			    TRAVELLER Digest 68

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Re: Some replies to replies	by "Harold D. Hale" <HDHALE@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>
  2) Re: Battle Rider Question	by ccjoe@showme.missouri.edu (Joseph Heck)
  3) Little but nasty bangs	by "Les Howie"  <lhowie@cpx.Prograph.Com>
  4) Re: TRAVELLER digest 64	by "Les Howie"  <lhowie@cpx.Prograph.Com>
  5) Ship Design - What's the problem.	by "Les Howie"  <lhowie@cpx.Prograph.Com>
  6) PAWS, Stutterwarp, weapon ranges.	by "Upton, Django" <DUpton@VTRNNTOV.TELECOM.com.au>
  7) TL of Rule of Man	by Edward_Swatschek@mindlink.bc.ca (Edward Swatschek)
  8) Supernovae	by Stewart Eyres <spe@jb.man.ac.uk>
  9) PAWS	by "Les Howie"  <lhowie@cpx.Prograph.Com>
 10) Re: PAWS, and some ship design questions	by Derek Smith <Derek_Smith.LOTUS@crd.lotus.com>
 11) Wanted: _Battle Rider_ overview	by erich@bush.cs.tamu.edu (Erich Schneider)
 12) Flares and other Rumors	by Steve Charlton/Avalon Software Inc
 13) -No Subject-	by Derek Smith <Derek_Smith.LOTUS@crd.lotus.com>

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

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 1994 17:33:26 -0500
From: "Harold D. Hale" <HDHALE@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Some replies to replies
Message-ID: <se9acbb0.045@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>

Stefan Matthias said:

>On hit capacity: I tought about using the quick kill rules, but after
>remembering a very disapoinging RuneQuest (I know it's of topic)
>adventure where my character died because the master rolled 01
>(critical success, twice maximal weapon damage for spears = 22) on attack
>and a no armour protecton (the PC had only 15 hit points) I decided that
>is roll is too much purly accidentaly.  However, I want, that a normal 2D6
>pistol is still dangerous (and is feared by the players :-).

   Then it is a question of game mechanics, and if GDW's way of
simulating reality doesn't work for you, then it doesn't work for you.
Just be aware that GDW's system is what it is, and I doubt they will change
it any time soon.  I happen to think it works extremely well, and my
players had an easy time grasping it once I set up a "Gun Range" Senario
for them.  Essentially we took a gaming session to go through the
individual combat rules.  First, I set up targets at various ranges for them
to shoot at with the weapon of their choice.  After sampling several
different weapons at a variety of ranges, they discovered which weapons
worked best for them at simply hitting a target.  Next, I ran them through
a combat simulator.  At Level 1, I had them engage fix targets at various
ranges and apply the basic damage results (no knock downs, no instant kills,
etc.).  At Level 2, they engaged "live targets" that could shoot back (tranq
darts, so if the PC got hit, he went to sleep) and I implimented all damage
results on the NPCs.  At Level 3, I added NPCs with "real" weapons, and
implimented all damage results on the PCs.  Everyone enjoyed the
simulations, and they were well versed with the combat rules and what their
weapons could and could not do in the end.  

>A 18x90 HEAP ammoution is probably not the typical personal combat
>thing.  I don't know (and don't be interested in) the exacted design
>procedure but that's probably something very big (length of 9 cm?) with
>armor piecing capability.  To use bigger guns to reduce the hit points
>problems seems however not to be a good solution.

   A 18x90 mm round is a high powered 12 gauge shotgun shell.  The
auto assault shotgun you see in the RCES Equipment Guide was my design,
though GDW turned it into a TL 10 model with a TL 12 laser sight (my
original design called for the entire weapon to be TL 12).  A bit heavy at
TL 10, it nevertheless is a practical weapon for close combat situations.  It
can of course pierce armor, and it was originally envisioned to be used
against armored troops close in (making those nasty blade weapons--"can
openers" obsolete).  The effect it has on unarmored troops can best be
summed up with the word *splat!* (average damage 42 pts. with buckshot at
close range, 2 more points than an NPC can take, and that's on single shot
without exceptional success--it is capable of firing three round bursts).

