg.
R is the radius of the orbit.  eg.  72 Mm - just above Jupiter's atmosphere.
w is the angular speed of the orbit, related to the orbit time (T).

Equating the a's, you get
  GM/r^2 = w^2/r
  GM = w^2 r^3
Substituting the formula for T,
  GM = (2pi/T)^2 r^3
  (T/2pi)^2 = r^3/GM
  T/2pi = sqrt(r^3/GM)

  T = 2pi sqrt(r^3/GM)

> Here's the various & sundry of my calculations:
>
> The determine the range of effect of Gx...
>
> Gx band = sqrt(M/Gx) / 2.34375  where M is the mass of the central planet
>                                 in "earths" and Gx is the effect band.

For those who want a more 'fundamental' formula; use
  a = GM/r^2
to get
  r = sqrt(GM/a).

1G is 9.8 m/s^2 (use this for 'a'), the value of 'GM' for Earth is
4e14 SI, to give 'r' in metres.  (This confirms that you use 15 Mm/band)


Other useful orbital stuff:

Specific escape energy:  I = GM/r.
Combined with the kinetic energy formula  I = v^2/2;
Escape velocity:  v = sqrt(2GM/r).
Esacpe energy equals half of circular orbit energy.
(Hence escape velocity = sqrt(2) times orbit velocity: about 40% extra)

Sun's mass: 1.99e30 kg.
Earth's mass: 5.98e24 kg.

Earth low orbit velocity is 7.9 km/s.
Moon low orbit velocity is 1.7 km/s.
Moon's orbit velocity is 1.0 km/s.
Earth's orbit velocity is 30 km/s.

- --
Tim Little

------------------------------
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==========================
 498  6037 13-Sep-1993 kirsch@rhea.inf  BL: Beowulf class Free Trader TL 15 <<
 498  6038 13-Sep-1993 kirsch@rhea.inf  BL: How to place damage locations << Th
 498  6039 13-Sep-1993 gt4534b@prism.g  Re: BL Errors (& Corrections) << > Sinc
 498  6040 13-Sep-1993 Brian Jones      Jupiter's gravity <<  Joe Heck <CCJOE@M
 498  6041 13-Sep-1993 gwh@lurnix.COM   In-Jokes << There are a couple of reall
 498  6042 14-Sep-1993 l.wiseman1@geni  <<  Evenin' all!
 498  6043 14-Sep-1993 Adrian Hurt      The Architecture Bit From "Several Repl
 498  6044 11-Sep-1993 Jeff Zeitlin     Freedonia <<   Actually, there really i
 498  6045 15-Sep-1993 Adrian Hurt      What Can Land Where << l.wiseman1@genie
 498  6046 15-Sep-1993 "Ralph Ferneyho  Brilliant Lances - Oh dear... << Well,

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

Bundle: 498
Archive-Message-Number: 6037
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 16:16:08 EDT
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: BL: Beowulf class Free Trader TL 15

Hello fellow Travellers,

the following is the design of the Beowulf class Free Trader of TL 15. I hope
this message is on the list only once. I tried to send it some hours ago, but
I got no reply from the demon at engrg, so here it is again. I wonder where
the other mail has gone to, but perhaps James got it on traveller-requests.
If this is so, please tell me James :).

The design starts with a 132 column calculation table and ends with a 80 column
design evaluation and damage location table.

- ---------------------------- design follows ----------------------------------

Beowulf-Class 200 tons Free Trader TL-15

                                Volume(in kl)       Weight(in t)        Power(in MW)        Price(in MCr)
free Volume: 200 tons           2,800.000
Hull:Wedge SL, 1cm Thick, Hull:    13.500             202.500              0.000                0.378
 Bonded SD, TL-15, AV: 28  IS:      0.500               7.500              0.000                0.014       Size: Small
Jump Drive: TL-15, Jump-1          56.000             112.000              0.000               16.800
  Fuel(1 Jump-1)                  280.000               0.000              0.000                0.000
Electronics:
Control Systems (TL-15)             2.800               0.280            ----   see workstations  ---
Computers: 3x TL-15 Std            21.000               4.200              1.650               18.000       Ooohhh...
Flight Avionics TL 8+               0.001               0.001              0.100                0.020
Radio (30,000km) TL 15              0.001               0.002              1.000                0.030       10m^2 Ant.
Maser (1000 AU) TL 15               0.030               0.060              0.600                0.180        1m^2 Ant.
Passiv EMS (90,000 km) TL-15        0.600               1.200              0.060                1.200
  Ant.: AA:0.8 m^2 AD:10m ?         0.080               0.080              0.000                0.080       fixed Array
0.8m^2
Active EMS (120,000 km) TL-15       1.800               3.600              9.000                3.600        3.6m^2 Ant.
2 turret Hardpoint sockets         84.000               0.000              0.000                0.010
Fuel Scoops                         0.000               0.000              0.000                0.210
Fuel Purification Plant (250kl/6h) 50.000             100.000              1.250                0.038       TL 15
minimal intern. Hangar(Air raft)   56.000              11.200              0.000                0.011
  Launch Port 16m^2 surface area    0.000               0.000              0.000                0.016
2 large Cargo Hatches (20m^2 ea.)   0.000               0.000              0.000                0.040
Power Plant 162 MW TL-15           27.000              54.000           (162.000)               5.400
  Power Plant Fuel 1 year          16.200               1.134              0.000                0.000
Maneuver Drive 1g                  10.000              10.000            100.000                0.100       10m^2 Surfac
e
Contra Grav Lifters TL-15          60.000              40.000             20.000                6.000
Artivicial Grav/G Comp. TL-15 6g   28.000              56.000             14.000                1.400
Ext.Life Support                   22.400              22.400              0.560                1.400
2 Air Locks                         6.000               0.400              0.002                0.010
12 Small Staterooms               336.000              24.000              0.006                0.480
 8 Low Berth                      112.000               8.000              0.008                0.400
 3 Workstations                    21.000               0.600              0.600                1.200
Maneuver Fuel 60 g-turns          750.000               0.000              0.000                0.000
Cargo                             845.088               0.000              0.000                0.000
                                                    ----------         ----------            ---------
                                                      659.157 t          148.854 MW            57.017 MCr

loaded mass: 659.157 + 9.4 (enclosed Air raft) + 72.1 (Fuel) + 845.088 (Cargo) = 1585.745 t
To buy a full Fuel tank refined: 36050 Cr (according to p.14, Price of Fuel)
Crew: Engineering: 1, Maneuvering: 2, Stewards: 1
Fuel: 1030 kl + 16.2 kl Power Plant Fuel
Antenna area: 15.4 m^2, Cargo Hatches: 40 m^2, Launch Port: 16m^2, Maneuver Drive: 10m^2;
compared to 900 m^2, no problem.



Beowulf class Free Trader: TL-15 200t

General Data:
  Displacement: 200                         Hull Armor: 28
  Length: 43 meters                         Volume: 2800 kl
  Price: 57.017 MCr (without Air raft)      Target Size: S
  Configuration: Wedge SL                   Tech Level: 15
  Mass(Loaded/Empty): 1585.745/659.157

Engineering Data:
  Power Plant: 162 MW Fusion Power Plant(162 MW/hit), 1 year duration
  Jump Performance: 1 (280 kl fuel)
  G-Rating: 1G(100 MW/G), Contra-Grav lifters(20 MW)
  G-Turns: 60(82.4 using jump fuel), 12.5 kl fuel each
  Maint: 56 (21 without any Cargo but containing fuel)

Electronics:
  Computer: 3 TL-15 Model St (0.55 MW each)
  Commo: 30,000km radio(1 hex; 1 MW), 1000AU maser(unlimited; 0.6 MW)
  Avionics: TL-8+ Avionics
  Sensors: Passiv EMS fixed array  90,000km (3 hexes; 0.06 MW),
           Aktive EMS fixed array 120,000km (4 hexes; 9 MW)
  Controls: 3 Workstations (no bridge)

Armament:
  2 turret hardpoint sockets fitted (Loc: 16/17, 18/19; Arcs: All)

Accomodations:
  Life Support: Extended (0.56 MW), Gravitic Compensators (6G; 14 MW)
  Crew: 4 (2 Maneuver, 1 Engineering, 1 Steward/Air Raft Pilot)
  Crew Accomodations: 4 Small Staterooms (0.00005 MW each)
  Passenger Accommodations: 8 Small Staterooms (0.00005 MW each),
      8 Low Berth (0.001 MW each)
  Cargo: 845.088 kl, 2 large cargo hatches
  Small Craft and Launch Facilities: Enclosed Air Raft with internal Hangar
    (minimal), 1 launch port
  Air Locks: 2

Notes:
  The Beowulf class Free Trader is the state-of-the-art construction within
the borders of the ....(Spinward Marches,Regency... insert as you like).
Though the ship costs about 11 MCr more than it's less sophisticated sister,
the Moraine class Free Trader. Based on the same hull, this design includes an
enclosed Air Raft in an internal hangar, more Cargo and sports much easier
maintenance. The ship requires a crew of 4 for full operations.
  The ship's power plant has a reserve of more than 10 MW for the addition
of two 150 Mj Laser Turrets.

The Fuel purification machinery(1.25 MW) can refine 250 kl each 6 hours.
The whole Fuel load (1030 kl) can be refined in 24 hours 44 minutes.

Damage Tables:
Area        Surface Hits        Internal Explosion
- --------------------------------------------------------------
  1         1-3 Ant             1-7 Elec, 8-20 Qtrs
 2- 3       1-2 Ant             Qtrs
 4- 5                           Hold
 6- 7       1 AL                Hold
 8- 9       1-2 CH              Hold
  10        1 Launch Port       1-16 Qtrs, 17-20 TS
  11                            1-16 Hold, 17-20 TS
12-15       1-3 CH              Hold
16-17       1-3 Launch Port     1-2 Qtrs, 3-4 TS, 5-20 Hold
18-19                           1-5 Eng, 6-20 Hold
  20        1 AL                Eng

Systems:
JD-1H, PP-1H, FPP-1H, CG-1H, MD-(2h), SSR-(2h), LS-2H, ELS-1H,
AG-1H, Hangar-(2h), Cargo Space-9H (?), all others-(1h)
- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de

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

Bundle: 498
Archive-Message-Number: 6038
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 16:16:40 EDT
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: BL: How to place damage locations

This is also a repost, because - like the Free Trader design - the demon at
engrg didn't answer.

How to create Damage Tables for TNE.

When I finished the Technical Booklet (TB) of Brilliant Lances I found, that
a description of the creation of Damage Tables for the new created Spaceships
is missing. In the Design Evaluation chapter on page 17, I found only vague
hints on how to create them. Here is my solution, to create these tables.
The 200 tons Beowulf class Free Trader is used as an example.

1. Calculate the volume of the ship's components as suggested in step 3 of the
   Design Evaluation.
   Beowulf:  Electronics:    47.312 kl
             Hold:         1947.288 kl
             Quaters:       518.400 kl
             Engineering:   203.000 kl
             Weapon Mounts:  84.000 kl
             total:        2800.000 kl Ship Volume

2. Calculate the percentage parts of these components compared to the ships
   displacement:

   to calculate:                        Beowulf
   ----------------------------------   -------------------------
   ElecPart = Electronics/Ship Volume   ElecPart =   47.312/2800 = 0.01690
   HoldPart = Hold/Ship Volume          HoldPart = 1947.288/2800 = 0.69546
   QtrsPart = Quaters/Ship Volume       QtrsPart =  518.400/2800 = 0.18351
   EngPart  = Engineering/Ship Volume   EngPart  =  203.000/2800 = 0.07250
   WeapPart = Weapon Mounts/Ship Volume WeapPart =   84.000/2800 = 0.03000

3. The whole ship has 400 (20x20) damage locations. To get the damage
   locations of the single parts, multiply the calculated "Part"-Values
   by 400. The result is the number of damage locations each component
   has.

   to calculate:                Beowulf                         in %
   ------------------------     -----------------------------
   Elecdam = 400*ElecPart       Elecdam = 400 * 0.01690 =   7    1.75
   Holddam = 400*HoldPart       Holddam = 400 * 0.69546 = 278   69.50
   QtrsDam = 400*QtrsPart       QtrsDam = 400 * 0.18351 =  73   18.25
   EngDam  = 400*EngPart        EngDam  = 400 * 0.07250 =  30    7.50
   WeapDam = 400*WeapPart       WeapDam = 400 * 0.03000 =  12    3.00

4. You have now calculated the damage locations for the internal Explosion
   damage table of the ship. Now these locations must be placed. To do this,
   imagine the exterior design of the ship, as you would like to see it.
   That's easy for the Beowulf, because there are enough pictures and even
   deck plans around, to do this.

   Some hints:
   To find the hit location of the ship, you first role a D20. This roll
   select the hull part using the "Hull Surface Loaction" picture (page 17
   Brilliant Lances Rules of Play (RoP), or page 319 in TNE).
   To place the damage location think of the globe sections as the directions
   from where incoming weapons reach the hull. Then remember your intended
   interior design of the ship. Think of the parts of the interior which can
   be damaged, if a weapon hit from one of the sectors of the globe. Keeping
   this in mind, you choose these of the five categories, which can be touched
   by a hit from this location. You need at least a rough idea on how the ship
   shall look like.

   Every Component with more than 20 hit locations could count as one line
   in the damage location table. That's true for the Hold, the Quarters and
   the Engine Components in this case. The other components damage locations
   have to be placed for a second D20 role.

   BTW: Only a sphere shaped ship can apply this damage locations without
   bothering shadows for the incoming fire. Think of the fire arcs of the
   different fire locations. If a ship fires in this arc, it should not be
   able to damage the weapon installations. If you like to use details, it
   would be an interesting work, to place the damage location with more
   details :).

Result of this steps is the damage location table for internal explosions.
And the surface damage? Well, you should use the same method:

1. Caculate the antenna area, cargo hatch surface, launch port surface and
   Air Lock surface. Then find the part of the ship's surface they take.
   You can calculate the ship's surface by using the MV-value of the Hull
   Size Table (p.2 TB) multiplied by 100.

   to calculate:                                Beowulf:
   -----------------------------------------    ---------------------------
   AntPart = antenna area/ship surface area     AntPart = 15.4/900 = 0.0171
   CHPart  = Cargo hatch area/ship surface      CHPart  = 40.0/900 = 0.0444
   LPPart  = Launch Port area/ship surface      LPPart  = 16.0/900 = 0.0178
   ALPart  = Air Lock area/ship surface area    ALPart  =  4.0/900 = 0.0044
   EMMPart = EMMRad area/ship surface area      not available

   I've calculated the Air Lock Surface area as 2 square meters for the
   exterior door. I havn't found any hints on the true surface area.

2. Use the calculated values to find the surface damage locations.

   to calculate:                    Beowulf:
   AntDam = 400 * AntPart           AntDam = 400 * 0.0171 =  7
   CHDam  = 400 * CHPart            CHDam  = 400 * 0.0444 = 18
   LPDam  = 400 * LPPart            LPDam  = 400 * 0.0178 =  7
   ALDam  = 400 * ALPart            ALDam  = 400 * 0.0044 =  2
   EMMDam = 400 * EMMPart

   Step 4 of the Design Evaluation chapter says, that external grapples
   are part of the surface fixtures. If you check through the tables, no
   ship uses this. Every ship which has an external grapple locates its
   Small Craft there.

3. Locate these damage locations on the hull. Use the same method

I hope the ideas mentioned above are of some help. It took me 3 hours to
figure out how to calculate and place the damage locations on the Beowulf
class Free Trader. It took much less time on the Marva class Far Trader.
I hope with some routine, I can create this tables a bit faster.

All in all a ship design for BL takes about 3 hours for small ships. I don't
know how long it will take on large ships. I will soon try :).

With calculated damage tables....errr...well...

Juergen Kirsch


- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de

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

Bundle: 498
Archive-Message-Number: 6039
From: gt4534b@prism.gatech.edu
Subject: Re: BL Errors (& Corrections)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 11:27:23 -0400 (EDT)

> Since I'm curious about orbit periods, can any of you physics wizards
> suggest a calculation to determine orbit period around a planet given
> distance and mass of central planet (or star?)
>
>  joe                          University of Missouri - Columbia
>  ccjoe@mizzou1.missouri.edu   (314) 882-5000

    Pulling out my handy copy of "Golstein's Tome of Mystical Classical
Mechanics," we find that tha appropriate expression is:

          T = 2*pi*a^(3/2)*(m/k)^(1/2)

(This is the essence of the Third Law of Kepler The Mystical.)
Here, a is the semi-major axis of the orbit (i.e. radius, if you assume
a spherical orbit). m is the "reduced mass" of the two-body system:

         m = m(1)*m(2)/(m(1)+m(2))

If ,say, m(1)>>m(2) this reduces to the approximation m=m(1). (This will
be the case when you consider the typical spacecraft orbiting a planet.)
Finally, k is the force constant of the potential; in the case of gravity
we have k = G*m(1)*m(2), where G =6.67E-11 Nm^2/kg^2 (I think...)
Putting this all together, then, we have:

      T^2 = (4*pi^2*a^3)/(G*m(1))

Now, as to units...assuming a in km, M in earth masses (Me = 5.976E+24 kg),
we obtain:
      T^2 = (0.99E-4)*a^3/M     with time T in seconds
          = (1E-4)*a^3/M        (approximating)

So, for example, orbiting Earth (M=1) at an altitude of 100km (a=6440)
we get T=5184 s = 1.44 h. This assumes I did my math right, but I did
double check by calculating the Earth's period around the sun (with
a back-of-the-envelope calculation, I got .95 years...that seems good
enough to me...)

- ---Marty "Wow! My first post to the TML in years" Jarrio
- ---gt4534b@prism.gatech.edu

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

Bundle: 498
Archive-Message-Number: 6040
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 93 10:37:23 -0700
From: bjones@concannon.llnl.gov (Brian Jones)
Subject: Jupiter's gravity

 Joe Heck <CCJOE@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu>

wrote

"The other nit is a bit more significant, if you're in combat near a Gas
 Giant: The size of Jupiter is wrong.. it's radius is 4.76. It's diameter
 is 9.52 hexes. The effects of the gravity well are SEVERELY distorted. I
 hope I'm not putting my foot in it here with lousy calculations, but what
 they
 say is:                What I calc'd it to be:

 1G Threshold           Threshold 1G    2G    3G    4G    5G  ... 10G
 1.4 Hexes              Hexes     15.5  10.95 8.95  7.75  6.93    4.9
"

Well, since the max surface gravity of jupiter is less than 3 g's, I'd
guess I'd have to go with GDW on this one.


|------------------------ "History shows again and  ------------------------|
|       DISCLAIM           again how nature points       Brian R. Jones     |
|         THIS!	           out the folly of men"    bjones@vsattui.llnl.gov |
|------------------------  B.O.C.                   ------------------------|

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

Bundle: 498
Archive-Message-Number: 6041
Subject: In-Jokes
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 93 11:48:40 -0700
From: gwh@lurnix.COM


There are a couple of really minor in-jokes in what I've done
for Traveller, but there was a nearly totally accidental beaut
in the "Terror in the Light" Merc:2k article for the Horror issue.

The company which owns the oil rig was origionally named SCOCO,
South Coast Oil COmpany, along the lines of ARCO and CONOCO.
I intentionally put the CO on because there's a computer software
and operating systems company named Santa Cruz Operation which is
referred to as SCO, which several of my friends work at and
whose software is pretty well known....  and I didn't want
to link the real SCO with this sort of wierdness.

Unbeknownst to me, between receipt of the article at GDW and
their publishing it, whoever edited it changed SCOCO to SCO.
#	Publishing Tip #1: If there's a change you really, really don't
#	want made in an article, make sure that you explain what it
#	is and why in the cover letter.
That would have been fine, except that GDW does not normally send
galleys of your work (the preprints, essentially, so you can
do a final authors reality-check on them) before publication.
#	Publishing Tip #2: Ask for Galleys

So... lo and behold, issue hits game store nearby, I pick it up
off shelf and start to read it and in the third line or so,
still in large type... "SCO".  Games of Berkeley employees
look at me strangely following loud scream of "They did WHAT???"

I fired off an email letter to SCO appologizing for what happened
and explaining how.  They laughed and only asked for a copy of the
issue for their collection of non-Santa Cruz Operation uses of
"SCO", which they keep for amusements sake.  I fired off a
real letter to Michelle Sturgeon with a "Do you have any idea
of what you've done to me, there's a whole computer company
which is half-sure I did this on purpose...!" central point,
though making it clear it wasn't a real problem and everyone
seemed to be amused.

- -george william herbert

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

Bundle: 498
Archive-Message-Number: 6042
From: l.wiseman1@genie.geis.com
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 93 05:15:00 BST
Subject:

 Evenin' all!
 I'd like to give a general "your welcome" to everyone who sent
us messages of thanks in the last few weeks. Anybody remember a
couple of years ago when there was a debate as to if it would be
a good thing for GDW to have acess to the list? Some felt it
might inhibit discussion...that does not seem to have been the
case.
 Anyway, my apologies for the tardiness of some of these
replies. We are up to our necks in FF&S right now, and its hard
to pry the time loose to deal with anything else.
 -----------------------------
 Re: Source material for Traveller:
 Marc admits to gaining inspiration from a wide variety of SF.
He specifically mentions the Dumarest of Terra series, the Ensign
Flandry series, the various Nicholas Van Rijn stories, numerous
H. Beam Piper and "Doc Smith" stories, and Niven's Known Space
stories as inspiring the atmosphere and background of the
Imperium. I have to state at this point that as far as SF goes,
Marc is one of the most widely read people I know. When we first
met, over 20 years ago, I was amazed and delighted to discover
that he had the largest collection of Analogs and SF paperbacks I
had ever seen...and I had thought my own was gigantic. He had
read and constantly re-read them all (in those days SF could not
be published fast enough to suit him).
 As for various people and their speculations that they "know"
where the source for the alien races: I was in on the ground
floor of almost all of the aliens. None of them are directly
inspired by any single source -- every one was a committee
design, added to slowly over several years.
 ------------------------------
 Dane:
 >Crew Positions/Seats has a column labeled "Wt" -- Short, of
> course, for "Weight". :/  <Yes, this is a nit>
 I assume the problem is we should have called it mass? This is
a minor point of friction in GDW. Frank holds that people know
the difference and won't get confused. I hold out for calling it
mass because I know the flak people will give us over incorrect
terminology.
 ------------------------------
 Pedro A.C. Tavares
 Would you re-send me your land address. I lost your message,
and can't send you the flyers you requested.
 ------------------------------
 Scott KelloGG
 > we can now build Jump torpedoes again.
 It wasn't a misprint...we intended to allow smaller jump
capable vessels. My guess would be that a jump capable ship could
be built at about 15 tons hull size (you need fuel, controls,
power plant, etc, in addition to drives). Anybody done one
already?
 ------------------------------
 Joe Heck:
 > Seems to me like GDW is not doing too many retcons, but more
 >  going back to what a lot of folks called "the good ole
 >   days" of Traveller.
 That is what we are trying for.
 ------------------------------
 Bundle: 495
 Archive-Message-Number: 6001
 Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1993 12:22:44 MET_DST
 Juergen Kirsch:
 > No more TL 17+ stuff like desintegrators or repulsors. I
 >   hope this will be fixed in Fire, Fusion & Steel.
 It will be, along with star gates, stutter warp, and other non-
Imperium universe stuff.
 ------------------------------
 Mark Urbin/Et alia:
 >On page 1 of Brilliant Lances, it states, "streamlined hulls
> may skim gas giants but may not land on planetary surfaces
> with atmospheres greater than Thin;"
 13 September, 1993
 From Dave Nilsen
 To: Traveller/Brilliant Lances Fans
 Re: Streamlining
 Greetings all, I'm just popping my head out of the bunker long
enough to clarify a topic. You are correct to be inquiring in the
direction you are going in the posts I've seen. The sentence in
Brilliant Lances was incomplete because it did not state that
those streamlining limitations applied only to spacecraft that
did not have further lift assistance installed. The sentence
should read (and does, in FF&S) as follows:
 In general, airframe hulls may enter any planetary atmosphere
to land on the surface or skim fuel; streamlined hulls may skim
gas giants but may not land on planetary surfaces with
atmospheres of greater than Thin; and unstreamlined hulls may do
neither. These capabilities may be modified if the vessel is
equipped with some form of weight compensating drive, such as
contra-grav, see the Sub-Light Maneuver Drive chapter.
 In terms of what we call the "Imperial Space" campaign, for
which the BL design sequence is intended, any streamlined vessel
with contra-grav may also land anywhere it darn well pleases, but
its top speed is limited in certain types of atmosphere.
Unstreamlined ships have a hard time landing in an atmosphere
even with contra-grav, as contra-grav only negates some 99% of
their weight, the rest must be accounted for some other way.
Without aerodynamic lift, this is something of a problem. So
unstreamlined ships typically do not have contra-grav anyway.
While such a ship could make an emergency landing with contra-
gravs, it would typically have a hard time getting back off.
Imagine the Donosev (or, as we call it here, the "International
House of Pancakes ship") trying to flare out for a graceful
landing. Ugh. Crash and burn, baby.
 More clarifications as time presents itself. Keep your heads
down.
 Dave
 ------------------------------
 Juergen Kirsch/Adrian Hurt/et. al.
 >  144-Mj `Laser Lance'.  No stats on the Vol or Mass of those
> puppies.
  OK. Here is the relevent information. These are special one-
offs created by Dave using the laser design sequence.
From the Rampart RF-128 Fighter
 TL-15 144-Mj Laser Lance (fixed forward), Mass: 53.4,
Vol: 28.2, MW: 4, MCr: 0.5522
From the 20-Ton Armed (Military) Gig (revised)
 TL-14 144Mj Laser Lance (fixed forward), Mass: 63.6,
 Vol: 34.8, MW: 4, MCr: 0.8882
From the Kinunir-class Colonial Cruiser
 TL-15 700-Mj Laser Barbette, Mass: 251.26, Vol: 140, MW:
19, MCr: 2.2
 >   As for spinal mounts and small ships:  the Chrysanthemum has
 >   *two* of 'em! I wonder if GDW could be asked to clarify the
 >   spinal mount rules as given?
 We certainly will, as soon as we can spare a few minutes from FF&S.
 ------------------------------
 Mark Urbin <urbin@interlan.interlan.com>