   Using a bigger round to eliminate the hit points "problem" is about the
only way to do it if you are going to stay within the confines of the
existing system.  As I stated previously though, I'm not convinced there is a
problem with the existing system.

Btw. What is TCS? (Traveller Combat System?)

   In old usage, TCS stood for 'Trillion Credit Squadron', though I think
I've
seen it used lately in reference to the 'Traveller Combat System'.  Someone
will come along and correct me, I'm sure, if I'm wrong.  :-)

Later folks,

Harold



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

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 1994 20:31:46 -0500 (CDT)
From: ccjoe@showme.missouri.edu (Joseph Heck)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM (TML Submissions)
Subject: Re: Battle Rider Question
Message-ID: <9410120131.AA33583@showme.missouri.edu>

Mary said:
> Since someone just amswered my call to GDW and graciously answered a 
> rule question relating to BATTLE RIDER, I tend to beleive they are still 
> in business; I don't think they'd be in much of a mood to answer 
> questions if they were in the process of cleaning out their desks!

Just out of curiousity, what was the question? I've been running an initial
game of BR over email... anything that would benefit the world at large?
-- 
 joe                          (314) 882-5000
 ccjoe@showme.missouri.edu    University of Missouri - Columbia  
 "with a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and
 impenetrable fog!" -- Calvin
 <A HREF="http://www.missouri.edu/~ccjoe">ccjoe</A>

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

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 94 23:22:05 ADT
From: "Les Howie"  <lhowie@cpx.Prograph.Com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Little but nasty bangs
Message-ID: <9410120222.AA10804@Prograph.Com>


Glenn Myers <gem188@swanson.com> writes
> 2) After reading the book "What If The Moon Didn't Exist?" I've 
> realized that the effects of a nova I had used to trigger a 
> collapse would be more devastating than I thought. 
> 
> (I know it is a blatant plot device, but I set it 1000 years 
> in the past to add background. The civilizations are now exploring
> this region again) 
> 
> I'd like to downgrade that stellar event to something which would
> permit partial recovery within 3-4 hundred years. Would stellar
> flares be applicable? What might cause them? Any other suggestions?
> 
> The major civilizations are about 12 to 18 jumps away. I'd like to 
> deny access to a particular region for about 5 - 9 hundred years.
> I'd rather not have more than a 5 jump radius of complete ruination.
> I'd like it to be survivable outside of that distance. What about
> other types of collapses besides novae.
> 
Let me make sure I understand: you are looking for a single astronomical
event 
which will cause civilization collapse acrss a sphere of about 10 parsecs 
(comparable to a loss of about 500 years development) and ecosystem collapse 
(just nobody left, at least bigger than a hedgehog) over about 5 parsecs.

1st, what is wrong with the supernova idea?  Except that the zone of death is

just a couple of light years it should do fine.  It would be especially 
injurious to early electrical tech levels (of the kind suceptable to an EMP, 
like us).

2nd, how about collision with a fast transisting cloud of extragalactic
matter? 
Nobody can say for sure what's beating about out there, except its probably
not 
nothing.  Put it nice and fast - say 80%c This would decrease planetary 
temperatures, causing ecosystem problems, would impact at a high energy
causing 
elevated radiation levels.  Travel (interplanetary and intersteller) would 
probably cease -- and it would generally make a nusence of itself.  We assume
it
is moving across the plane of the galaxy, so that it has gone down thorught
the 
map.  its 20 parsecs across, so about 80 years to transit completely at .8c

.  