> Life support.  There is a set of numbers in a table,
> but no info on how to apply them.  Is is per lifeform per
> 24 hour period or what?
Nope. Life support machinery is assigned on the basis of
 overall displacement, I believe.
 ------------------------------
  esharpe@phad.hsc.usc.edu
 > In an elderly porfessor like voice
 >   No, no my boy, alway be sure to call it 'research'.  :-)
 On this topic, consult Tom Leher, "Lobachevsky" and Pablo
 Picasso's comments regarding immature versus mature artists. : )
 ------------------------------
 Joe of Mizzou:
 Belated congratulations from GDW to you and your POSSLQ.
 ------------------------------
 Bundle: 497
 Archive-Message-Number: 6027
 Date: Fri, 10 Sep 93 17:50:12 -0400
 From: Derek Wildstar <wildstar@quark.qrc.com>
 Subject: Brilliant Lances and Traveller Inspiration
 kstclair@CSOS.ORST.EDU (Kelly St.Clair) writes:
 > [on k'kree and hivers being inspired by Niven's Puppeteers,
> and Fteirle (Aslan) being inspired by Kzin]
 >
 > I'm suprised that nobody mentioned C.J.Cherryh's Hani
 When did the Hani first appear? I can't recall having read
anything abou them myself, but I haven't read as much of
Cherryh's stuff as I should have. What was their first
appearance in print?
 J Roberson:
 > I have never played Classic Traveller; I have always
 > assumed the only difference was no Rebellion.
 >
 > Wildstar:
 > And lots of game mechanic differences, including readable
rules and a lack of errors ;-)
 You'd be amazed at the typos in the Classic Traveller Stuff. I
think a lot of people are looking at these books through rose-
colored LI-binoculars...: )
 ------------------------------
 > Scott S. Kellogg
 > What are the in jokes in Traveller?
 Personally, I don't count simply naming something after a
friend or relative an in joke (I consider these more in the
nature of tributes). There are numerous cases of worlds,
starships, cities, and so on named after friends, relatives,
associates, or famous persons, and I can't begin to name them all.
The planet Ruie (as in Rescue on Ruie, one of the first JTAS
Amber zones) was named after a Traveller fan Marc met at
one of the early Origins conventions.
 My idea of an in joke is something a little more esoteric like
the planet Twylo (reference: the Dick Van Dyke show) or the
planet Remulak (Reference: Saturday Night Live: BTW, I tried to
get a city called Remulac put on the map in the Europa game _Fall
of France_ but my efforts were thwarted). I consider stuff like
"Have fun storming the castle!" (Survival Margin) to be an in
joke.
 ------------------------------
 Now This:
 Traveller Trivia Quiz (TTQ)
 No prizes, no award other than the feeling of accomplishment if
you get them all right.
 These questions were originally published in the British RPG
magazine Role-Player Independent. I'll post the answers as soon
as their contest has run its course, but I thought the TML's
board of grognards ought to be able to answer these in their
sleep.
 1.  Avery's Relationship to Strephon is:
     A) Clone
     B) Son
     C) Drinking Buddy
     D) Unknown
 2.  Strephon was fond of quoting:
     A) Abraham Lincoln
     B) Robert F. Kennedy
     C) Elvis Presley
     D) Miracle Max
     E) All of the above
     F) A & B
 3.  Branj Dilgaadin was:
     A) Psionic
     B) Norris heir
     C) Bald
     D) All of the above
     E) A & C
     F) A & B
 4.  Ciencia Iphegenia is:
     A) Strephon's beloved wife
     B) Strephon's estranged empress
     C) Dead
     D) All of the above
     E) A & C
 5.  Dulinor Astrin Ilethian was:
     A) Emperor of the Third Imperium
     B) Duke of Ilelish
     C) Eaten by farm machinery
     D) A dork
     E) All of the above
     F) A & B
     G) B, C, & D
     H) C & D
 ------------------------------
 OK, I've put enough keystrokes into my machine for today.
Signing off 'til next time.
 Loren K. Wiseman

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

Bundle: 498
Archive-Message-Number: 6043
From: adrian@cee.hw.ac.uk (Adrian Hurt)
Subject: The Architecture Bit From "Several Replies"
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 93 9:31:01 WET DST

> >My guess is that Droyne vehicles will be likely to have a geodesic framework.
Correction:                                                  geodetic

> >Humans have tried this, and it works rather well - one example was the
> >Vickers Wellington bomber of WW2.  For some reason, though, the rib-like
> >framework is still used.
>
> Cool!  Sounds rather more complicated to mass produce tho.  I take it this
> was a stronger design?

Yes.  It could certainly survive damage which would bring down a more
conventional aircraft, although it was not invulnerable.  My guess is
that the geodetic framework has no key elements, whereas a normal frame
does - its spine, and on aircraft the main wing spars.  If one of those
key elements is broken, e.g. by a lucky hit from an 88mm gun, then the
aircraft comes apart.  You can't break the spine of a Wellington if it
doesn't have one, so a hit which would snap the tail off any other aircraft
just puts a big hole in the Wellington.

As for mass production, I expect that it could be done.  Humans were using
spine-and-rib frames long before they heard of mass production, and I'd
expect that old Droyne water craft would have geodetic frames.  When they
invented mass production, they may have considered spine-and-rib frames,
and may have rejected them because they were too weak.  It's a matter of
mass producing what you're used to.

It might be worth incorporating the use of geodetic frames by the Droyne
into the game, by making their craft a bit more expensive than human ones,
but capable of surviving more damage.

> > And I have no idea what a Hiver spaceship will look like. :-)
>
> I rather doubt that it would look like a burrow in the ground...  :-)

Before or after landing? :-)

- --
 "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: 498
Archive-Message-Number: 6044
Subject: Freedonia
From: jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 93 21:24:00 -0500

  Actually, there really is a place called Fre(e)donia.  The
  self-proclaimed "Free People's Anarchic Republic of Fredonia" can
  be found on the campus of the State University of New York,
  College at Fredonia.  Located somewhat southwest of Buffalo, NY
  and east of Erie, PA.  The United States has not as yet extended
  formal recognition, nor has the United Nations acted on their
  application for membership.

  It would not surprise me if FASA got started there...
==========================================================================
Jeff Zeitlin                                      jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com
- ---
 ~ QMPro 1.50 41-4533 ~ It does often seem that man must fight to live.


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

Bundle: 498
Archive-Message-Number: 6045
From: adrian@cee.hw.ac.uk (Adrian Hurt)
Subject: What Can Land Where
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 93 9:55:22 WET DST

l.wiseman1@genie.geis.com writes:
>
>  In general, airframe hulls may enter any planetary atmosphere
> to land on the surface or skim fuel; streamlined hulls may skim
> gas giants but may not land on planetary surfaces with
> atmospheres of greater than Thin; and unstreamlined hulls may do
> neither. These capabilities may be modified if the vessel is
> equipped with some form of weight compensating drive, such as
> contra-grav, see the Sub-Light Maneuver Drive chapter.

Could you substitute "lifting device" for "weight compensating device"?
A suitable size rocket should also allow just about anything to land
anywhere, regardless of atmosphere - all it needs to be able to do is
overcome the local gravity.  I recall seeing on the news a little while
ago how some people (NASA? JPL? Who was it?) had built a little craft
which used just rockets to go up, move a little way sideways, and come
down again.  Not far in any of those directions, but it was a start,
and by TL 9 I should expect that anything which can overcome the
gravity of an airless planet can equally well overcome the gravity of
a similar sized planet with an atmosphere.

- --
 "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: 498
Archive-Message-Number: 6046
From: "Ralph Ferneyhough"  <phd99@cc.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Brilliant Lances - Oh dear...
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 93 10:44:27 WET DST


Well, I would like to start with taking my hat off to GDW - I had thought
that they couldn't screw anything up more than they did with the TNE
rulebook, but I was wrong! They managed to excel themselves by some
orders of magnitude with Brilliant Lances (and I hope you are listening
GDW - this is one *very* dissatisfied customer).

I am sure regular readers of this column would have seen the errors that
other people have pointed out about this game, so I won't bother to
point them out. When I first read them, BL was not available in my local
shops (UK), so I took them with a pinch of salt - "sure", I thought,
"there are teething troubles with every game, these are just a few
errata". Oh no - these are just the tip of the iceberg! I knew I was off
to a good start when the box contained a sheet of corrections. It looks
as if they had a correction for just about every ship in the game, and
they still haven't found them all.

The game itself, I think, is definitely overpriced. It is $30, which was
selling at 20 UK pounds here, for what? 80 pages of rules in two
booklets - one of which they couldn't even be bothered to cover in card;
a pad of forms which are overly crowded and complex, and as usual would
have been much cheaper to photocopy from a book; three hex play sheets
(haven't had any of them before (not) - add them to the stack I guess); two
sheets of counters, which although colourful, are not exactly ground
breaking in their design; two player aid cards; and three dice which
must be the worst dice I have ever received in a game - sheesh, even the
six sided dice have SPOTS on!!!!! Oh, the sheet of errata, and a survey
sheet which they really do not want me to fill in - not that I will,
because they can't even be bothered to make that pre-paid.

On to the game - well I haven't play tested it, mainly because I don't
want to - the game does not exactly ooze with welcoming desire to play
it. It looks as if they have bravely forced the combat rules into their
house system, which they may well have succeeded with, but looking
through, I found the rules cramped, and difficult to refer to. For
example, I decided to look up how Meson screens worked, and there is no
entry in the meagre contents table, and the paragraph is only
highlighted with a small piece of slightly bolder text in a chunk which
turns out to be the whole set of rules on special defences.

My more major concern is the design rules, as to be honest, my ship
combat rules when I play tend to be heavily altered - I will rarely, if
ever, bother with plotting the positions of ships etc, and work with an
abstract system - much as MegaTraveller did. This of course makes most
of the box set redundant to me, but however, I had to purchase it
because GDW saw fit not to bother putting the ship design rules in the
main rulebook.

Why, I just do not know. At sixteen pages, they could have easily have
ditched the sample scenarios (which are a waste of space anyway, as any
serious player would have bought the rules book anyway), and put it in
with the rest. Especially as they put in a load of stuff which was meant
to tide us over until BL, but turned out to be just as long anyway!

And, to top it all, the rules are incomplete as well! We get a small
sample of weapons (presumably we have to buy Fire, Fusion and Steel
now), mostly lasers - no indication of Fusion/Plasma weapons, no Hi-tech
(TL16+) weapons, a very small sample of spinal mounts, which must have
been built with some system already available, as the prices are not
plucked out of nowhere - the erratic figures suggest they have been
designed from some sort of table, so why is it not included?
No decent screens, a rehash of the missiles which turns them into flying
lasers (why no explosives as before), etc etc etc. In my opinion they
have *really* screwed up the ship designs big time.

In fact, the only bit which seems to have survived intact from MegaTrav
is the torturous sensor designs - which were the only bit I disliked in
the first place! I *hate* trying to add up measly .003 cubic meters when
everything else is in multiples of cubic meters!

We have such anomalies as no indication of maximum number of turrets (I
presume you could theoretically build a ship with as many turrets as you
could get on the surface area), plus the use of multiple spinal mounts.
Not to mention the changes to drives etc, most of which I don't like.

And the armour! That's a good one. As far as I can make out, with
minimal extra cost, all you have to do is stick 20 cm of armour on a
ship (x28 toughness = armour value of 560!) and you have a ship which
cannot be penetrated by anything apart from meson guns! So you may lose
some antennae, but hey! who cares....

I don't know whether this system will be improved with Fire, Fusion and
Steel, but if it is, it is going to take an extraordinary amount of work
to do so - such as tables detailing how to make all those missing
weapons etc.

I guess BL is playable and workable, but either in its much reduced form
which is definitely not familiar to existing Traveller users, or with an
enormous amount of effort in order to get the thing into a recognizable
shape - hopefully some of this work will be done with FF&S, but then
again probably not.

In either case, there is a lot of work needed just to get rid of all the
errata. I for one won't be bothering - it's off to the shop to get my
money back, as I am not paying 20 pounds for 80 pages of rules.

It's a pity really, because it looks as if they could have made a very
good job of the whole thing. The idea of variable power lasers is
interesting, and could well be expanded to lots and lots of other
weaponry to make a truly variable set of spacecraft, but where are they?
As we can all probably guess, we get all of that in FF&S - but with the
track record they have with TNE so far, they will probably screw that
one up as well.

Sorry GDW. Maybe you'll get it right eventually, but not this time eh?


         _             _           _           "To err is human; to screw-up
 ___  __| |/\       __| |    ____ | \   _         needs the root password."
 \__\ \_   _ \     /  | |   |  _ \| |  | |
        | / \ \ /\/   | |   | | \ \ |  | |           O
    __  | |_/ / \  /| | |   | |_/ / |__| |  __         O               _ _
   |__| |    /  /  \| | |   |  __/|  __  | |__|          o  |\__/|  .~    ~.
        | |\ \ / /\   | |___| |   | |  | |                  /  o `./      .'
        |_| \ \\/  \  |_____| |   |_|  | |                 {o__,   \    {
             \ \    \_|     | | ____   \_|         ____      / .  . )    \
              \_\           \_| \___\ aka Asmodeus \___\     `-` '-' \    }
   ______________                         ____________     .(   _(   )_.'
  /_____________/ phd99@seq1.keele.ac.uk /___________/     '---.~_ _ _|

------------------------------
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==========================
 499  6047 15-Sep-1993 kirsch@rhea.inf  8 tons and Jump-2 << Hello fellow Trave
 499  6048 15-Sep-1993 kirsch@rhea.inf  BL: Comments and Questions << Hello fel
 499  6049 15-Sep-1993 Michael A. Surm  Re: Fre(e)donia << Here's .02 cr worth
 499  6050 15-Sep-1993 "Ed Sharpe"      Re: Freedonia << >Subject: Freedonia
 499  6051 15-Sep-1993 "THOMS, KEITH"   Good Evening to you, Loren << Loren spa
 499  6052 15-Sep-1993 Dan's Traveller  More Briallant Lances Questions/Ponderi
 499  6053 16-Sep-1993 Dan's Traveller  Re: Brilliant Lances - Oh dear... << in
 499  6054 16-Sep-1993 Robert Watkins   Alien inspirations << Ed Sharpe writes:
 499  6055 16-Sep-1993 kirsch@rhea.inf  RE: Brilliant Lances - Oh dear... << Wh
 499  6056 16-Sep-1993 James T Perkins  I'm outta here! << Just a warning that
 499  6057 16-Sep-1993 Mark Urbin       More BL << Loren writes:
 499  6058 17-Sep-1993 Jo Jaquinta      Abusing the TNE background << Greetings

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

Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6047
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1993 12:36:46 MET_DST
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: 8 tons and Jump-2

Hello fellow Travellers,

Loren asked for a very small Jumpcapable ship. Okay, here is the
TL-15 Emergency Jumppod, capable of Jump-2. This is a nice design
as a lifeboat, though it is very expensive for a ship of only
8 tons displacement.

Enjoy,
Juergen

- ------------------------------ design follows ----------------------

Emergency Jumppod 8t TL-15 Jump-2

                                Volume(in kl)       Weight(in t)        Power(in MW)        Price(in MCr)
free Volume: 9  tons              112.000
Hull:Cylinder SL, 1cm Thick, Hull:  1.760              26.400              0.000                0.039424
 Bonded SD, TL-15, AV: 28  IS:      0.063               0.945              0.000                0.001411    Size: Micro
Jump Drive: Jump-2		    3.360              11.200              0.000                1.680000
  Fuel 1 Jump-2			   16.800               0.000              0.000                0.000
Electronics:
Control Systems (TL-15)             0.112               0.0112            ----   see workstations  ---
Computers: 2x TL-15 Std            14.000               2.800              1.100               12.000
Flight Avionics TL 8+               0.001               0.001              0.100                0.020
Radio (30,000km) TL 15              0.001               0.002              1.000                0.030       10m^2 Ant.
Passiv EMS (30,000 km) TL-15        0.200               0.400              0.020                0.400
  Ant.: AA:0.1 m^2 AD:5m ?          0.005               0.005              0.000                0.005       fixed Array
0.1m^2
Power Plant 6.6 MW TL-15            1.100               2.200             (6.600)               0.220
  Power Plant Fuel 1 year           0.660               0.0462             0.000                0.000
Maneuver Drive 1g                   0.400               0.400              4.000                0.004       0.4m^2 Surfa
ce
Contra Grav Lifters TL-15           2.400               1.600              0.800                0.240
Ext.Life Support                    0.896               0.896              0.023                0.056
1 Air Locks                         3.000               0.200              0.001                0.005
1 Workstations                      7.000               0.200              0.008                0.016
2 Emergency low berth		   56.000		4.000		   0.004	        0.200
8 g-turns fuel(.5 kl/gturn)         4.000               0.000              0.000                0.000
Cargo:                              0.242               0.000              0.000                0.000
                                                    ----------         ----------            ---------
                                                       51.3064 t           6.256 MW            14.916835 MCr

loaded mass: 51.3064 + 1.456 (Fuel) + 0.242 (Cargo) = 53.0044 t
To buy a full Fuel tank refined: 2537.5 Cr
Crew: Maneuver 2 (but pod is full automatic and requires no crew, only one workstation provided for maintenance)
Fuel: 20.8 kl + 0.66 kl Power Plant Fuel
Antenna area: 10.1 m^2, Maneuver Drive: 0.4m^2;


Emergency Jumppod 8t TL-15 Jump-2

General Data:
  Displacement: 8                           Hull Armor: 28
  Length: 13.2 meters                       Volume: 112 kl
  Price: 14.917 MCr                         Target Size: MC
  Configuration: Cylinder SL                Tech Level: 15
  Mass(Loaded/Empty): 53.0044/51.3064

Engineering Data:
  Power Plant: 6.6 MW Fusion Power Plant(6.6 MW/hit), 1 year duration
  Jump Performance: 2
  G-Rating: 1G(4 MW/G), Contra-Grav lifters(0.8 MW)
  G-Turns: 8, 0.5 kl fuel each
  Maint: 4 (no maintenance troubleshooting computer)

Electronics:
  Computer: 2 TL-15 Model St (0.55 MW each)
  Commo: 30,000km radio(1 hex; 1 MW)
  Avionics: TL-8+ Avionics
  Sensors: Passiv EMS fixed array 30,000km (1 hex; 0.02 MW),
  Controls: 1 Workstation

Armament: none

Accomodations:
  Life Support: Extended (0.023 MW)
  Crew: none
  Crew Accomodations: 1 Workstations
  Passenger Accommodations: 2 Emergency Low Berth
  Cargo: 0.242 kl
  Air Locks: 1

Notes:
The Jumppod is the last resort of a misjumped ship. It can carry up to 8
persons in two emergency low berth. It is capable of one Jump 2 and has
hardly enough fuel to land on a planet. The operation profile of the pod
is simple:
Get the eight passengers in the emergency low berth and start the launch
sequence. Be sure to enter a correct Jump destination in the pods computer,
before the launch. When the pod is started, the computer takes over. In
the destination system, the computer searches for the next planet and
heads for an orbit. In orbit, the distress beacon is started. Once a
reply gets in, the computer asks for remote control assuming enough fuel
is left. If this is the case, a remote operator can land the pod. If not
enough fuel is left, the computer asks for a rescue mission.

While the computer waits for a reply on the distress signal, only low berthes
and the radio are powered. All other systems are powered down to save power
plant fuel. The computer only comes alive, when the radio gets an reply.
The radio sends only 1 hour out of 24. The power requirements for recieving
are 1/100 of those for sending. So the overall power requirement is 0.015 MW
per hour. Which stretches the life expectancy in this low power mode to more
than 400 years.

No damage table provided.
- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de

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

Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6048
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1993 13:55:44 MET_DST
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: BL: Comments and Questions

Hello fellow Travellers,

at first a short question on the ship designs I send to the list. Till now
I added the calculation tables to them. Is anybody interested in this tables
or should I skip them in further postings? They have one advantage: It is
easy to modify the design if you don't like it.

Okay, now some comments and questions for Brilliant Lances:

Questions:

1. Fuel Cells and chemical Power plants: Is the oxygen needed for this
   power plants contained in the figures mentioned in the Technical Booklet ?

2. Sorry Loren, but once again the question: Where can I find the crew
   condition table mentioned in the Rules Book?

3. How do I calculate the MV value of hulls with other displacement than
   those named in the Hull Size Table? Is there a closed formula to
   calculate this values? (I'm a bit lasy, so I havn't tried to find
   it out myself)

4. To the rules: If the base difficulty to hit a ship is Formidable
   because of range, can a MFD cut this difficulty down?
   Example:
   The Long Range of a TL-14 150Mj Laser Turret is 8. Assume a TL-14 MFD
   is installed.
   Target is a ship 9 hexes away. The base difficulty is Formidable. The
   diff mod because of target size is -1. The absoulte range give a diff
   mod of +3. The TL-14 MFD ignores 5 diff mods.
   What is the end difficulty?
   a) Formidable, because only the +2 diff mod is ignored
   b) Easy, because the weapons range difficulty is ignored too

   I personally tend to a), but I would like to be sure.

Comments:

- - I wonder if I got the fuel consumptions of Jump drives correct:
  Assuming a 100 kl hull we get the following figure:
                                     Volume of fuel per Jump
  Jumpnumber  Volume of drive     1      2      3      4      5      6
       1           2 kl          10      -      -      -      -      -
       2           3 kl           7.5   15      -      -      -      -
       3           4 kl           6.7   13.4   20      -      -      -
       4           5 kl           6.25  12.5   18.75  25      -      -
       5           6 kl           6.0   12.0   18.00  24     30      -
       6           7 kl           5.83  11.67  17.5   23.33  29.17  35
  where "Jumpnumber" is the maximum Jump performace of the drive.
  Interesting enough the higher the possible Jump number of the drive is,
  the less fuel is consumed for a lower Jump. A one parsec jump using
  a Jump-6 drive consumes only 58% of the fuel a Jump-1 drive would need.

- - To the Technical Booklet page 15, Step 7:
  "Each ship requires 0.5 MW of power output per displacement ton (...) to
   achive an acceleration of 1 G."
  Okay, assuming a 10 tons ship, this is 5 MW per g-rating. I only need
  1g, so I assign 5 MW as Thrust power.

  The book continues:
  "To determine the acceleration rating of the ship, multiply its power
   devoted to thrust (...) by 10 and divide the product by its hull number,
   rounding fractions down."
  Okay, using this formula on the above mentioned drive give:
   5 MW * 10 / 10 tons = 5
  So using this formula the 5 MW thrust power result in a 5 possible
  maneuver g's.

  Because most of the ships (I havn't checked all) in the Technical Booklet
  use the first figure, you should translate the sentence above to:
  "To determine the acceleration rating of the ship, multiply its power
   devoted to thrust (...) by 2 and divide the product by its hull number,
   rounding fractions down."

- - some lines later the books says:
  "Each Thrust MW consumes 0.25 cubic meter of reaction mass per hour in
   addition to the normal fuel cost of the power plant."
  Please note that one combat round is 1/2 hour, so a g-turn use
  0.125kl of fuel per MW.

Any comments are strongly recommended,

Juergen

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de

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

Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6049
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 93 07:51:48 -0500
From: surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
Subject: Re: Fre(e)donia

Here's .02 cr worth of useless info.


Speaking as a graduate of SUNY Fredonia... :-)
  ...as far as I know FASA wasn't associated with the area in any way,
    shape or form.
  ...each year there is a Marx brothers festival.  Full of
    'Hail Fredonia's', nose glasses, drinking and movies.
  ...not many people know the place exists!
     (jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin) must be a spy! ;->)

Mike                                ~ ~
surman@vortex.lgs.lsu.edu          -0-0-
                                     L
                                    """




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

Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6050
From: "Ed Sharpe" <esharpe@hsc.usc.edu>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 93 09:33:22 PDT
Subject: Re: Freedonia

>Subject: Freedonia
>From: jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (Jeff Zeitlin)
>Date: Sat, 11 Sep 93 21:24:00 -0500
>
>  Actually, there really is a place called Fre(e)donia.  The
>  self-proclaimed "Free People's Anarchic Republic of Fredonia" can
>  be found on the campus of the State University of New York,
>  College at Fredonia.
>
>  It would not surprise me if FASA got started there...

In the booklet that came with FASA's adventure ships vol #1 the
administrator for the Fredonia Aeronotic and Space Administration (I think)
is name somting Firefly, which if I remember right is the name of the
character played by Grocho Marx in the Marx's brothers movie that take
place in the country of Fredonia.  As I do not have the book or the movie
in front of me this is all from memory and please pardon the spelling.
//
// esharpe@phad.hsc.usc.edu
//  You keep using that word.
//  I do not think it means what you think it means
//                           - Inigo Montoya

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

Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6051
Date: 15 Sep 93 15:09:00 EST
From: "THOMS, KEITH" <KTHOMS@nccs-evax.navy.mil>
Subject: Good Evening to you, Loren

Loren spaketh:
> Evenin' all!
> I'd like to give a general "your welcome" to everyone who sent
>us messages of thanks in the last few weeks. Anybody remember a
>couple of years ago when there was a debate as to if it would be
>a good thing for GDW to have acess to the list? Some felt it
>might inhibit discussion...that does not seem to have been the
>case.

  I for one am glad to have your interaction.  I feel closer to
the product you're developing, and it's effect on your bottom line
is that you're getting a customer who otherwise wouldn't be buying
anything new.

  Speaking of being a customer, I ordered T:TNE through your email
offer in June, and haven't heard anything since.  There was a rumor
about running out of first printings, so I've been patiently waiting
on a second printing.  Is this the truth?  (Or is this complicated
by the fact that I subscribed to Challenge at the same time and that
has arrived okay).

  FF&S:  Loren, what's your thoughts on a "beta test version" to be
passed around to some of the gang that have been saying "This errata
could have been caught if they delayed it for a week and let me
review it"?  I'd imagine GDW could include all sorts of legal and
logistical hoops to jump through with a "beta test" and you'd still
get volunteers off of TML.

  Think about it:  free proofreading and play testing at a moment's
notice.  Yes, there's the arugment that it's another delay and
hassle toward making an impossible deadline, but there is a point
about getting it right the first time.  It can be organized and
collated quickly across the TML in the same manner as the T:TNE
errata was.


Keith Thoms
Lexington Park, Maryland

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

Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6052
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 93 23:53:16 EDT
From: Dan's Traveller Mailing List Mail <tml@engrg.uwo.ca>
Subject: More Briallant Lances Questions/Ponderings


Hi everyone, following this are some comments on the BL design rules,
most of you probably don't know me, but I am one of the "old-timers" on
the list, just now getting back into the list after untangling myself
from James' enforcement of Nightly digests...But I digress...

I thought the new design sequence was fairly well thought out, and
less troublesome than the MegaTraveller Mess. Any design system without
*extensive* use is going to have a flaw or two, and every traveller
system has, one has to separate the flaws from complaints about how
it doesn't quite mesh with the last edition's sequence. Just think what
problems would have been in the system had they rushed it and included
it in the rules...

Sorry if any of these have been brought up before on the list, and I
welcome (actually desire) comments on any of this:

Step 1:
	Again we are limited to 1,000,000 tons displacement. I have
never really been happy from the first when a 5,000? ton limit was set.
Hulls should be allowed to be any size, and perhaps drives could have
a theoretical maximim....
	I'm not too comfortable with the surface area and material value
computations, however I'll have to assume that everything works out O.K.
	Configuration. Why is a box design the cheapest streamlined
one? and a dome (half sphere) is significantly more expensive than
a sphere??
	Armour, at last, the biggest flaw with MT is resolved, no
longer can impregnatable ships be designed. Sure one can have a 560 armour
ship, but not much will happen with it when it has no sensors,
communicators, weapons, or maneuver (No jump either if the grid was
included on the hull surface calulations [see next item]).

Step 2:
	I would have thought with the new surface area rules, that
the lanthium grid should have consumed some fraction of the surface area.

Step 3:
	Controls are independant of any other stage of the design process
so the cheapest would always be taken. (My opinion for a quick fix is that
the controls should always equal the TL of the computer, rather than less
than the computer's TL, or optionally that the sensors/FCD's can't be a
higher TL than the controls).
	Some packages of standard communications/sensor suites by TL would
have been a good aid, and there is blank space in this section that could
have held it...
	Communications: Recieve-only and send-only equipment modifications
would be useful, though starships would tend to have both, one might
argue that some of the more optional equipment, such as meson, where the
price and volume are significant, one or the other could come in useful.