Les Howie
Technical Architect (Database)
Prograph International


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

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 94 23:33:51 ADT
From: "Les Howie"  <lhowie@cpx.Prograph.Com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 64
Message-ID: <9410120233.AA10822@Prograph.Com>

 merrick@RT66.com (Merrick Burkhardt) writes
> Anyone else notice that military ships(fleet elements) have no need of
> passive sensors?  In BL you have bogey counters, unless you start the
> scenario with a side hidden... when do you have an idea the guy is a
> bogey in the first place?
> 
The problem (in BR) is not that you don't need passive sensors.  The problem
is 
that the map is too small.  We have been discussing two patches:

Up the map size to, say, 100x100 (we are playing blind with a ref, so this is

not nuts).  This means that you do not have all those sensors crammed into
one 
small space where the cumulative low probablility events will nail you.

If you go active, passive sensors will get a fix on you out to twice the
range 
of YOUR ACTIVE sensor.  This means that you WILL keep quiet.  And you WILL 
install passive sensors.

For that matter, going to a power down state on a covert mission starts to
make 
sense.

Les Howie
Technical Architect (Database)
Prograph International


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

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 94 23:35:38 ADT
From: "Les Howie"  <lhowie@cpx.Prograph.Com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Ship Design - What's the problem.
Message-ID: <9410120235.AA10826@Prograph.Com>

Paul Harris <100073.77@compuserve.com> writes
> I would be very intrested if anyone could help me out with the sequence of 
> the
> way in which 
> the starship design rules for FFS should work as the sequence in the book 
> does
> not seem to 
> work correctly. 

Works for me.  What's the problem?

Les Howie
Technical Architect (Database)
Prograph International


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

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 94 12:49:00 EST
From: "Upton, Django" <DUpton@VTRNNTOV.TELECOM.com.au>
To: tml <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: PAWS, Stutterwarp, weapon ranges.
Message-ID: <2E9C895B@msmail.trl.oz.au>


Derek Smith <Derek_Smith.LOTUS@crd.lotus.com> writes:

3)  Done any of the above work and NOT come to the conclusion
(in the specific case of Particle Accelerators)  that EVEN SPINAL
MOUNTED PAWS are a waste of space...??? (And Mass, and Energy, and
Money, and TIME...)
 --------------------

I agree that PAWS appear to be a complete waste of time against warships.
A PAWS will produce more damage in a target with armour less then half the 
value of the PAWS's penetration than a laser of equal output energy. The 
laser will however be much more useful against a more heavily armoured 
target.

 -------------------
"KMCCARTHY" <KMCCARTHY@qmgate.osc.hq.nasa.gov> writes:

I did a quick review of the 2300AD StarCruiser Naval Architect's Manual and
FFS
regarding Stuuterwarp Efficiency.  It quickly becomes apparent that the
greatest variation between the 2300AD and FFS is that FFS uses Parsecs and
2300AD uses Lightyears.

In 2300AD each tactical space combat hex was 600,000km and each turn was 1
minute.  Brillant Lances scale is 30,000km and 30 minutes.  In 2300AD ships
moved at twice their StutterWarp Efficiency in hexes per minute.

SUGGESTED FFS RULES ERATA:
FFS p. 43: I suggest that a FFS rules fix should be to retain the 2300AD 
rule
of StutterWarp Efficiency  equals travel distance of LY/day.

The conversions for Brillant Lances movement are as follows, FFS p. 43: 
 Forty
times (i.e., 2  * 20) warp efficiency per MINUTE.  Multiply this by THIRTY 
for
BL time scale in hexes per turn.  If only StutterWarp Ships are involved
divide
each BL turn into TEN 3 minute segments.
 ----------------------

Yes an almost perfect fix!
Also try:
 - Use actual mass instead of "10D" in the efficiency formula.
 - Charge build up range limitation= TL^(1/3) parsecs (= 7.665 ly @ TL 13 )