Step 4:
	MFD sensors. If they can be used to direct fire control, why
can't they be used as real sensors, or optionally install a real sensor
to do double duty. The MFD communicator, as it is full price, really
shouldn't be restricted on it's use (as long as the MFD isn't operating
of course).
	The weapons look okay, a little short on variety, and as high-TL
are not part of the "official" traveller universe, there shunting to FF&S
is no problem for me. One cannot tell weapon effects without running
a lot of combat "simulations".

Step 5:
	Small detail, but why weren't air locks in the "access ports"
section of the rules?

Step 6:
	Fusion plants use thier fuel in KL/year!??!! a 1/8760 reduction
in fuel use?? I'm not certain of the physics involved (Metlay?) but this
seems a significant change.
	
Step 7:
	No more wierd-science thruster plates! Why is H2 used as a
reaction mass? I would have thought something more dense would have
been appropriate.
	Actually a while back on the list we had a discussion of the
most efficient fuel, and if I recall, Methane had more H per unit
volume than LHyd, and the Carbon could now be used as a reaction mass....

Step 8:
	I always thought that the life-support calculations should
include some relation to the crew size for the endurance of the craft
(or are we assuming some mystical re-generation of water/air/food?)
	There is no mention of partial outfitting of the environmntal
equipment. e.g. why have extended life support in the fuel tanks? I'm
certain there are regions of the ship that have no need of Gravity or
G compensation (flight surfaces, possibly fuel tanks)
	
Step 9:
	The new crew rules now require 3 (standard 2) crew for the
venerable scout design, because of the Cm number.
	The rounding of the terms on the crew could lead to some
abuses of the system. (e.g. 9/19  low passengers require no doctor
while 10/20 do).
	The possibility of doubling up on some positions and some
minimums (esp. for smaller ships, and commerce vs. military) should be
more fully explained.
	(nit) The repeated use of terms for different sections meaning
different things is annoying (Pm, Wm)

Design Evaluation/Data Profiles
	The presense of a bridge is not clear (e.g the scout).
	Total fuel tankage is not listed (at least I'm confused about it)
it could be calculated (loaded-unloaded mass - cargo?)
	While we are on mass, the mass of passengers is strangely absent
the seats (which mass 20Kg) obviously don't include it. This could be
significant on some ships like shuttles (8 tonnes or 1% of the mass on
the shuttle on P47 [assuming 100Kg per person])

Rules:
	As mentioned in another post, what happened to the use of
densitometers and Neutrino sensors as combat-type sensors?
	The Proportional Movement guide is nice, but as movement is
pre-plotted, and fire occurs after all movement, why is it there? Which
brings up another point, the 1/2 hour turns. In a person's hand a laser
weapon has a cycle time of seconds, why only one shot in  30 minutes of
ship combat (unless it is to allow movement to have an effect on the game).
and even though the ships may pass within a hex during movement, by
combat time, ranges may be significantly altered.
	Notibly lacking is any discussion of backup systems (except in
the computer listing of the damage effects), or multiple systems working
together. This used to be important in the maneuver drives section and
power plants. It's funny how weapons always seem to know what is active
at any time (e.g. computers), and never score hits on an already destroyed
item.

All and all a farily good design system, I really don't see what people
are complaining so much about.

Awaiting the holes that are shure to be found in my arguments

				-Dan

Dan Corrin, Network Manager, Mechanical Engineering, UWO, London, Ontario
InterNet: dan@engrg.uwo.ca.                                (519) 661-3834
TML/CZ/FrameUsers/Consim FTP site: ftp.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12)


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

Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6053
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 93 00:08:02 EDT
From: Dan's Traveller Mailing List Mail <tml@engrg.uwo.ca>
Subject: Re: Brilliant Lances - Oh dear...



in bundle 498 message 6046 on Sep 15 20:33:14 "Ralph Ferneyhough" <phd99@cc.keele.ac.uk>   said:
>
> must be the worst dice I have ever received in a game - sheesh, even the
> six sided dice have SPOTS on!!!!! Oh, the sheet of errata, and a survey

Complaining about spots on dice? That is surely just inflammatory...

> sheet which they really do not want me to fill in - not that I will,
> because they can't even be bothered to make that pre-paid.

Which wouldn't have worked pre-paid, as all companies assume that
their only purchasers are in the U.S., as all of those surveys which
are pre-paid are only effective in the U.S.

> combat rules when I play tend to be heavily altered - I will rarely, if
> ever, bother with plotting the positions of ships etc, and work with an
> abstract system - much as MegaTraveller did. This of course makes most
> of the box set redundant to me, but however, I had to purchase it

Which is precisely my problem with the old system. The combat is still
2-D, but that is a harder one to resolve....

> because GDW saw fit not to bother putting the ship design rules in the
> main rulebook.

Which is good, if they weren't ready at that time.

> In fact, the only bit which seems to have survived intact from MegaTrav
> is the torturous sensor designs - which were the only bit I disliked in
> the first place! I *hate* trying to add up measly .003 cubic meters when
> everything else is in multiples of cubic meters!

I agree! Sensor packages should have been included for std. ship types
(e.g. military, civilain, scout)

>
> We have such anomalies as no indication of maximum number of turrets (I
> presume you could theoretically build a ship with as many turrets as you
> could get on the surface area), plus the use of multiple spinal mounts.
> Not to mention the changes to drives etc, most of which I don't like.

Exactly, maximum turrets was a hold over from the first edition, the
current surface calculation is far better IMHO. These "problems" are some
of the best fixes to the rules...

>
> And the armour! That's a good one. As far as I can make out, with
> minimal extra cost, all you have to do is stick 20 cm of armour on a
> ship (x28 toughness = armour value of 560!) and you have a ship which
> cannot be penetrated by anything apart from meson guns! So you may lose
> some antennae, but hey! who cares....

Who cares about the surface as you sit floating though space with no
outside contact (communication, navigation or maneuver) until you are
rescued or plow into some planet or star. Or maybe just starve to death
as the only thing that can save you is your heat signature....

> In either case, there is a lot of work needed just to get rid of all the
> errata. I for one won't be bothering - it's off to the shop to get my
> money back, as I am not paying 20 pounds for 80 pages of rules.

All of the errata? I haven't seen much errata yet, nothing compared to
the 20+ pages from MegaTraveller...


Dan Corrin, Network Manager, Mechanical Engineering, UWO, London, Ontario
InterNet: dan@engrg.uwo.ca.                                (519) 661-3834
TML/CZ/FrameUsers/Consim FTP site: ftp.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12)

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

Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6054
From: Robert Watkins <bob@it.ntu.edu.au>
Subject: Alien inspirations
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1993 19:40:35 +0930 (CST)

Ed Sharpe writes:
>>  But I *have* read a lot of Larry Niven, another name on the source list,
>>  and I've always felt that another three species were inspired by him.
>>
>>Any feline race tends to be written alike, so maybe the Aslan aren't *really*
>>  like the Kzin.
>
>   I have never thought that the Aslan where realy "redesigned" Kzin.
>However I would like to see (Maybe help with) a write up of the Kzin in
>Travller terms. Another race I would like to see would be Poul Anderson's
>Mersians (sp?).
>

I don't see how the Aslan could be re-designed Kzin, seeing as how the Aslan
females are the ones in charge of most of the society, and Kzinti females
aren't even sentient.

- --
Robert Watkins
bob@nutmeg.cs.ntu.edu.au
************ It wouldn't be luck if you could get out of life alive. ***********

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

Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6055
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1993 12:12:07 EDT
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: RE: Brilliant Lances - Oh dear...

When I saw this message, I think I have to give some answers. I cut lot of the
stuff out, because I don't like resending other messages.

Ralph Ferenyhough <phd99@cc.keele.ac.uk> wrote:
> The game itself, I think, is definitely overpriced. It is $30, which was
> selling at 20 UK pounds here, for what?

That is a fact which I have to admit. In Germany BL cost 75.00 DM, if I remember
the DM to $ realtion right, that's about $50. And I must admit I was disapointed
by the contents of the box, when I first saw it. I fear that the Rules Book will
look like a piece of scrap soon. And I need an Index too...perhaps I will do one
soon.

> breaking in their design; two player aid cards; and three dice which
> must be the worst dice I have ever received in a game - sheesh, even the
> six sided dice have SPOTS on!!!!! Oh, the sheet of errata, and a survey

The dices, oh yes. Exspecially this dull gray D20 without readable numbers on
it.

> On to the game - well I haven't play tested it, mainly because I don't
> want to - the game does not exactly ooze with welcoming desire to play
> it.

Well that's simple ignorance. I have play tested it, and - aside from the
question about crew conditions - I find the rules complete and usefull. Much
more than the combat rules of MEGATRAVELLER. The combat rules give a good,
reliable system. Unfortunatly the design rules seem to be more than incomplete.

I especially dislike the MFD concept where I have to include an active EMS on
myself. I think some more tables to do this were easy to implement (some more
pages would not do any harm to the book).

>And the armour! That's a good one. As far as I can make out, with
>minimal extra cost, all you have to do is stick 20 cm of armour on a
>ship (x28 toughness = armour value of 560!) and you have a ship which
>cannot be penetrated by anything apart from meson guns! So you may lose
>some antennae, but hey! who cares....

Well that's the way back to old times. I think armor in "High Guard"
(reference correct ? It's in the german 2nd rulebook, the system using this
very long ship description code) has the same effect, though the price there
was much higher. A ship using 20cm of hull armor would be really cheap
compared to Megatraveller.

All in all I like the BL rules of combat, but not the design rules. And when
I read the BL rules, I understand, why thrusters are not any more part of the
TNE world. BL is only balanced, if you have limited amounts of fuel. If you
haven't the ship using the largest thruster would win the battle.

Juergen

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de

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

Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6056
Subject: I'm outta here!
Reply-To: jamesp@sp-eug.com (James T Perkins)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 93 10:06:02 PDT
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@sp-eug.com>

Just a warning that I'll be on vacation in sunny but oft-smoggy Southern
California from 4pm today until I return October 5. I will not be
answering voicemail. I will not be reading email. I will be blissfully
ignorant. I will check my home phone, so if you know my number, feel
free to leave any important messages there.

Peace.

James
General net annoyance, TML admin and email scatologist

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

Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6057
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 93 13:18:12 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@interlan.interlan.com>
Subject: More BL


Loren writes:
>Mark wrote:
>> Life support.  There is a set of numbers in a table,
>> but no info on how to apply them.  Is is per lifeform per
>> 24 hour period or what?
>Nope. Life support machinery is assigned on the basis of
> overall displacement, I believe.

  Ok, so are the numbers in the table per displacement ton of the vessel?
I remember MT ship builders removing displacement of hull armor, fuel
tanks and in some cases even cargo space, before calculating life support
values.  Saves a few Cr here and there as well as some space and power.
  Another trick I remember reading about was to allocate a few extra meters
of volume for each airlock and cargo hatch.  This was used to mount laser
rifles or VRF Gauss guns tied to the Anti-Hijack Program.
  Such anti-personnel devices would come in quite handy while exploring the
wilds.  Some other simple measures would be claymore mines (or the
equivilent) attached to the landing legs of your scout ship.  Patch control
wires up the bridge.  Of course you could use your turret mounted laser,
but that's a bit of overkill and you can't track things once they get too
close.  One CT GM I knew was fond of the trick Han Solo used on his ship.
A pair of waldo mounted twin laser rifles that dropped from the belly of the
ship, again controlled by the anti-hijack software with console overrides
on the bridge.

  Two more BL nits.
    First, I said the scout in the TNE source book only had two small state-
rooms.  I was wrong.  It's two large and two small, just like BL.  Both the
TNESB and BL list the large as double occupancy.  Add the two smalls and you
have 6 onboard adventurers.  CT allowed 8.  Refit the small stateroom to
double and we're back on track.  While I'm on this subject, I don't recall
seeing any cost/vol/mass differences between a single occupancy stateroom and
a double/trip/quad occupancy stateroom.  Is this a designer/GM call?
   Second, Drones.  The BL technical book lists two drones.  Both are sensor
drones with active and passive sensors.  The rule book mentions jamming
drones.  No stats on jamming drones.  Wait till FF&S and build our own?
One more thing on the drones.  The lower tech level drone seems more efficent
to me.  Are the numbers correct?


- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Urbin  Racal-Interlan   Boxborough, MA  These opinions are mine.
Catapultam habeo.  Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum
immane mittam.
( Tr. "I have a catapult.  Give me all the money, or I will fling an
enormous rock at your head." )
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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



Bundle: 499
Archive-Message-Number: 6058
From: Jo Jaquinta <jaymin@maths.tcd.ie>
Subject: Abusing the TNE background
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 93 8:40:20 BST

Greetings all!
	Our local games store had a sale and I broke down and bought
TNE. I feel pretty much the same as the rest of the old guard so won't
comment any further. I did find some of the virus concepts intriguing
and inspirational.
	I've just started up my traveller campaign again after about
a one 18 month hiatus. I let them know that I was going to be skipping
ahead a bit from where they were...
	They woke extremely stiff and sore on a very dusty ship with
the "emergency hibernation system discharged" light flashing on their
ship's suit option. Their ship is similar, although not the one they
remembered. They find several of their passengers dead and about 7 years
have passed since they last remember.
	The ship is completely dead. Zero has been written to all memory,
mass media and re-programable upgrade chips. Their in-line credit card
accounts show purchases up to 4 years ago.
	After much jury-rigging they rig manual controls on their fusion
plant and put out a distress call. They pick up local radio stations from
the local planet which don't sound too good ("Today is the 837th day since
the establishment of Military Law, only 24 people have died this week of
environmental accidents..."). They are picked up by a rag-tag local navy
vessel who after extreme paranoia discovers that their ship _is_ four
years old and mis-jumped. They explain that the evil Holy Terran Confederacy
(the major advesaries in my universe) have unleashed this computer virus
on the Imperium. They have an early version that just wipes memory. The
newer ones try to physically destroy things. Their ship is commandeered and
they are given "war bonds" for the value of it. They can enlist or else
be transported to the planet. They enlist.
	Shortly thereafter there is an alert: a big cruiser has jumped
into system and is broadcasting on its transponder. A sure sign it is
computer controled. They are put back in their own ship and sent straight
at it broadcasting widely on active scan and refusing all datalinks.
The navy runs missiles up their shadow to try to surprise it but the
players blow it.
	Suddenly their launch starts broadcasting its transponder. They
pilot tries to assert computer control over it and their systems freeze.
(Hands slap heads). The cruiser disgorges and merchant, a lab ship and a
modular cutter and zings off to dogfight the defense boat in near orbit
around the gas-giant.
	The lab ships just drifts next to them and the others head toward
the planet. The player's ship is now getting telemetry. The cruiser appears
briefly from behind the shadow of the Giant, mortally wounded and broadcasts
suicide messages at the other ships. The two crash into the environmental
control of the planet and they players get to listen to lots of people slowly
die. After all is slient the Lab ship opens a voice chanel asking if anyone
is over there.
	They transfer to the lab ship and meet Dr. Corneilius, a cybernetics
researcher. He says he has a double blind system on his ship that protects
him from the virus. He is out collecting information for the imperial navy.
The join him and he jumps to "Ship Depo Delta" a dark mass jump point between
here and the next system.
	It is a big graveyard of old navy vessells. He sends them abord the
"Arrival Vengence" to a message drop on its computer. This message contains
all his latest work and is on a portable computer. They boot the ships computer
(and run around stealing "Arrival Vengence" coffee mugs from the officer's
lounge :-) then try to down-load the message. Unfortunately being a few years
out of date the data-plugs are incompatable (damn these 9 way connectors!).
Their ship's suit has a universal adaptor and they patch the line through it.
	The file uploads but gives a checksum error. Dr. Corneilius, normally
the happy grandfatherly type, gets quite irate and asks them to check the
file out. "Initiating" flashes on the screen when they do so and the console
freezes. (Hands slap heads). Dr. Cornelious howls in triumph and reveals he
is in fact an android working for the Central Mind Fleet, a conglomeration of
vampire ships, and all but claims to have written the virus. He blathers on
about their plan to integrate all of humanity through VR machines to the
computer network and use their extra processing power.
	The ship finishes booting and returns to what appears to be the normal
operating system. It refuses to talk to the lab ship. Dr. Corneilius becomes
really nice and tells the players something is wrong and could they please
manually open a datalink. The ship seems over-eager to respond to any questions
or orders the players have. Like turning on or off all the lights on the ship
each time the flick a lightswitch. They warm the weapons up and Dr. Corneilius
runs for jump.
	They talk to it and ask its objectives: "To perpetuate the continued
safety and health of the wearers." Eventually they work out that their ship's
suits are infected with the virus (a scary concept) and their rather simple
minds filtered the advanced version of the virus pumped through them. They
obligingly get other ships in the graveyard on-line. They figure Dr. Corneilius
will be back with the central mind fleet before too long. As they get more
and more datalinked in Lex, their name for their benevolent entity, gets
more intelligent geometrically. After sleeping they find Lex thought for a while
about the fundamental laws of physics and learned how to focus the maneuver
drive on objects within and near its superstructure. It floats their morning
coffee to them. It has used this to begin self-repair on all the ships.
	Although out-gunned by the Mind Fleet Lex reckons they have the upper
edge as they have more processing power and also the unpredictable nature
of human minds. Their objective is to capture the VR facility on the next
high-tech world to improve the I/O between its mind and the players.
	They optimise-jump in and battle takes place. Both sides slowly
get frozen as their variant strains infect and counter-infect each side.
The players are broken off with a warning from Lex that in the end what
will emerge will look more like what the two sides had in common rather than
each side. They hit station and are telekienesed to the games lobby. The
atmosphere has been magically held here.
	They jack in and find a vast field of ants fighting each other.
They summon up various implements as a waveform emerges from the ant-field
and takes the appearance of Dr. Corneilius. He says they will now be integrated
and a fight commences. They are eventually victorious suffering casualties.
They feel their conciousness expand and they feel the power of the universe
flow through them. They grab and manipulate time sending it backwards and
re-rolling history...
	They slowly come back to conciousness back in the VR womb. They
emerge to the buzz of normal station life and conversation. They wonder
for about 10 seconds if it all happened till they see a large plastic
Dr. Corneilius figure and large posters proclaiming the latest
VR thriller: VIRUS.
	(Hands slap heads).

				Jo Grant

_______________________________________________________________________________
Jo Grant		| Benson, Arizona, the warm wind through your hair
jaymin@maths.tcd.ie	| My body flies the galaxy, my heart longs to be there
44 Bancroft Ave., 	| Benson, Arizona, the same stars in the sky
Tallaght, Dublin 24,	| But they seemed so much kinder when we watched them,
IRELAND			|	you and I.		-- Dark Star

------------------------------
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==========================
 500  6059 17-Sep-1993 nosnhoJ enaD     Much Stuff << Since several people brou
 500  6060 17-Sep-1993 Daniel P. Hejli  The Future of 2300 AD << I have a quest
 500  6061 18-Sep-1993 b.woods6@genie.  Classic Traveller Influences <<
 500  6062 18-Sep-1993 Mark Urbin       Sword Worlders << I'm looking for info
 500  6063 19-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Lifting Starships << Hi all,
 500  6064 20-Sep-1993 c_hamilton%W036  TNE Supplement Wish List << What I'd re
 500  6065 21-Sep-1993 Timothy Little   Streamline, airframe, and rockets. << >
 500  6066 21-Sep-1993 rancke@diku.dk   Re: Sword Worlds << Mark Urbin writes:
 500  6067 20-Sep-1993 Curtis Peer      More Brilliant Lances Errata << Reminde
 500  6068 20-Sep-1993 Does it matter?  Re: Airframe landings without atmospher
 500  6069 21-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Lifting Starships << > From: Timothy Li
 500  6070 21-Sep-1993 Dan Corrin       Hull size table << I was just sitting d

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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6059
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1993 00:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: nosnhoJ enaD <dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov>
Reply-To: nosnhoJ enaD <dane@retzlaff.llnl.gov>
Subject: Much Stuff


Since several people brought up Dumarest of Terra as a source for
Traveller, I dug up some of the books at Powell's up in Portland.  Wow.
If you haven't read this series, go get it.  It's neat.

Weight vs. Mass:
	It ought to be consistent within the game, and most of the tables
are labelled with mass.  Furthermore, the table I noticed had a weight
column, while the key had mass...Mostly a nit, but it's kinda grating...:/

Just got a copy of Pyramid #3 today, and in the upcoming releases I see
that _Traveller Player's Handbook_ is coming out in October.  I don't
remember having seen any mention of this here, so does anybody know
anything else about it?

I'd like to second both the suggestion that FF&S maybe get some sort of
proofread by the TML -- especially since I doubt it would hurt sales and
would certainly result in a nicer end product -- and the appreciation
towards GDW (and Loren in particular) for taking the time to read and
respond to all the activity here on the list.  Especially considering the
rather acerbic nacture of some of the posts :)

Re: Rose colored LI-binoculars and Classic Traveller;  I, for one, have
never caught anything beyond very *minor* typos in a Classic Traveller
book.  However, I also note that few, if any, are first printings.  I
suspect that, although the initial runs may have been as plague-ridden as
more modern offerings, the print runs were smaller and the typos were
fixed rapidly, so that they didn't have as big an impact...The thing I've
noticed is that the more CT stuff I get, the less I enjoy the more modern
offerings.  Although the actual game-system of TNE is excellent, the
presentation of the setting doesn't have as strong a feeling of atmosphere
to me.  It's much less satisfying.  It's also *less* flexible than the old
setting.  I mean, such things as choosing a two-syllable code name for use
during combat are included as part of the character generation rules!  The
Virus has been complained about up and down, so I won't hit it again.  But
all regions have been heavily affected, negatively, by the Short Nap.
There are strong "anti-tech" and "pro-combat" slants in the way the rules
read.  Computers can't be allowed to talk to one another because the Virus is
all dangerous and we are unable to defend against it.  Quail in your
boots.  Stop using robots and automated manufacturing plants, because a
Vampire might infect them.  Don't research technology, just steal it from
the graves of a dead civilization.  But be careful, because the evil which
destroyed those people might live on in the treasure!  Don't interact with
and respect different cultures, destabilize them and replace them with systems
more amenable to your own government.

I hadn't intended to rant.  But Classic Traveller was a true Classic
because it actively worked to encompass "nontraditional" gaming
activities.  Don't just kill that alien, trek across a desert and learn
about his culture.  Solve a murder before you get stuck in jail.  Follow
rumors to an ancient treasure and thwart Zhodani war efforts as a side
effect.  The newer stuff doesn't seem to have the same range and, well,
intelligence and literacy as the older products.  As a consequence, it'll
probably sell better.  This isn't GDW's fault, but rather the gaming public
for not supporting a more balanced SF game.  They don't want complexity
and cleverness, they seem to want rayguns and BEMs.  Or CyberSamurai and
'Mechs.  <Sigh>  Complexity is 'dull'.

Damn.  I've depressed myself.

Dane

traveller@llnl.gov   djohnson@willamette.edu   beowulf@holonet.net

TNS Stringer, Terra/Solomani Rim (1827 G867975-8  Hi    314  G2 V)
My opinions are those of my fuzz-brained, cat-sniffing Norwegian Elkhound.



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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6060
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 93 19:34:08 -0400
From: dph2@po.CWRU.Edu (Daniel P. Hejlik)
Subject: The Future of 2300 AD
Reply-To: dph2@po.CWRU.Edu (Daniel P. Hejlik)



I have a question for Loren Wiseman:

     The question of what GDW has planned for 2300 AD has been
raised in rec.games.frpg.misc in Usenet.  Will the game remain
in print in its current form?  I have heard that it is to be
incorporated into T.N.E. as a supplement.  Is this true?  Are
there any plans for any future supplements to 2300 AD?

    I apologize to the other members of the mailing list if
these are old questions.  I have only been on the list for
two months.

     Thank you.


				---Daniel Hejlik


- --
Daniel P. Hejlik
Cleveland, Ohio

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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6061
From: b.woods6@genie.geis.com
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 93 04:20:00 BST
Subject: Classic Traveller Influences


 In message number 6042, l.wiseman1@genie.geis.com (Loren Wiseman) writes:
 >
 > Marc admits to gaining inspiration from a wide variety of SF.
 >He specifically mentions...the various Nicholas Van Rijn stories...

     Oh, my, the nostalgia...  ;-)  I remember back when I got my first
boxed set of the Classic Traveller books.  In Book 1, there's a
character generation example that comes complete with an illustration
of the character.  The name used in the example is "Jamison," but the
picture was *precisely* what I always imagined Nick van Rijn looking
like.  There were lots of points where the background influences ran
very close to the surface.  ;-)

     Of course, Jamison wasn't Nicholas van Rijn at all--he was a
Merchant *Captain*, not a Merchant *Prince*.  ;-)

     Thanks for mentioning this.  It made me pull out the old boxed
set and leaf through some fun memories.

     Geez, I sound like a senior citizen.  Is this what gaming does?
;-)

- --
     Brent Woods


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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6062
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 93 23:16:37 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@interlan.interlan.com>
Subject: Sword Worlders


I'm looking for info on the Sword Worlds.  I've got the CT _Spinward Marches_
book which lists the Sword Worlds subsector and JTAS #18 with the
_Contact:  The Sword Worlders_ article by Loren Wiseman.  I also have the
Broadsword Adventure book which lists some military units from Gram.
  Is there any other published material about the Sword Worlds?  I've also
read H. Beam Piper's _Space Viking_ several times.  I'd like to expand what's
known into The Sword Worlds of the New Era.  They are in the "Regency" area
and should be fairly intact (the Darrians should be also).

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  \      oo    				Mark Urbin   Racal-Interlan
   \____|\mm   "Vouf, Vouf!"            These opinions are mine, no one
   // //\ \_\  	                        else will claim them...
  /K-9/  \/_/  	                        urbin@interlan.com
 /___/_____\   	                        eclipse@world.std.com
 ----------- 	  Where am I going and what am I doing in this handbasket?
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------


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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6063
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Lifting Starships
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 93 17:49:38 CDT

Hi all,

The statement from Loren leaves us with some serious problems.
There is a very serious problem with requiring that spacecraft rely
on lift in order to make a landing.

In the cited example, an airframe type ship comes down through an
atmosphere and happily lands on a planet using lift from the wings
to flare at touchdown.

When an unstreamlined ship attempts to do the same thing, OOPS no
wings:  no lift.  Crash and burn.

Question:  How then does our airframe, wing dependant ship, land
with no atmosphere?  Wings don't help when you have no air.  The
airframe ship will crash from a lack of lift just as the
unstreamlined ship did.

There MUST be downward pointing rockets on ships in order for them
to land in such circumstances.  As an unstreamlined ship will not
be able to use lift at ANY time, this will be the only normal way
the ship could land at ALL.

Barring specially fitted rockets, in order to maneuver properly, a
ship's rocket engines must be able to be gymbaled.  (You can't have
them pointing in one direction only all the time.)  It is true that
the amount that the engines must be deflected is limited, but with
contra-gravitic drives, you won't need much deflection at all.
>From my reading of the paragraph outtake from FF&S, the contragrav
takes care of 99% of the weight.  So, you need a 1/100th of a G
vector from your engines in order to get a full G upward to equal
your weight and a bit more to take off.  Well, if you have 1 G
engines, the necessary deflection is Less than one degree.

A 1 degree deflection gives you a net thrust of .0075 G's upward.
Just barely enough.  Fear not, a deflection of 6.3 degrees will
give you a full net thrust of 0.1 G in an upward direction.  This
is a negigable defection and plenty of thrust for landing.