Useful weapon range formulae:
FF&S contains different formulae for calculating the short range of CPR guns 
and Mass drivers. The projectile that leaves the barrel of either weapon 
should however behave in the same way and not care what fired it!
Plasma and Fusion guns also have a strange range formula that appears to 
disreguard common sense.
The following can be used to produce consistant results for all weapon 
types:
The following definitions are used:
u= muzzle velocity (m/s)
t= 0.3 (s)
r= projectile radius (cm)
M= projectile mass (kg)
S= Special KEAP ammo pen mod eg 3 for APFSDSDU
J= pulse energy of cartridge (MJ)

CPR gun short range = (1/k)ln(ukt+1)
k=4.04*(10^-4)(r^2)/MS

Mass driver short range = (1/k)ln(ukt+1)
k=1.286*(10^-3)/rS

H.E. weapon range= (1/k)ln(ukt+1)
k=4.115*(10^-3)/J^(1/3)
u= 8000 for plasma
u= 12000 for fusion

Django.

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

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 94 01:01:26 -0800
From: Edward_Swatschek@mindlink.bc.ca (Edward Swatschek)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: TL of Rule of Man
Message-ID: <m0quyiF-0003YxC@rsoft.rsoft.bc.ca>

Glenn Myers, in digest 67, wrote:

> 1) What was the approximate TL at the end of the Rule of Man, i.e.
> Twilight or before the Long Night. I have been cleaning up some details
> in my campaign and this is a loose end. I assumed a TL = 12 when I first
> wrote it. Is that accurate?


   The Terran Confederation reached TL 12 around 2300 AD, shortly before
the Ziru Sirka (First Imperium) capitulated.  At this time the Vilani were
at TL 11, and had been for 3000 years.  It seems that the Rule of Man
remained at TL 11-12 for its 400 years, but there is no nothing I've read
that details this.  Sylea was TL 10 as the Long Night began.


--
               Edjs                    _
              ------                _ //  CIS  : 76427,662
   Edward_Swatschek@mindlink.bc.ca  \X/   GEnie: E.SWATSCHEK
        a3162@mindlink.bc.ca              Other: a03162@giant.rsoft.bc.ca


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

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:15:41 +0100 (BST)
From: Stewart Eyres <spe@jb.man.ac.uk>
To: "Trav. Mailing List" <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Supernovae
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9410120941.A19463-0100000@jbpsr>


re. 

>Date: Tue, 11 Oct 94 16:36:44 EDT
>From: Glenn Myers <gem188@swanson.com>
		.
	Stuff Deleted
		.

> Hi All, 
                .
        Stuff Deleted
                .
>2) After reading the book "What If The Moon Didn't Exist?" I've 
>realized that the effects of a nova I had used to trigger a 
>collapse would be more devastating than I thought. 

Why?  I've never been able to see why a supernova could have a dramatic 
effect (ie. catastrophic and immediate destruction to civilisation by 
direct physical effects) beyond a few parsecs.  OK, so the political and 
economic etc. repercussions of a SN in an important system (eg. Antares) 
might be devastating.  All this assumes that when you say `nova' you mean 
a supernova.  If you simply mean a nova (which is a much less dramatic 
and destructive event) then all the above s aplicable, only more so!  Of 
course, a nova may be the alternative to supernova you are looking for.  
Stellar flares are a bit puny, me thinks.

If you want to start throwing about high energy steallar events in your 
campaign, it is probably worth getting an Astronomical Dictionary which 
will explain novae, etc.  I've always thought dwarf novae, symbiotic 
stars, and other cataclysmic variables provide possibiilities for 
interesting disaster effects (by analogy to Terra, living in these 
stellar systems are a bit like living in an Eartquake zone).

____________________________________________________________________________
"Traveller Done Wrong 
	- Let's get the Fiction back into Science Fiction Roleplaying"

Stewart								N.R.A.L.
								Jodrell Bank
								Macclesfield
spe@jb.man.ac.uk						Cheshire
								SK11 9DL
____________________________________________________________________________




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

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 94 10:40:08 ADT
From: "Les Howie"  <lhowie@cpx.Prograph.Com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: PAWS
Message-ID: <9410121340.AA11494@Prograph.Com>

Derek Smith <Derek_Smith.LOTUS@crd.lotus.com> wrote
> 3)  Done any of the above work and NOT come to the conclusion
> (in the specific case of Particle Accelerators)  that EVEN SPINAL
> MOUNTED PAWS are a waste of space...??? (And Mass, and Energy, and
> Money, and TIME...)

Since I play battle rider, I am inclined to agree - but I would think that
the 
paws would be very effective for surface feature degredation: destruction of 
sensors, antennas and the like.

Les Howie
Technical Architect (Database)
Prograph International


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

Date: 12 Oct 94 13:41:45 ES
From: Derek Smith <Derek_Smith.LOTUS@crd.lotus.com>
To: traveller <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Re: PAWS, and some ship design questions
Message-ID: <9410121736.AA03392@internet1.lotus.com>

>>Derek Smith <Derek_Smith.LOTUS@crd.lotus.com> wrote
>> 3)  Done any of the above work and NOT come to the conclusion
>> (in the specific case of Particle Accelerators)  that EVEN SPINAL
>> MOUNTED PAWS are a waste of space...??? (And Mass, and Energy, and
>> Money, and TIME...)

>Les Howie <lhowie @ cpx.Prograph.Com> responded
>Since I play battle rider, I am inclined to agree - but I would think that
the 
>paws would be very effective for surface feature degredation: destruction of

>sensors, antennas and the like.

This is true.  Surface features are nailed by Damage Value, which can
be much higher for a PAWS than for a laser.  The problem is that I can
design a laser that will get _through_ your armor and get at the 
internals of your ship.  Your Active EMS Antenna (on the surface)
isn't going to do you any good if I've shot out the actual sensor
control unit.  Also, at range, bay mounted PAWS will usually have
less _Damage_ value than barbette lasers, but will cost more, take
up more space, weigh more, and consume more power.

Now, at _lower_ tech levels, PAWS effectiveness approaches that of
lasers (because the PAWS has an Input Energy to Discharge Energy
ratio of 5:1 at all Tech Levels, whereas Laser IE to DE ratio improves
with tech level.)  Maybe at TL 10 or so, a PAWS might be more
effective (especially with X-ray lasers unavailable at that TL).
I'd have to look and see.

No one has answered my question about the Critical Hit table in
the TNE rule book.  IS having _Penetration_ Value across the top
a mistake?  IS replacing _Penetration_ Value with _Damage_ Value
the propere correction?

Also, I mixed my units accidentally in my last post.  I said that
the Laser took up 6 displacement tons and that the PAWS I used in
the example took up more than 50,000 displacement tons.  This is
incorrect.  The PAWS in the example took up more than 50,000 CUBIC
METERS (about 3571 displacement tons).  It's still a ridiculous
ratio, however.

Now, a ship design PHILOSOPHY question.  What levels of Armor to
people tend to put on WARSHIPS that they design, and why?

I envision 3 sort of "plateaus" in Armor level, and these give
Armor Values of 310, 602, and 1975.

Here's why:

1)  310 is EXACTLY the Penetration Value of the standard TL 15
turret laser.

2)  602 is EXACTLY the Penetration Value of the standard TL 14-15
barbette laser.

3)  1975 is EXACTLY the Penetration Value of the lasers on the
high yield detonation pumped X-ray laser.

Other weapons are pretty much customized, so I envision warships
being armored to one of these levels, based on practicality.
1975 may be an impractical armor value for anything but the biggest
Battleships/Riders.  602 Might be practical for Cruisers.  I don't 
know.  What do people think?  Do you put higher armor levels on, just
in case you run into someone who's _higher_ tech level than you?
(On a lark, I designed a TL 20 barbette laser for the standard
barbette socket.  It's ghastly.  PR:DV = (1/31):97 at all ranges.
That's a penetration value of 3007...  Discharge Energy = 1500 Mj)

Please, please, PLEASE, PUH-LEEEZE share your thoughts on the
Armoring doctrine, the TNE Critical hit table, &c...