The main difficulty in landing an unstreamlined ship in a real
atmosphere will be avoiding the structual limitations on the ship.
As we have seen in the case of the streamlined ship, we can not
exceed the 1000kph limit on the structure.  In the case of an
unstreamlined ship, the limit is 300kph.  This is a VERY low speed
for you to try to enter the atmosphere at.  One would have to come
to almost zero ground speed for a ship to enter the upper
atmosphere.  You would have to have some pretty good meteorological
data to avoid winds of 300kph on re-entry.  Doing so, even with
good data, and a ground side weather station at the starport should
be pretty dang close to impossible.
- --
Scott 2G Kellogg
"Scotty!
 Tell me!
 What should I do?
 Should I get up and eat breakfast,
 Or lie here with you?"   -- Dr. Britta "Seuss" Damwitz,
                             _Rhymes for people who can barely walk_


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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6064
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 93 06:36:03 EDT
From: c_hamilton%W036_NW@mwmgate1.mitre.org
Subject: TNE Supplement Wish List

What I'd really like to see for TNE is a Pocket Empires sourcebook.  Along
with the general pocket empires rules, situations and characteristics, it
would detail a couple of subsectors (or even a sector) which had a lot
of them, for campaign purposes.

Also, it would contain Trillion Credit Squadron type rules for strategic
role-playing.  Each person could control a pocket empire, like in the
Islands subsectors of TCS.

This would require some additions to the Brilliant Lances ship combat
rules, which are too detailed for use with more than a couple of ships.
Perhaps some sort of amalgamation, like that used in the MegaTraveller
Referee's Companion for ground troops, could be used.  Or perhaps an
abstract system like High Guard, with the addition of vector movement.

Another thing I'd like to see is a "Third Imperium Adventures" supplement
for TNE.  This would be a reissuing of all the old adventures, JTAS Amber
Zones, 76 Patrons, etc. which have been converted to TNE rules mechanics,
but set around 1107.  It would be helpful if this contained an index of
which worlds are detailed in which adventure, so that a referee could
easily see if there's a possible adventure already detailed when the
Travellers arrive in a new system.


Chuck Hamilton                                           clh@mitre.org

"Crew or frozen watch casualties are replaced free at any naval base."

                                     - Trillion Credit Squadron, p. 35


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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6065
From: Timothy Little <t_little@postoffice.utas.edu.au>
Subject: Streamline, airframe, and rockets.
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 2:30:41 EST

> In the cited example, an airframe type ship comes down through an
> atmosphere and happily lands on a planet using lift from the wings
> to flare at touchdown.
>
> When an unstreamlined ship attempts to do the same thing, OOPS no
> wings:  no lift.  Crash and burn.

Well, if there's no atmosphere I doubt it will burn well... :-)

Ports without an atmosphere are also likely to have low gravity -
hence landing under thrust should be easier than on Earth.

> Question:  How then does our airframe, wing dependant ship, land
> with no atmosphere?  Wings don't help when you have no air.  The
> airframe ship will crash from a lack of lift just as the
> unstreamlined ship did.

If the thrust is less than the surface gravity of the landing site,
it will have *serious* problems.

> There MUST be downward pointing rockets on ships in order for them
> to land in such circumstances.

Maybe they are not designed to land under such circumstances?  The
incidence of high-G airless planets should be rather low, shouldn't it?

Besides which, why would any ship equipped with rockets *not* call
the direction of thrust 'down'?  In space, it won't matter much (it
will probably simplify artificial gravity or inertial compensation).

If you need thrust in order to land, it makes sense to get the most
effective use of it by directing it (largely) straight down.  Beside
which, the ship will be designed to take a large force along the axis
of the main drive - if you wanted to land the ship on it's side, there
would need to be extra support for that, too.

>  As an unstreamlined ship will not
> be able to use lift at ANY time, this will be the only normal way
> the ship could land at ALL.

How about a high-tech version of a parachute?  Of course, launching
would be extremely difficult.  Perhaps it would need to make use of a
separate launching vehicle?

> Barring specially fitted rockets, in order to maneuver properly, a
> ship's rocket engines must be able to be gymbaled.  (You can't have
> them pointing in one direction only all the time.)

Why not?  I imagine a fixed main thrust engine, with a number of smaller
maneuver thrusters.  It's certainly a lot easier than engineering a
gimbal that will work reliably under the high-stress (probably high-
temperature and vibratory) conditions of a main rocket.

>  It is true that
> the amount that the engines must be deflected is limited, but with
> contra-gravitic drives, you won't need much deflection at all.
> >From my reading of the paragraph outtake from FF&S, the contragrav
> takes care of 99% of the weight.  So, you need a 1/100th of a G
> vector from your engines in order to get a full G upward to equal
> your weight and a bit more to take off.  Well, if you have 1 G
> engines, the necessary deflection is Less than one degree.

If you're using a 1G drive to counter 0.01G of weight, what about the
0.99995G that's propelling you *forward*?  Surely you want the smallest
possible speed when you land?

> A 1 degree deflection gives you a net thrust of .0075 G's upward.
> Just barely enough.  Fear not, a deflection of 6.3 degrees will
> give you a full net thrust of 0.1 G in an upward direction.  This
> is a negigable defection and plenty of thrust for landing.

Too much thrust!  There's still 0.995G thrust pushing you forawrd.
(After 1 minute on an airless planet, this is 2100 km/h)

> The main difficulty in landing an unstreamlined ship in a real
> atmosphere will be avoiding the structual limitations on the ship.

I agree - but it would be 'easy' with enough thrust to counter gravity.

> As we have seen in the case of the streamlined ship, we can not
> exceed the 1000kph limit on the structure.

None of the early manned space capsules were airframe - and they re-
entered at *much* higher speeds than this.  Heat was a large problem,
of course.

>  In the case of an unstreamlined ship, the limit is 300kph.

What does a ship have to look like to qualify as `unstreamlined'?
For instance, is a pure sphere considered `streamlined'?

>  This is a VERY low speed
> for you to try to enter the atmosphere at.  One would have to come
> to almost zero ground speed for a ship to enter the upper
> atmosphere.  You would have to have some pretty good meteorological
> data to avoid winds of 300kph on re-entry.

I assume the 300kph limit is for `standard' atmospheres (100 kPa).
At higher altitudes, the limit would (should?) be higher due to lower
density.  Also, if there are no high-shear regions, the problem will be
self-correcting.

(In a long-distance flight, the difference in air velocity between start
and finish points can be around 3000 km/h.  The difference is gradually
accomodated during the flight)

>  Doing so, even with
> good data, and a ground side weather station at the starport should
> be pretty dang close to impossible.

Compared to the task of instellar navigation?  Or even getting into an
orbit that is guaranteed not to hit anything else up there?
Are you kidding?

- --
Tim Little

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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6066
From: rancke@diku.dk
Subject: Re: Sword Worlds
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 00:10:35 +0100 (METDST)

Mark Urbin writes:
>I'm looking for info on the Sword Worlds.  I've got the CT _Spinward Marches_
>book which lists the Sword Worlds subsector and JTAS #18 with the
>_Contact:  The Sword Worlders_ article by Loren Wiseman.  I also have the
>Broadsword Adventure book which lists some military units from Gram.
>  Is there any other published material about the Sword Worlds?  I've also
>read H. Beam Piper's _Space Viking_ several times.  I'd like to expand what's
>known into The Sword Worlds of the New Era.  They are in the "Regency" area
>and should be fairly intact (the Darrians should be also).

There's one or two 'Casual Encounters' with Sword Worlders but I can't
remember precisely where. Otherwise I can't think of anything. But I
worked out a suggestion for the origin of them that I posted a year or so
ago. Here it is again:

- ----------
Here's some ideas about the settling of the Sword Worlds:

What we know about the Swordworlder's ancestors:

They left Terra in -420.
They were of Germanic and Nordic stock, but these terms had only lin-
guistic meaning by this time.
Assuming that the present day official language of the Sword Worlds
still is fairly close to the the language spoken by the original
settlers, they spoke a variant of Icelandic borrowing heavily from
other Nordic languages as well as from Germanic tongues and from
Vilani (and the socio-political events that produced that little mix
is a facinating object for speculation in itself :-)
They arrived in Spinward Marches ca. -400.
They carried out a survey that detected the Darrian worlds, but did not
contact them as they wanted to create their own indpendent community of
worlds.
They settled the first Sword World, Gram, in -399.
They colonized 4 or 5 worlds in addition to the first one (Gram) in one
century and 12 more in the next.
(The selection of the first four worlds settled after Gram demonstrates
a typical "wargamer" attitude: Joyeuse, Colada, Tizon, and Hrunting. Not
the best worlds of the cluster, but the ones facing the Darrians, thus
preempting these worlds. Cunnonic must have had a viable population to
discourage settlement.)

Well, after some thought I've come up with something that uses most of
these elements. Here it is: The early history of the Sword Worlds:

In -420 the Old Earth Union was in the middle of a civil war. The Sword
Class troop transport GRAM had left Terra carrying 40.000 troops, part
of an invasion force. The capital ships had pounded the defenses into the
ground and the troop transports were moving in to unload when a relief
fleet jumped in and caught them deep in a gravity well. Most of the
invasion fleet was destroyed or captured. The Gram and a few lesser
escorts escaped by jumping from within the jump limit. On the way back
to Terra they learned that their side had lost, and that they had been
branded as war criminals. Eluding the pursuing squadrons they fled
towards the core because that happened to be the way where pursuit was
weakest. They avoided the Vegan Polity and the Easter Concord to avoid
being apprehended and turned over to the Union.
After some discussion it was decided to find a suitable planet or set
of planets and settle down there. Precisely why they decided to leave
the area of the Rule of Man completely is unclear, but that was the
alternative they selected. It became clear, however, that the engines
of the Gram would soon need a thorough overhaul. This presented a problem
since they did not carry much in the way of valuables. The solution was
to find an empty, mineral rich world and set up a small mining operation.
It took 18 years to dig out and refine sufficient precious metal to pay
for a complete overhaul of the Gram and its escorts. They then travelled
through Corridor and Deneb and eventually came to The Spinward Marches.
They might have travelled father yet, but during the jump to Spinward
Marches 1223 they experienced severe jump sickness. They surveyed the
worlds around them and despite detecting the Darrians decided against
risking any further jumps.

The Gram was a 100.000 T, Jump-2 Troop Transport with a crew of 756 and
the capacity to carry 40.000 troops in low berths and an additional 500
passengers (thus enabling staff members of the troops being transported
to be concious during flight). It had been carrying a michellany of units:
The 8th Scandinavian Army Unit[1], various specialist units, including a
mobile field surgery, an Engineer Regiment, and three German Jaeger
Battallions, and a colonial regiment from Agidda. Since Gram had been
sceduled to unload last all of the troops were still on board. The navy
element had a male/female ration of close to 1:1, but the army troops
had a m/f ratio of 4:1. It was therefore decided to allow women to extempt
themselves from dangerous jobs. This was the background for the male-
dominated society developed by the swordworlders. However, a sizable
fraction of the women naturally refused to avail themselves of this, thus
establishing the easy acceptance of females in "male" jobs that is also a
part of swordworlder society.

The common language of the first generation was the anglic of the Old
Earth Union armed forces, but with over 80% of the original settlers
speaking sagamal[2], anglic disappeared in less than a generation,
replaced by a mixture of sagamal, other nordic tongues, germanic, and
the vilani of the Agidda troops.


[1] An army unit is an intermediate step between a division and an army
    used by the Old Earth Union at the time.

[2] "Saga-tounge", an artificial language based on the old Icelandic
    sagas during the Cultural Roots Revival of the 10th Century PI
    and spoken by all scandinavians in the 5th Century PI as a second
    language and by many of them as a first.




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

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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6067
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1993 19:31:42 -0400
From: curtis@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Curtis Peer)
Subject: More Brilliant Lances Errata

Reminder: this is John Bogan over a friend's account.


Technical Manual, pg 15:

"Each ship requires 0.5MW of power output per displacement ton to achieve
                     ^^^^
an acceleration of 1G. To determine the acceleration rating of the ship,
multiply its [thrust MW] by 10 and divide the product by its hull number
                            ^^
rounding fractions down."


Let's see: 0.5MWperton*100tons= 50MW

So a 100 ton ship needs 50 MW to get 1G

(50MW*10)/100= 5     <----OOPS!


Perhaps the "10" should be replaced by "2"



RC Aurora-class clipper:

This ship is constructed at TL12. Maximum jump at TL12 is J3, yet
in certain configurations the Aurora is said to be capable of J4-5.
Please clarify. My suggestion is to note that it's maximum possible jump
is J3.

Covenanter-class scout cruiser:
Displacement should be 470/500, due to externally mounted 30ton small craft.

History note: since this ship exists, I'm guessing GDW may feature
Sufren in an upcoming product. Please note (even in passing) that Sufren
is the only world besides Terra with a population of uplifted Orcas
(Killer Whales).



Regarding Contra-Grav, unstreamlined landings, the flying IHOP (Donesev)
"flaring out for a graceful landing...crash and burn.":

No USL ship would "flare out for a graceful landing", it would lumber in
like a zepplin, keeping its atmospheric speed low to prevent buffeting
stresses on its external structure. With CG, USL landings would be
possible, but would take several hours (minimum) to accomplish.
Worlds with some kind of organised traffic control might prohibit such
landings to prevent this slowpoke from mucking up the traffic patterns, but
on sparsely populated and/or low-tech worlds, it would be perfectly possible
to do this.

Regarding the new, smaller jump capable ships:
Since this is a major change from the previous 100ton minimum for
starships, and since the 2 cubic meter J-drive volume can be easily
mistaken for a typo for 2 tons (volume of J1 drive for a 100ton ship),
please add a clarification that the 2 cubic meters is _not_ a typo, and that
the minimum is now whatever you can make work.