Thanks

Derek Smith

---------------------------------------------------------------------
These are not the opinions of Lotus Development Corporation, which is
not on the Starship Architecture, Hull Armoring committee.

The secret of the universe is @*&^^^ NO CARRIER

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

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 94 13:33:26 CDT
From: erich@bush.cs.tamu.edu (Erich Schneider)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Wanted: _Battle Rider_ overview
Message-ID: <9410121833.AA11433@ bush.cs.tamu.edu>

Seeing as none of my local game stores have it, I wonder if anyone here
could give me a brief overview of _Battle Rider_'s game system.
--
Erich Schneider  erich@bush.cs.tamu.edu  http://tamsun.tamu.edu/~ers0925

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

Date: 12 Oct 94  8:57:02 MS
From: Steve Charlton/Avalon Software Inc
To: traveller <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Flares and other Rumors
Message-ID: <9410121500.AA05239@khan.avalon.COM>

Glenn Myers asks:

>2) After reading the book "What If The Moon Didn't Exist?" I've 
>realized that the effects of a nova I had used to trigger a 
>collapse would be more devastating than I thought. 

>(I know it is a blatant plot device, but I set it 1000 years 
>in the past to add background. The civilizations are now exploring
>this region again) 

>I'd like to downgrade that stellar event to something which would
>permit partial recovery within 3-4 hundred years. Would stellar
>flares be applicable? What might cause them? Any other suggestions?

There are solar flares everyday.  During periods of above-average solar 
flare activity, broadcast signals can be degraded or even interrupted.
If such flare activity was more intense, this could develop into 
permanent damge for relay equipment, and even damage to power
distriution systems.  All you need to do is posit a REALLY BIG flare or
period of flare activity.

Larry Niven had a really good short story about an EXTREMELY powerful
flare, called "Inconstant Moon" (I think).  His flare was powerful enough
to temporarily superheat the atmosphere on one side of the world,
which would cause all sorts of environmental problems on the other
side.  Definitely worth a read, nut I don't remember which collection of
short stories it was in.

Re: Reports of GDW's demise:
After sending my message about the GDW rumors, I called GDW and got
an answer (as I expected).  I took this info (and a copy of yesterday's
GDW posting) to my local shop, and encountered the same assistant
flunky.  I told him that I did verify GDW was still around, and offered to
show him the posting.  His response was that he honestly could not
care less, that GDW produced shoddy product that never sold, and
went back to his ongoing Magic game.  All of this was started when I
foolishly asked him if he knew what the release date for Vampire Fleets
was.  This whole situation reminded me of the Challenge 74 editorial, 
and has definitely prompted me to not return to this store.  This is too
bad, as the store in question was a relatively new store, that I started
patronizing in hopes of encouraging a second game store in this city
(Tucson).  Even during the DGP Heresy, I have always enjoyed GDW's
product, so this attitude really surprised me.  Is this a common
attitude out there, or did I just happen upon a nest of fools?

scharlto@avalon.com

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

Date: 12 Oct 94 15:16:06 ES
From: Derek Smith <Derek_Smith.LOTUS@crd.lotus.com>
To: traveller <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: -No Subject-
Message-ID: <9410121913.AA05876@internet1.lotus.com>

>I have always enjoyed GDW's
>product, so this attitude really surprised me.  Is this a common
>attitude out there, or did I just happen upon a nest of fools?

You happened upon one nest in a larger Wide-Area-Nestwork.
We are Virus in the Global nest of fools.  Fools are ubiquitous.

8^>

>scharlto@avalon.com

Derek Smith
Derek_Smith.Lotus@Crd.Lotus.Com

--------------------------------------------------------------
These opinions are not those of Lotus Development Corporation,
which is in neither the Virus, nor the Fool business...

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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 68
**************************