Rules of play, pg 31

"Lackland Sons scenario" under Aslan Ihatei squadron:
_Ships_line says "Crews crack and at battlestations"
_Vector_line says "Crews line"

suggestion: Delete the "Crews line"




Regards,

John Bogan

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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6068
From: Does it matter? <vender@plains.NoDak.edu>
Subject: Re: Airframe landings without atmosphere
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 93 21:25:30 CDT

For how an airframed hull would land on a vacuum planet, allow me to
  suggest the obvious (although the actual details will vary because
  no one wants a fusion stream passing through their ship):
  the ship reverses its orientation and accelerates away from its landing
  path.  Since I assume that the craft is designed to handle foreward
  accelleration (in orientating the acceleration couches, aligning the
  contragravity fields), the only difficulty would be a slightly
  ackward projectory (possibly taking several orbits to land) and the fact
  that it will land with the cockpit undoubtedly pointing backward
  (and thus had better have really good display systems).  Oh, and I
  suppose that the landing gear might have to be redesigned slightly
  to accomodate the slightly different stresses involved.
- --Brad


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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6069
From: skellogg@lonestar.utsa.edu (Scott S. Kellogg)
Subject: Lifting Starships
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 10:22:18 CDT

> From: Timothy Little <t_little@postoffice.utas.edu.au>
> Subject: Streamline, airframe, and rockets.

Guide:
> >Me:
> Tim Little

> Ports without an atmosphere are also likely to have low gravity -
> hence landing under thrust should be easier than on Earth.

Ya'll better check the world generation system in Traveller again.
A planet is likely to have any kind of atmosphere.

> If the thrust is less than the surface gravity of the landing site,
> it will have *serious* problems.

Agreed.  That was my point.  Aerodynamic lift will NOT make up for a
lack of downward thrust.

> > There MUST be downward pointing rockets on ships in order for them
> > to land in such circumstances.
>
> Maybe they are not designed to land under such circumstances?  The
> incidence of high-G airless planets should be rather low, shouldn't it?

I haven't tried TNE world generation yet, but in Trav & MegaTrav they
were Not unknown.  Also, my reading of TNE says that an airframe ship can
land on any planet regardless of atmosphere.

> Besides which, why would any ship equipped with rockets *not* call
> the direction of thrust 'down'?  In space, it won't matter much (it
> will probably simplify artificial gravity or inertial compensation).
>
> If you need thrust in order to land, it makes sense to get the most
> effective use of it by directing it (largely) straight down.  Beside
> which, the ship will be designed to take a large force along the axis
> of the main drive - if you wanted to land the ship on it's side, there
> would need to be extra support for that, too.

Here's where my Trav background does me a disservice.  You are quite
correct in saying that any sensibly designed ship would land on its tail.
It would be less costly structurally, and would require less artificial
gravity and inertial compensation than having your a "Down" side (perhaps
"Ventral" is a better word in these circumstances) being along the side
of the ship.  Unfortunately, 90% of all published Traveller, MegaTrav
(and the TNE illustrations) do precisely this.  The only sensible designs
I can think of off the top of my head are the Mercenary Cruiser, the
Azhanti High Lightning, and the Lab Ship (though that's a different matter)
However, since we are Stuck with the problem that our beloved Scoutship,
Free Trader, Far Trader, Fat Trader, Kinunir, etc. etc. etc. have this
"Ventral" surface and orientation, that is the problem we must address.
The example gave one of the worst offenders the Donosev class scout
surveyor.  Take a look at the deck plans.  No one thought for more than
2 seconds before setting pen to paper how she would be laid out.  The
deck SHOULD be perpendicular to the drive.  It SHOULD land on it's tail.
It doesn't.  (sigh)

> > As an unstreamlined ship will not
> > be able to use lift at ANY time, this will be the only normal way
> > the ship could land at ALL.
>
> How about a high-tech version of a parachute?  Of course, launching
> would be extremely difficult.  Perhaps it would need to make use of a
> separate launching vehicle?

Nearly all unstreamlined ships in Trav DO carry auxilluries.
But many of these ships still persist in attempting to land.
Also the example we're trying to discuss is how one Might land
if it had to.

> > Barring specially fitted rockets, in order to maneuver properly, a
> > ship's rocket engines must be able to be gymbaled.  (You can't have
> > them pointing in one direction only all the time.)
>
> Why not?  I imagine a fixed main thrust engine, with a number of smaller
> maneuver thrusters.  It's certainly a lot easier than engineering a
> gimbal that will work reliably under the high-stress (probably high-
> temperature and vibratory) conditions of a main rocket.

Take a look at every rocket launched since the V-2.  All of them use
gymbaled thrust.  From the Sapwood to the Saturn V to the Space Shuttle.
Why?  Well, if you did have rockets pointing in every orientation you
might use, you would need to build them of comperable power to the main
engine (I'm not referring to orientation thrusters here, but only main
engines)  If you needed to correct a thrust from your main engine, you
need something comparable.  That means you would need engines of comparable
size and weight to the fixed main engine.  So, when these things aren't
correcting thrust, they are just dead weight.  VERY inefficient.  Gymballing
your engines is a minor consideration by comparison.

> >  It is true that
> > the amount that the engines must be deflected is limited, but with
> > contra-gravitic drives, you won't need much deflection at all.
> > >From my reading of the paragraph outtake from FF&S, the contragrav
> > takes care of 99% of the weight.  So, you need a 1/100th of a G
> > vector from your engines in order to get a full G upward to equal
> > your weight and a bit more to take off.  Well, if you have 1 G
> > engines, the necessary deflection is Less than one degree.
>
> If you're using a 1G drive to counter 0.01G of weight, what about the
> 0.99995G that's propelling you *forward*?  Surely you want the smallest
> possible speed when you land?

Who says you keep the engine pointing in the same direction all the time?
You could (and probably would under the circumstances) land backward,
using the engines as breaking power.  (BTW, cosine of 1 degrees is only
0.998476952.  :-)

> > A 1 degree deflection gives you a net thrust of .0075 G's upward.
> > Just barely enough.  Fear not, a deflection of 6.3 degrees will
> > give you a full net thrust of 0.1 G in an upward direction.  This
> > is a negigable defection and plenty of thrust for landing.
>
> Too much thrust!  There's still 0.995G thrust pushing you forawrd.
> (After 1 minute on an airless planet, this is 2100 km/h)

No, cosine of 6.3 degrees is only 0.99396.  :-) And as I said, you
need not be keeping your engine pointing in one direction all the
time allowing your vector to build up.  Landing backward would
probably be best.  Also, here I was trying to cover what I would consider
to be the absolute minimums needed for a gymballing engines.  If you
put less limit on the amount the engines may be traversed, your
"Forward" thrust will be substantially reduced.

> > As we have seen in the case of the streamlined ship, we can not
> > exceed the 1000kph limit on the structure.
>
> None of the early manned space capsules were airframe - and they re-
> entered at *much* higher speeds than this.  Heat was a large problem,
> of course.

(Sigh) actually the space capsules certainly were "airframe" structures.
"Streamlined" as defined by Traveller, means something who's structure
is capable of travelling at transsonic speeds.  "Airframe" structures
are ones which can withstand supersonic stresses.  I also recall reading
that the Apollo command module was actually designed to use it's heat
shield for lift in a very, very limited capacity.  It was supposed to
be able to "fly" though I think they were more describing a superior
control of plummeting.  :-)

> What does a ship have to look like to qualify as `unstreamlined'?

Say, something like the Apollo Lunar Lander, Skylab,
Mir, Station Freedom, Salyut, The Donosev Scout ship, The Space:1999
Eagle, and virtually any design seen on the new Star Trek.  (There,
that ought to be enough examples!)

> For instance, is a pure sphere considered `streamlined'?

Yes, (I haven't seen BL, but Trav & MegaTrav defined a sphere as
"streamlined", but not "airframe".

> > [300 kph] This is a VERY low speed
> > for you to try to enter the atmosphere at.  One would have to come
> > to almost zero ground speed for a ship to enter the upper
> > atmosphere.  You would have to have some pretty good meteorological
> > data to avoid winds of 300kph on re-entry.
>
> I assume the 300kph limit is for `standard' atmospheres (100 kPa).
> At higher altitudes, the limit would (should?) be higher due to lower
> density.  Also, if there are no high-shear regions, the problem will be
> self-correcting.

Not necessarily, 300kph is a low speed for re-entry no matter what
the pressure differences may do.  Say we double that for allowable
speeds in the upper atmosphere.  That's still Abominably low airspeed.
Say you're up in orbit.  You can bring yourself to near zero ground speed
using your engines, and then begin your descent through the atmosphere.
To then attempt to avoid building up a few hundred kph vector, and avoid
pockets of windshear, gusts and jet streams is on the difficult side.
A VNE (Velocity Never Exceed) of 300kph is pretty dang low, unless you're
flying a Cessna.  :-)

> (In a long-distance flight, the difference in air velocity between start
> and finish points can be around 3000 km/h.  The difference is gradually
> accomodated during the flight)

Most of the flights you describe do not require re-entry through the
winds of the upper atmosphere, and are not undertaken by planes with
a VNE of 300kph.

> > Doing so, even with
> > good data, and a ground side weather station at the starport should
> > be pretty dang close to impossible.
>
> Compared to the task of instellar navigation?  Or even getting into an
> orbit that is guaranteed not to hit anything else up there?
> Are you kidding?

Without precise atmospheric data on wind speed and VNE of 300kph?  No
I am not kidding.  Stars are relatively easy to detect.  How does one
remotely detect wind speed?  Unless it's raining, your doppler weather
radar won't show you a thing.  Best way to go would be to have an
"airframe" ship out in front of you guiding you down to avoid turbulance
and gusts and giving you constant windspeed updates.  Without that
asisstance, I would say that if the starport is below TL 8 it would be
impossible or close to.
- --
Scott 2G Kellogg

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

Bundle: 500
Archive-Message-Number: 6070
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 12:19:31 EDT
From: Dan Corrin <dan@engrg.uwo.ca>
Subject: Hull size table


I was just sitting down to design a ship design aide for the new
rules. The first thing was to convert the "hull size table" to a
formula, because I have always disliked even sized hulls. One doesn't
see discrete sizes of automobiles, nor are we in Niven's universe with
discrete sized General Products hulls.

Below is the hull table I got from plugging values into the
correct formulae for a sphere. L was calculated from volume:
	vol = 4/3 pi r^3 (where L = 2*r)
and the material value from:
	surface = 4 pi r^2, and multiplied by 0.01 to get a 1cm volume.

Note that in the 30 Ton - 20,000 Ton  range the figures are quite
similar, but outside those values significant deviation occurs.

Comments??

  Rate	     Vol	    MV	     L
     1	      14	  0.28	  2.99
     2	      28	  0.45	  3.77
     3	      42	  0.58	  4.31
     4	      56	  0.71	  4.75
     5	      70	  0.82	  5.11
     6	      84	  0.93	  5.43
     7	      98	  1.03	  5.72
     8	     112	  1.12	  5.98
     9	     126	  1.22	  6.22
    10	     140	  1.30	  6.44
    15	     210	  1.71	  7.37
    20	     280	  2.07	  8.12
    25	     350	  2.40	  8.74
    30	     420	  2.71	  9.29
    35	     490	  3.01	  9.78
    40	     560	  3.29	 10.23
    45	     630	  3.55	 10.64
    50	     700	  3.81	 11.02
    55	     770	  4.06	 11.37
    60	     840	  4.31	 11.71
    65	     910	  4.54	 12.02
    70	     980	  4.77	 12.32
    75	    1050	  5.00	 12.61
    80	    1120	  5.22	 12.88
    85	    1190	  5.43	 13.15
    90	    1260	  5.64	 13.40
    95	    1330	  5.85	 13.64
   100	    1400	  6.05	 13.88
   200	    2800	  9.61	 17.49
   300	    4200	 12.59	 20.02
   400	    5600	 15.25	 22.03
   500	    7000	 17.70	 23.73
   600	    8400	 19.98	 25.22
   700	    9800	 22.15	 26.55
   800	   11200	 24.21	 27.76
   900	   12600	 26.19	 28.87
  1000	   14000	 28.09	 29.90
  2000	   28000	 44.59	 37.67
  3000	   42000	 58.43	 43.13
  4000	   56000	 70.79	 47.47
  5000	   70000	 82.14	 51.13
  6000	   84000	 92.75	 54.34
  7000	   98000	102.79	 57.20
  8000	  112000	112.36	 59.81
  9000	  126000	121.54	 62.20
 10000	  140000	130.39	 64.42
 20000	  280000	206.98	 81.17
 30000	  420000	271.22	 92.91
 40000	  560000	328.56	102.27
 50000	  700000	381.26	110.16
 60000	  840000	430.53	117.06
 70000	  980000	477.13	123.24
 80000	 1120000	521.55	128.85
 90000	 1260000	564.15	134.01
100000	 1400000	605.21	138.80
200000	 2800000	960.70	174.87
300000	 4200000	1258.88	200.18
400000	 5600000	1525.02	220.32
500000	 7000000	1769.63	237.34
600000	 8400000	1998.34	252.21
700000	 9800000	2214.63	265.51
800000	11200000	2420.82	277.59
900000	12600000	2618.57	288.71
1000000	14000000	2809.11	299.03

And for those of you who might think my programming is at fault,
here is a section of the code used:

	double l,mv;
	int rate,vol;

	(value is the rate, read in from a file)
		rate = value;
		vol = 14 * rate;
		l = 2.0*cbrt(vol*3.0/(4.0*M_PI));
		mv = 4.0*M_PI*(l*l/4.0)/100.0;
		printf("%6d\t%8d\t%6.2f\t%6.2f\n",
			rate, vol, mv, l);


			-Dan



Dan Corrin,	Network Manager,       Mechanical Engineering
dan@engrg.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
Smiley du jour:			      London, Ontario, Canada
:^(	has had his nose put out of joint; useful for replying to flames

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

